The Narrow Path Ministries

I was just analyzing cults and other teachings and it seems satan was busy around 1830. It seems to me that it was in this time period that Mormons, Jehovah witness, dispensationalist and other teachings were started in this time period. Is it a coincidance?

Hi Jim,

Steve has a lecture (or lectures?) about this but I can't remember if it's:
Mormonism, Cults, or exactly which (see the digitalministries page from "Topical Lectures" @ http://www.thenarrowpath.com/ (Steve's site).

Whichever one (or ones?) they were...he covers a lot of "New Agey" movements from that time period. Dispensationalism began around 1829; Christian Science, second half of century; the "New Thought Movement"...(see the "Word of Faith" lectures where Steve traces the "prosperity gospel" back to it).

I couldn't say if these movements were a coinicidence or not. It seems like Steve said that some people think this stuff was a fulfillment of some kind of prophecy---Oh yeah! "Satan being released for a short season" (Re 20:3b, 7).
Might be, I don't know....
Rick

This came up during the discussion time during the meeting in Orange County this weekend. Psychomike and Steve were discussing how they each at one time had even thought that perhaps the right to free exercise of religion might not have been such a great idea...a thought they dismissed pretty quickly. Someone reminded us that the persecuted church is a stronger church, as well.

I wanted to say something then, but, not surprisingly, I didn't. So here it is now:

It seems to me that even though this period, the mid-nineteenth century, saw the rise of cults, history also records the Second Awakening, a genuine spiritual revival among the saints, at the same time. In fact, it seems to me that every revival seems to parallel a rise in cultism and secularism. During my own lifetime, there was the Jesus Movement (4th Awakening?) that seemed to be surrounded by the rise of secular humanism and an interest in eastern mysticism.

Perhaps these are periods of more intense spiritual activity, resulting in both good and bad. Maybe it's a spiritual warfare phenomenon, where for every movement of the Holy Spirit, there is also a counterfeit from Satan. While I don't fancy the rise of cults, I'm glad that there have been revivals historically and pray that there will be more, even if it means putting up with the counterfeits.

I was thinking that maybe since we are spared persecution from an atheist government or from a state mandated church, we have to put up with cults as one means of our testing. I agree that the persecuted church is a strong church and that the American church, by and large, can be characterized as weak and flabby. I am frequently astonished, however, at the number of faithful saints I run into all the time. Perhaps there is a strong remnant remaining here.

I agree totally with you Michelle. I am seeing this in my trek on the internet. I actually welcome it for your very reasons but pray for the weak minded (no one here of course) that they may resist the devil's work in this area.

I wanted to say something then, but, not surprisingly, I didn't.

Michelle, are you shy, or couldn't you get a word in edgeways?

Shy. Plus I was getting a little hungry.

I was just analyzing cults and other teachings and it seems satan was busy around 1830. It seems to me that it was in this time period that Mormons, Jehovah witness, dispensationalist and other teachings were started in this time period. Is it a coincidance?

Maybe. The so-called "Plymouth Brethren" also began around that time period. Are they a cult? Some people think so, but I think they (especially the "open" brethren") are one of the best current expressions of the CHURCH.

I hope this post doesn't detract too much from the intent of this thread, but I just felt the need to say that some people are too quick to classify a group as "a cult".

50 years ago, Seventh Day Adventisism was classified as a cult. My oldest brother, who taught a course on "cults" in a Bible institute at the time, included this denomination as one of the examples of "a cult". Yet, this denomination is now accepted as part of the evangelical community.

A leading writer in a magazine representing a well-known fundamentalist radio program, wrote that the "two-by-twos" are a "dangerous and deceptive cult". I wrote to the magazine asking what was "dangerous" about these simiple, devout people. I also stated that I know a number of them and have never encountered any "deceit" in any of them. The editor of the magazine replied saying that his organization took no position concerning the group, but that the author of the article had lifted his statement from another source.

Some organizations which have been considered to be "a cult" have actually had a change in their theology so as to be no longer so considered. An example is "The World-Wide Church of God". When it was led by Herbert W. Armstrong and his son Garnet Ted Armstrong, it was widely considered to be a cult by most fundamentalist and evangelicals. But the organization had a dramatic change in its theology. It has even become Trinitarian. Now it is accepted also as part of the evangelical community.

It seems that it would be wise to define exactly what is meant by "cult" before relegating any group to that particular pigeon hole. Otherwise such classification could be defamatory.

I agree Paidion, and I think your point helps make my point.

What is your definition of a cult?

One correction. There is still the official World-Wide Church of God that remains the same before their founder died but many left the church and began the reformed portion.

I find it a hard term to define. But I would say that a group which is a cult often or usually has most or all of the following characteristics:

1. The group revolves around a single, supreme leader, who controls the members and is obeyed without question.

2. The members are completely sold out to the objectives of the leader or the group. Personal objectives, desires, and values are set aside for the sake of the leader or group.

3. Thinking is discouraged. Members are continuously bombarded with the propoganda of the leader or group.

I think there are some others, but I cannot bring them to mind at the moment.

It's strange, but the first two seem to apply to Christianity itself! That is when we consider our single, supreme leader to be Jesus Christ ---- except that Jesus doesn't control his disciples; but rather invites their
submission.