4,994
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 49:
Line 49: + + + + + + +
→Non-Christian cults
:'''Just a note''' this ''is'' up as an AfD, ([[Articles for Deletion]]). [[User:Cracker|Cracker]]<sup>[[User_Talk:Cracker|talk]]</sup> 23:10, 14 March 2007 (EDT)
:'''Just a note''' this ''is'' up as an AfD, ([[Articles for Deletion]]). [[User:Cracker|Cracker]]<sup>[[User_Talk:Cracker|talk]]</sup> 23:10, 14 March 2007 (EDT)
::I submitted it for deletion based on a early entry. [[User:ColinR|ColinR]] 23:12, 14 March 2007 (EDT)
::I submitted it for deletion based on a early entry. [[User:ColinR|ColinR]] 23:12, 14 March 2007 (EDT)
==How can any denomination ever start...==
...without, at its ''start,'' being "of recent origin" and small? It wouldn't start at all unless it had a difference of opinion with the existing denominations. The chances of it succeeding are low unless it has a charismatic leader, and unless it has a reasonably intense focus on winning new members.
So, it seems to me that whenever a denomination starts, it is almost certain be "of recent origin," to have a charismatic leader, and a focus on prosyletizing. The difference between that and the definition of "cult" in the article is a matter of degree.
It seems to me that most denominations must look an awful lot like a "cult" when they are starting. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 18:58, 20 March 2007 (EDT)