Talk:Christian countercult movement

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Christian countercult movement article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This page is not a forum for general discussion about personal beliefs, nor for engaging in Apologetics/Polemics. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about personal beliefs, nor for engaging in Apologetics/Polemics at the Reference desk.

Christianity: Latter Day Saints / Charismatic Mid‑importance

	Christianity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Latter Day Saints portal This article is supported by WikiProject Latter Day Saint movement (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Charismatic Christianity (assessed as Mid-importance).

Religion: New religious movements Low‑importance

	Religion portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by New religious movements work group (assessed as High-importance).

Sociology: Social Movements Low‑importance

	Society portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the social movements task force.

Politics Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Philosophy: Social and political Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Social and political philosophy

Untitled

It seems to me that since these groups are so controversial why not include a section on this topic? It was done in the Jehovah's witnesses article.

I will post a link to CESNUR and "Ontario Consultants for Religious Tolerance" which are religious tolerance websites that have been vilified by some of these "anti-cult" groups, although they appear to be academically sound organizations.

http://www.cesnur.org/

http://www.religioustolerance.org/

that last link is quite good.

I agree that these groups are controversial and yet I do not see any section on the criticism of these groups. I am tagging this article {npov} --Saint-Paddy 00:00, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV template?

I confess that I cannot understand the justification for the disputed NPOV template on the article from this talk page, so I have removed it. If someone can clarify what the purported problem is, that would be helpful. nae'blis _(talk) 17:40, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Discernment Ministries redirect

Should Discernment Ministries redirect here? Right now it's going to Christian theological controversy - which I can't understand well enough to figure out what's up or down... CDC (talk) 22:44, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I deleted this last sentence due to lack of objectivity and ad hominem attacks.

Removed sentence

I removed the following:

Instead, by combining insights from missions theory, a cross-cultural approach to dialogue, proclamation and conversion is applied in outreach.

It's fluff and it's advertising, and it's certainly not NPOV. -67.182.236.190 02:47, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Moved from Anti-cult movement because off-topic there please merge here

I moved this from anti-cult movement because it was off-topic there. Please merge with this article.

"Their activities and orientation vary: some are missionary and apologetically oriented, directed at current members of divergent groups, some are therapeutically oriented, directed mainly at former members of divergent groups, and others educally [sic-?] oriented, directed at members of their own denomination or at the general public. Counter cult ministries concern themselves mainly religious groups which regard themselves as Christian but hold one or more unorthodox beliefs, including The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the Unification church, Christian Science, and Jehovah's Witnesses, although some also target newer and older non-Christian groups, such as Wicca, Neopagan groups, New Age groups, Buddhism, Hinduism and other Eastern religions.

An American umbrella group the Evangelical Ministries to New Religions (EMNR) was formed as a professional association for individuals and ministries addressing "cults" of Christianity, new religious movements, and world religions."

Andries 16:07, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cult template

Should the template be used here? - since the definition of "cult" by the Christian counter cult movement is different from the mainstream definition... Sfacets 04:09, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it should be. This is yet another way of viewpoint on cults. The point of categories and templates is to allow readers to navigate between related articles. This article is certainly related to the overall issue of cults. -Will Beback · † · 10:30, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah alright, put that way, it makes sense. Sfacets 11:58, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Would it be fair to say that the movement (or at least some branches of it) uses the word “cult” rather euphemistically and as a propaganda tool? That their use of the term is a way of spinning what they are doing, and by their using words like “cult members” instead heretics they can achieve, with one swoop, both the painting of those other religious movements as wacky and dangerous while simultaneously keeping themselves from looking like throwbacks to the inquisition?

So in this sense, you could say it isn't about “cults” at all or how these people “define” a cult. “Cult” is just a code word and a smoke screen for going after heretics. 75.70.79.27 03:59, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Catholic Inquisition

In some extent, the Catholic Inquisition can be seen as a counter-"cult" movement, as they used to see "heresy" as "cults". Maybe some of those should be included in the article. Chimeric Glider (talk) 19:38, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Primary sources are insufficient

It is not acceptable to use primary sources such as the Bible to support a specific interpretation. Wikipedia needs reputable secondary sources to support those positions. Further, unless sources are produced that define the Patristic Fathers as members of founders of the counter-cult movement, then that language needs to be removed from the article. It is a little difficult to believe given the article itself says this use of the term cult was not created until 1970. There is a difference between apologetics and counter-cult activities. --Storm Rider ^(talk) 01:38, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Article title = bias

The things listed in this article as "counter cult movements" are not just counter cult. In fact, one of their central purposes is to combat anti-religion, irreligion, evolutionary theory, and relativism. So why does Wikipedia ignore this? Obviously it is intentional, considering Wikipedia editors are 4 times more atheistic than the American public. No bias in Wikipedia? Please...the statistic right there proves it, let alone having this article (and thousands of others) prove it by its very title. Wikipedia you've done it again! What a joke. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.252.50.41 (talk) 21:23, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Martin sections - sources needed

I added citation requests in the Martin P as well as removed the unsourced "defrocked" from his bio. Whoever wrote the sections on Martin seems to be satisfied with the lack of sources. I am not. If we dont get sources on the so-called controversies then we should remove those sections as they seem to be better suited on Martin's own page instead of here. I dont have the time to edit this page but it certainly needs it. --epecho ^(talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 02:58, 26 October 2008 (UTC).[reply]

Link to Craig Branch references the wrong person

Hi, new here:

the link under "Organizations" - Craig Branch leads to a profile of the wrong Craig Branch....could someone fix this?

Thanks

BARivers Barivers (talk) 05:16, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Rapture?

How is the Rapture an essential Christian teaching, when as a doctrine it didn't exist at all until the early 19th century? John Nelson Darby, who invented the eschatological system of dispensationalism (of which the Rapture is a part), was a cult leader himself (see Exclusive Brethren), and so I find it highly ironic and even hypocritical of so-called "countercult ministries" to label non-dispensationalist churches as cults, when all churches that teach traditional Christian doctrine are non-dispensational. Just because fundies claim it's an essential doctrine doesn't mean it is one. Fundamentalism itself almost seems like a cult to me in some ways; in particular, the denial of general revelation seems almost Manichaean, as does their take on sola scriptura (the statement "there is no source of truth other than in the Bible" is not itself in the Bible, and is therefore as self-contradictory as the phrase "It is absolutely true that there is no absolute truth". I'm more of a prima scriptura guy myself). Anyway, we should at least offer the opinions of those who disagree with this "movement" or regard it as being cultlike in itself. LonelyBoy2012 (talk) 19:51, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Persecution?

The article is tagged with two categories about religious persecution. Are the Christian countercultists really persecuting anyone? It sounds more like they are disagreeing and arguing more than persecuting. BayShrimp (talk) 15:16, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Mistranslation from Germanic terms corrected

Pfarrer Amt is no a pastoral minstry, and Evangelische is no Evangelical in german. 186.95.175.242 (talk) 16:52, 25 October 2014 (UTC)This section was taken from personal blog by Anton Hein.[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Christian countercult movement. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:52, 6 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]