Thursday, 27 March 2025
GROK on why genuine scholars dislike the term "cults"
GROK:
Religious scholars often dislike the term "cults" because it’s loaded with negative connotations and lacks precision in academic study. The word originally comes from the Latin "cultus," meaning worship or devotion, but over time—especially since the 20th century—it’s been hijacked by popular culture to describe fringe groups, often with implications of brainwashing, danger, or fanaticism. Think Jonestown or Heaven’s Gate. This baggage makes it a sloppy fit for serious analysis.
Scholars prefer terms like "new religious movements" (NRMs) because they’re neutral and descriptive. NRMs focus on groups that emerge outside established traditions, without instantly branding them as deviant or manipulative. "Cult" gets thrown around too loosely—sometimes it’s just a lazy jab at any belief system someone finds weird or threatening. That subjectivity muddies the water when you’re trying to understand what a group actually believes or does.
Plus, the term’s history in sociology and theology has shifted. Early 20th-century thinkers like Ernst Troeltsch used "cult" to describe small, mystical offshoots of bigger religions, distinct from "sects" or "churches." But that technical meaning got drowned out by sensational headlines. Today, slapping "cult" on a group can shut down discussion—it’s more a judgment than a tool for insight. Scholars want to dissect belief systems, not dunk on them.
The sacralists are coming?! II
The mouth breathing moral panic from anti JW bigots is a distraction.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)