Cult Propaganda

[SallyF]

Are the writings known as the "New Testament" cult propaganda …?

Can any of the writings be shown to have emanated in any way from any version of God?

[2Dbunk]

[Replying to post 1 by SallyF]

I don't know where the cut-line is for cult v, recognized religion is, but I can assure you that every religion began as a cult.

[Elijah John]

In the cultural context of the time, yes, the New Testament is "cult" propaganda. In that context neither term "cult" or the term "propaganda" is a pejorative. Christianity was a "cult" of Judaism, back in the day. But on this site, it is better to avoid using the term "cult" to refer to any particular group of present day Christians, or to an individual who identifies as a Christian.

Far better to use the term "sect", that way one stays within the rules of this site.

And propaganda as opposed to biography, yes indeed. The New Testament is an apologetic designed to win converts to the opinion that Jesus is indeed the "Christ" the anointed, the Messiah, the Son of God.

But both can be true, apologetic/propaganda or the Word of God. The two are not mutually exclusive. Assuming of course there is a God.

[Tcg]

Are the writings known as the "New Testament" cult propaganda …?

Can any of the writings be shown to have emanated in any way from any version of God?

Not any version that hasn't emanated from the same source as the writings themselves. Man made writings. Man made gods.



Tcg

[Realworldjack]

Are the writings known as the "New Testament" cult propaganda …?

Can any of the writings be shown to have emanated in any way from any version of God?

Are the writings known as the "New Testament" cult propaganda …?

Well, let us see?

We have two letters in the NT which were addressed to an individual by the name of Theophilus. In the first letter, the author begins by saying,

Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile an account of the things accomplished among us, just as they were handed down to us by those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and servants of the word, it seemed fitting for me as well, having investigated everything carefully from the beginning, to write it out for you in consecutive order, most excellent Theophilus; so that you may know the exact truth about the things you have been taught.

Since this letter was addressed to an individual, and the author would have only had this individual in mind as he wrote, on top of the fact that this author could have had no idea about any sort of Bible, or that anyone else besides his intended audience would have read these letters, then how in the world could this be considered any sort of, "propaganda", since he was simply writing to a friend, out of concern for this friend?

Next, as we turn our attention to the letters of Paul, who happened to author 13 of the letters contained in the NT, he as well addresses his letters to particular audiences a the time, 4 of which were addressed to individuals, all of which are addressing particular concerns at the time, and Paul as well would have had only his intended audience in mind at the time, and could not have had any idea that the letters he was writing would have been read by anyone else besides his original intended audience, and he certainly could not have possibly known of any sort of Bible, that his letters would have been contained in, hundred of years later.

Thus far, we have accounted for 15, of the 27 letters contained in the NT. Of these 15 letters we have accounted for thus far, how can any of them be said to be, "cult propaganda?"

prop·a·gan·da
/ˌpräpəˈɡandə/
noun
1.
information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote or publicize a particular political cause or point of view.

I will be happy to go through each, and everyone of the 15 letters we have accounted for thus far, and allow you to explain to me how they would fit the definition above.

Can any of the writings be shown to have emanated in any way from any version of God?

Well, let us look again at what the author of the two letters to Theophilus has to say at the beginning of his first letter,

Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile an account of the things accomplished among us, just as they were handed down to us by those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and servants of the word, it seemed fitting for me as well, having investigated everything carefully from the beginning, to write it out for you in consecutive order, most excellent Theophilus; so that you may know the exact truth about the things you have been taught.

Well, the author certainly tells Theophilus exactly how he obtained his information, and there is no mention of God, whatsoever. Rather, this author tells Theophilus, that he obtained this information through what he claims to be, "careful investigation."

Moreover, in his second letter to Theophilus, this author begins to use the words, "we", and "us" to describe certain events pertaining to the travels of Paul, as if the author was actually there to witness the events he records.

The question then becomes, if this information that this author communicates to Theophilus, did not, "emanate" from God, but was rather through what the author claimed to be, "careful investigation" and his own eyewitness accounts, how would this make the information any less reliable?

[John Human]

[Replying to post 1 by SallyF]

I don't know where the cut-line is for cult v, recognized religion is, but I can assure you that every religion began as a cult.

It was once said that a religion is a cult that is big enough to have a college with a football stadium.

[bjs]

What do you mean by “cult�?

Do you mean the traditional definition? That is, the aspect of a religious tradition that deals specifically with the worship of a deity.

Do you mean the pop culture definition? That is, a relatively small group of people having religious beliefs or practices regarded by others as strange or sinister.

Do you mean the religious studies definition? That is, a sect that has changed the core beliefs of an existing religion while claiming to maintain at least some ties to the parent religion.

If the NT is “cult propaganda� depends first on what definition of “cult� you are using.

[Tcg]

What do you mean by “cult�?

A cult is other people's religion. Of course, to the other people, their religion is true and other people's religion is a cult. So a cult is always other people's religion. Of course all people are other people from someone's view so all religions are viewed as a cult by someone.



Tcg

[bjs]

What do you mean by “cult�?

A cult is other people's religion. Of course, to the other people, their religion is true and other people's religion is a cult. So a cult is always other people's religion. Of course all people are other people from someone's view so all religions are viewed as a cult by someone.

No, nearly all rational people recognize that being a part of another religion does not make someone a cult member.

As I pointed out, the word “cult� can mean different things in different contexts. You seem to be using the pop culture definition. I have never known anyone in any religion who believed that all other religions were cults.

[Tcg]

I have never known anyone in any religion who believed that all other religions were cults.

Perhaps you've never heard of Billy Graham then?

• "One characteristic is that cults reject the basic beliefs of the Christian faith–beliefs that Christians have held in common for almost 2,000 years. Instead, they say they alone have a full understanding of the truth about God, and the only way to know the truth is to be part of their group. Many cults have their own writings also, which they either substitute for the Bible or add to the Bible."
  
  https://billygraham.org/answer/how-do-c ... istianity/

Billy Graham was of course a Christian.



Tcg