"Question: How do you define a cult? What is a cult and what is not?"

I think this is a very good question to think on -- and perhaps also the wrong question.

It is a good question, of course, because it is concerned with orthodoxy, and with keeping Christianity pure from false teachings.

But it may not be quite the best question to ask because it tends to encourage three major categories where the Word of God has only two. Most cult definitions by Christians rightly include those who deny the deity of Christ, the Triunity of God, salvation by grace through faith, and perhaps two or three other major touchstones of orthodoxy. But they then seem to allow a large gray area, an area of seriously wrong teaching that is not, according to their definition, cultic. In this gray area I believe we would find much of the teachings of, say, Max Lucado (Example: his miscasting Christ as a lifestyle evangelist), Rick Warren (Example: His extreme distortion of the Word by his tweaking of paraphrases, or should I say "far-off phrases", far from the original).

The cult issue is sort of like the similar misunderstanding concerning the assumed three classes of people: Christians, unsaved, and - in between, sort-of, the "carnal Christian" (sic). Yet Scripture speaks only of two classes of people, elect and unelect, sheep or goats, wheat or tares, etc. As far as truth is concerned, likewise, there seems to be only two classes of teaching, variously contrasted:

* "The truth that is according to godliness" (Tit. 1:1) vs. those vain and profane teachings that lead to further ungodliness (2 Tim. 2:16).
* Teaching from above vs. teaching from below
* Speaking of God,or the things of God vs. speaking of the world, and according to the elemental teaching of the world.
* Teaching that comes from Christ vs. those who have "lost connection to the Head" (Christ).
* Words of Life and Spirit vs. profitless words (John 6).
* "Spirit of Truth" vs. "Spirit of error".

I realize that there is error on minor issues based on: honest mistake, ignorance, remaining prejudices, cultural blind-spots, etc. Of these types of error ("being otherwise minded") Paul assured the Philippians (3:15) that God would correct those in due time. This is not about those gray areas above.

So we should not ask "What is cultic"? - an artificial, unhelpful distinction - but rather should ask ouselves, "Am I gathering or scattering?" We should examine every doctrine with this measure:�"Is this the Spirit of Christ speaking? Or is it the Spirit of the World"? After all, teaching of this second sort - though it may not be classed as cultic - does a bait-and-switch on the Word of Life (and Death) just as spiritually murderous as the Jehovah's Witness's works-salvation. Warren's�preaching of affirmation and "purpose" instead of repentance and godliness, though not labeled by many as cultic, assures that many of his "converts" end up in the same hell that cultists do. They do so, because - like in the cultic churches - they were never awakened with an encounter with the terrifying, awesome, worshipful Real God!

This is why teachers like Warren are so dangerous; they often get a grudging pass from orthodoxy as being sufficiently within the pale.

Jesus warned us, "He who is not with me is against me, and he who doesn't gather with me scatters.", Luke 11:23

But my whole point is still that to ask the question of "What is a cult?" is not the best approach, since there are groups that give lip-service to orthodoxy (Trinity, the deity of Christ, salvation by grace through faith, etc.) and are thus not technically cultic, yet still do not bring people to Heaven. And if they do not do that, then they confirm people in their Hellward direction. Many formalists fall in this category.

So my whole point is that there are really only two groups, depending on how they respond to the question "What think ye of Christ?", Matt. 22:42. The Bible sets forth Him as our Prophet, Priest and King. We either accept Him, or come to accept Him (not instantaneous), as all three of these ... or we reject Him as these (Prophet, Priest, King) and stay in our sins. One is the Spirit of Christ, the other the spirit of Antichrist.

The foundation of our faith is to trust in Christ as Prophet, Priest and King. He is, in fact, anointed (the Messiah) in all three offices:

a. Prophet: "The Spirit of the Lord God is upon Me ... anointed Me to preach", Isa.60:1-2 (comp. Luke 4:18-19).
b. Priest: Psa. 132: 9- 10, 16- 17.
c. King: Psalm 2:2 "against the Lord and His Anointed"; Psa. 45:6- 7.

We accept Him as Prophet as we value the Word of God for who He is.
We accept Him as Priest as we rest in His work on the Cross and as our Interceder, Heb. 7:25.
We accept Him as King as we obey Him, having Christ formed in us.

There are many who follow Him as Prophet and Priest, but not as King. These are the ones of whom Elisabeth Elliot says "They are not struggling with sin. They are postponing obedience".

There are many who profess allegiance to Him as the last two, but slight Him as Prophet. By making much of writings like the so-called "Book of Enoch" (sic) or the Jewish Targums, etc. they effectively join Satan in saying "Hath God (in this case, Christ) said?".

So, the cult question is an unhelpful one at best, since it does not get to the heart of what separates Sheep from goats - Christ Jesus.

There are only two categories: We are with Christ or against Christ. Gathering his elect or scattering them.

You are one - and are doing one - this very moment.