The Brethren to my knowledge are Bible-based. They were the only church in the QLD country town I lived in that could be found preaching on the post office corner each week, year after year. That says something fro grit and courage.
Its a shame you poisoned your kids with that rubbish Antiseptic.
Not too late to change. May The Lord Help you.

Gibo, with all due respect, if the posters here were to vote in the category:

"Most likely to be in the grip if a destructive cult"

I'm confident you'd win by a wide margin. It's somewhat ironic that you're the one raising views about the dangers of fringe views, when you subscribe to a book about UFOs that has been discredited, together with a tenuous version of Christianity that relies on prophecy and the existence of demons.

Ironically, advice from a cult member would be quite valuable, if only they could see that they are indeed in the grip of cult-like beliefs, but I suppose if they could see that, they wouldn't be in the cult any more. A bit of a catch 22.

You also back away from discussion when your view of reality is challenged - a fellow Christian, Philo, challenged you to describe one verifiable instance of a corporeal demon that didn't exist in someone's head.

You said you can't speak to him on the matter anymore.

Don't you see that is the hallmark of a cult? The unwillingess to engage when people challenge your view?

If your belief system had some kind of centralised controlling organisation and a mode of payment, it would tick every single box in the cult classification.

Boaz,

You brought up good points:
money and/or power and/or sex, with teachings that promote the leader(s) getting them easily, are good indications for a cult.

Regarding the contents of the doctrine, however, I do not see a distinction between orthodoxy and unorthodoxy, except that unorthodox cults are more likely to deny their followers access to the prevalent and influential orthodox views, while orthodox cults have less to fear from the influence of minority unorthodox views.

It makes no difference Whether a group teaches boogooboogoo or gooboogooboo - these are just words, not reality: instead, we need to look at how the members and their leaders behave in actual life.

Some people on the outside may perhaps even agree that boogooboogoo (or gooboogooboo) is correct, or have a healthy argument among them about which of these is the true statement, but cult members live in another context and for them the doctrine is harmful regardless whether or not it has a "truth value".

I think that if I came upon a group of more than two or three people who believed in UFOs, demons and outlandish apocalyptic prophecies, then I'd regard them as a cult.

I'm sure just about anybody else I know would too.

According to my dictionary, a cult is a religious group whith its
own special rituals, especially one which is seen as dangerous or
harmful by other people.

Based on that definition, both Gibo and BD would be cult members :)

.

Don't you love it, "derivations from the norm".

Gibo, one man's cult is another man's answer.

I've formed my so far group of one which I call the Scientific Animist Sect( bit sniffy myself about cults}. We believe that each of us animates our days- Have a nice day, no thanks I've got other plans.

We accept JC's teaching that we should love our neighbor but only admire her ass.

We at SAS acknowledge the demonic qualities of others- whether it be in their gardening, their art or in their destructive actions. SAS stands for pregnant ladies on the bus, number ones and the national anthem at the Bledisloe.

Did you never stop to think that only those who don't trust themselves to do the right thing rely on RULES, whatever orthodoxy or apparent deviancy(?) they subscribe to?