I don't like that you equate "New Religions" with "cults". That this is "benign" use of the term is good to point out but not ALL cults are benign and media/common use of the term is prejorative. Not all "New Religions" deserve the label "cult" in the commonly assumed negative implications of the term. Due to your equating "new Religions" with "cults" (benign as it may be) I cannot use your video with my students. They will not discern the meaning, despite you pointing it out.
I have to disagree with your concern. Professor Andrea Diem-Lane is simply pointing out the sociological definition of a cult -- a religious group that is socially divergent from its environment. She goes on to point out that such groups can transform and lose this title as a cult as the religion begins to conform to society or society begin to conform around it. A great example is Christianity, which started as a cult, off sprung from Judaism. It was distinctly a cult, rather than a Jewish sect for example, due to the radically different nature of Christianity. As such, historians often refer to early Christianity as "the cult of Christianity". Furthermore, Professor Diem-Lane points out that there is indeed a difference between problematic and non-problematic cults. Perhaps that distinguishment can help your students identify between the denotative and connotative meanings of the word? I'm confident that your students will be able to see the difference.
She also points out that there are problematic New Religions and ones that are not problematic. On top of that, she explains that the term "cult" does not mirror the stereotypes and stigma that the media has given it.
![[LIVE] : ONE ลุมพินี 69 | คู่เอก "กุหลาบดำ vs นาบิล"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/PNM6U8e_HMo/mqdefault.jpg)
![ตีสิบเดย์ [FULL] | ครอบครัวสะท้านทุ่ง "นางบี & อ้ายสติ๊ก"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/A1rhYcxxNtA/mqdefault.jpg)
Thank you.... "Religions are many, but the reality of religion is one. The days are many, but the sun is one." ~ Abdu’l’Baha, Baha'i Faith
This was great, thank-you!
Christianity spread mainly by their "convert them or kill them" attitude (The crusades, the inquisition, burnings, hangings, torture, etc).
I don't like that you equate "New Religions" with "cults". That this is "benign" use of the term is good to point out but not ALL cults are benign and media/common use of the term is prejorative. Not all "New Religions" deserve the label "cult" in the commonly assumed negative implications of the term. Due to your equating "new Religions" with "cults" (benign as it may be) I cannot use your video with my students. They will not discern the meaning, despite you pointing it out.
I have to disagree with your concern. Professor Andrea Diem-Lane is simply pointing out the sociological definition of a cult -- a religious group that is socially divergent from its environment. She goes on to point out that such groups can transform and lose this title as a cult as the religion begins to conform to society or society begin to conform around it.
A great example is Christianity, which started as a cult, off sprung from Judaism. It was distinctly a cult, rather than a Jewish sect for example, due to the radically different nature of Christianity. As such, historians often refer to early Christianity as "the cult of Christianity".
Furthermore, Professor Diem-Lane points out that there is indeed a difference between problematic and non-problematic cults. Perhaps that distinguishment can help your students identify between the denotative and connotative meanings of the word? I'm confident that your students will be able to see the difference.
She also points out that there are problematic New Religions and ones that are not problematic. On top of that, she explains that the term "cult" does not mirror the stereotypes and stigma that the media has given it.