Soren wrote on Aug 7
th, 2015 at 11:06pm:
Pho Huc wrote on Aug 5
th, 2015 at 4:18pm:
Isn't the only difference between an unorthodox, extremist, or false religion and a cult popularity?
In Roman times Polytheism was the in thing, and Islam, Christianity and Judaism were Cults.
Now days The last three are all large scale accepted religions and the anyone who goes around worshiping Pluto is considered a bit of a nutter.
The religions themselves havn't changed much, rather the public perception of the creeds.
So Islam (Christianity, Judaism) are mere fashions.
Why do Islamists kill in the name of fashion? They are obviously not as sophisticated as you (imagine yourself to be).
Mohammed is not Allah's final messenger - he is a mere fashonista.
This is so daft, it must be your own idea.
Well at least i'm not being accused of plagiarism
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/d01b7/d01b71fc2705af18546f85a8745c6c6e4e5dd356" alt="Smiley Smiley"
Religion is analogous to fashion in that varies in popularity over time and location and changes to reflect the zeitgeist of the times.
you've got to look at the millenial scale to see major shifts though, its certainly not as transient as fashion in art.
Regardless, Islam fails to meet what is the most important test of cult status which is size.
When used in every definition other than religion (music, film, history) cult denotes subjects with a devoted but small followings. Thus the size of the following can be considered as a critical aspect of cult status.
Say what you will of Islamic doctrine there is no denying that it has enough of a following that describing it as cult would be a misnomer.