Is Bill Gothard a cult?

[Mike Olson 77]

A sexual abuse/harassment suit by a lot of victims against Bill Gothard and IBLP is still in progress as the court rejected Gothard and IBLP's request of acquitting the case.

Anyhow, do you think Bill Gothard is a cult of Christianity?
(1) If so, why? If not, why not?
(2) What do you mean by a cult? How do you define the term in your own words?

 

[-57]

A sexual abuse/harassment suit by a lot of victims against Bill Gothard and IBLP is still in progress as the court rejected Gothard and IBLP's request of acquitting the case.

Anyhow, do you think Bill Gothard is a cult of Christianity?
(1) If so, why? If not, why not?
(2) What do you mean by a cult? How do you define the term in your own words?

I went to his website....and saw nothing on what He believes. I could be wrong but this typically is a red flag warning.

 

[Ken Rank]

What one believes is not what determines a cult status. We have almost devolved to the point where, when we encounter a person who happens to come to a different conclusion than we do on some things, we call them a cult. At best, when we come across one who really has some doctrine that is "out there," it is heresy... as we define heresy today. A cult by definition requires a controlling leader, at least, that would be part of the classic definition. I do admit, that some sites define cult and heresy the same way. Sad... that we don't pay enough attention to detail in cases like this.

 

[Albion]

A sexual abuse/harassment suit by a lot of victims against Bill Gothard and IBLP is still in progress as the court rejected Gothard and IBLP's request of acquitting the case.

Anyhow, do you think Bill Gothard is a cult of Christianity?
(1) If so, why? If not, why not?
(2) What do you mean by a cult? How do you define the term in your own words?

No, one man is not a cult...or a denomination or a religion, for that matter.

Is it possible that what this man teaches would be the stuff of a cult? Maybe. Religiously speaking, a cult is usually characterized as a society or movement that 1) teaches a different idea about the nature of God (including a rejection of the Trinity), 2) does the same concerning the nature of Man (including a denial of his immortal soul), and 3) uses some holy writings OTHER than the Bible which are said to be revelation from God.

 

[Dave-W]

We have almost devolved to the point where, when we encounter a person who happens to come to a different conclusion than we do on some things, we call them a cult.

Indeed.

There are 2 types of true cults.

The first comes from the etymology of the word. It comes from the Latin adjective cultus, -a, -um meaning "hidden." So a cult has some kind of hidden practice or belief that is not available to the general population.

The second is what Ken was talking about - a personality cult. And that has NOTHING to do with what the group believes. It is the adulation of a charismatic leader. He/she is considered to be the end-all and be-all of religious belief and practice, even if that belief is completely in line with orthodoxy. It is about the leader and not much else.

 

[Dave-W]

Anyhow, do you think Bill Gothard is a cult of Christianity?

A person himself cannot constitute a cult. It would be the group that adulates the person, like a Rev Sun Myung Moon or a Jim Jones.

I have been around "gothardites" for the last 45 years. But I have never heard the kind of adulation of him that typify groups like the Moonies or the Children of God. So, no, gothardism is NOT a cult.

But IMO it IS a bad teaching and has produced some very bad fruit. I think it can be shown to have been the progenitor of Joshua Harris' "Purity Culture" teachings. (which has its own bad fruit)

 

[Earatha]

He's a detestable human being, and that should be enough to condemn him.

As far as his teachings, it's not that far outside the teachings of other sects.

 

[Dave-W]

As far as his teachings, it's not that far outside the teachings of other sects.

Indeed. Too bad the church has such a bad history of off-the-wall teachings.

I know at least one pastor who described his teachings on music as being "racist."

There are many sites listing the failures of the "purity" culture which was based on his teachings and the earlier Victorianism. It has destroyed the lives of many couples.

His teachings on submission have been used by congregational leaders and parents to "lord it over" their congregants, turning them into micromanaging dictators.

 

[WannaWitness]

I think what the OP might be referring to is not so much the person of Bill Gothard being a cult, but the doctrine (if that's the right word) associated with him. I could be wrong, but that's my guess.

As far as Gothard's doctrine being "cultish", I don't know if that's true or not. What I do tend to believe is a few off-the-wall viewpoints and some legalistic practices doesn't necessary constitute the makings of a "cult", so long as these ideas don't conflict with the Christian statement of faith based on the Bible. One of the only things that stand out to me about what little I have heard of him was that he is one of the "rock-music-is-evil" crowd, but I am familiar with churches that do this. They're not cults (in fact, far from it); they just reek of legalism with many outlandish rules that are not universal to the Christian faith (no playing cards, KJVO, dresses/skirts only for women, and so on). Another thing I heard is that he is against Cabbage Patch dolls (something about them being "demonic" although I honestly don't know where that notion comes from).

There might be other things, too, but like I said, I have yet to read more about him. All I can say right now is what I know and remember off the top of my head. The "cult" thing, however, is up for debate (which I am not into because I'm simply not good at it; I simply state my 2 cents for all who may be interested).

 

[Daniel Marsh]

A Matter of Basic Principles-A Review
Bill Gothard - Institute in Basic Life Principles

 

[Dave-W]

. The "cult" thing, however, is up for debate

As some have already said, the term "cult" often gets mis-used to mean we do not agree with their teachings or practices.

 

[dayhiker]

I haven't had any contact with Bill Gothard in years. But I never thought of him as an cult.

When I went thru his seminar I was really blessed by it. But it was one of the times in my life that I cam to put the emphasis of my Christianity on obeying rules rather than a love relationship with Jesus. I've done that like 3 times in my life and each time I felt the Holy Spirit pull away from me. Ya, I'm slow to catch on sometimes. But I don't go there any more.

So to me the primary bad teaching of Gothard is how it turns Christianity into a rule based faith and with that has to come judgements. Not healthy at all in my book.

 

[Dave-W]

So to me the primary bad teaching of Gothard is how it turns Christianity into a rule based faith and with that has to come judgements. Not healthy at all in my book.

Yes. This.

 

[WannaWitness]

As some have already said, the term "cult" often gets mis-used to mean we do not agree with their teachings or practices.

That's right. A cult is a religious group that denies or conflicts with the Bible-based fundamentals of the Christian faith (hope I explained that right). Christian churches that are merely legalistic in nature are not cults if their doctrine holds to these fundamentals, even if they do have other ideas/interpretations regarding theology, rituals, works, and meanings of certain Scriptures. They can be mistaken for cults due to their, what-you-call, "exclusive" nature, but I know there is a difference because these conflicts lie in the secondary issues on which Christians can and will disagree (and Romans 14 touches on that in great lengths). I have heard some people refer to the so-called King James Only movement as a "cult". It is not a cult at all; they're just a bit outlandish to me in that some in the movement have implied that others who disagree are "less holy", "blind" to the "true knowledge" of God's Word, or don't really care about pleasing God. However, that's a topic for another time.

But cults are not about these secondary issues; they come right out and deny the Biblical basics of the faith. The primary truths about Jesus's divinity, virgin birth, crucifixion, and resurrection. That Jesus is the only way to come to Father God, and only He is to be worshiped. If a church just happens to be legalistic in nature, but adheres to all of that, then they are not cults (although some cults can be legalistic, too.)

Like I said, I haven't found anything that would make me believe that Bill Gothard and his group would be a cult. As far as I know, his statement of faith is based totally on God's Word. I'll have to study a little more about him. He is certainly an intriguing figure in the realm of Christianity, I'll say that much.

Yeah, I'm probably "preaching to the choir", but that's the best explanation I can give of the different between a cult and a legalistic church. I just hope I didn't add more confusion to the topic than what's already there (I don't think I'm the greatest at explaining things most of the time).

 

[Dave-W]

That's right. A cult is a religious group that denies or conflicts with the Bible-based fundamentals of the Christian faith (hope I explained that right).

A Popular misconception - that you explained well.

As has been previously stated, a true cult either has hidden doctrines or practices; or is based on a charismatic leader that is unaccountable. Sometimes it is both.

A group can be completely orthodox both in beliefs and practices and STILL be a cult.

 

[WannaWitness]

A Popular misconception - that you explained well.

As has been previously stated, a true cult either has hidden doctrines or practices; or is based on a charismatic leader that is unaccountable. Sometimes it is both.

A group can be completely orthodox both in beliefs and practices and STILL be a cult.

Totally makes sense.

 

[Albion]

It does make sense, but it's not a good treatment of the meaning of the word "cult." This word historically was used to refer to any organized religious movement. In more recent days, people needing some term to describe modern developments took up use of the word for their own purposes.

They fall into two basic categories:

1. mind-controlling groups headed by some charismatic leader in the style we used to associate with California hippie communes. They could have almost anything from belief in some new sort of social order to certain sex practices or wanting to be in touch with aliens from outer space as their reason for existing.

And 2. religious movements and churches that went beyond what Catholics and Protestants, even considering the differences that separate them, agree upon as the essentials of the Christian faith. This use of the word depends totally upon there being unorthodox doctrines (as I outlined in an earlier post) and does not necessarily involve any guru-like leader, sensory deprivation techniques, and all of that.