Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!crabapple.srv.cs.cmu.edu!bb3.andrew.cmu.edu!news.sei.cmu.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!headwall.Stanford.EDU!rutgers!igor.rutgers.edu!geneva.rutgers.edu!christian
From: stephen@mont.cs.missouri.edu (Stephen Montgomery-Smith)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Latest on Branch Davidians
Message-ID: <Apr.23.02.55.37.1993.3129@geneva.rutgers.edu>
Date: 23 Apr 93 06:55:38 GMT
Sender: hedrick@geneva.rutgers.edu
Organization: University of Missouri
Lines: 63
Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu

In <Apr.22.00.55.06.1993.2048@geneva.rutgers.edu> aaron@binah.cc.brandeis.edu (Scott Aaron) writes:

>In article <Apr.20.03.02.42.1993.3815@geneva.rutgers.edu>,
>conditt@tsd.arlut.utexas.edu (Paul Conditt) wrote:
>>
>>
>> I think it's really sad that so many people put their faith in a mere
>> man, even if he did claim to be the son of God, and/or a prophet.

>I'll pose a question here that's got me thinking:  what distinguishes
>"true" religion from cults (I'm speaking generally here, not specifially
>about Christianity)?  Jerry Falwell was on Good Morning America on 
>Tuesday ostensibly to answer this question.  Basically, he said that
>true religion follows a message whereas a cult follows a person.
>But, then, Christianity is a cult because the message of Christianity
>IS the person of Jesus.  So what distinguishes, for example, the
>Branch Davidian "cult" from the Presbyterian "church"?  Doctrinal
>differences don't answer the question, IMHO, so don't use them as
>an answer.


As far as I can see, one of the big differences between Davidians and
Christians is in who they follow.  I have sometimes tried to put myself
in the feet of one of Jesus's disciples.  Basically, they gave up a
lot --- career, possibly family, and well, a whole bunch, to follow
Jesus.

So what is the difference?  It is quite plain.  Jesus was good and
David Koresh was not.

The problem is, I think, is that we try to legislate what is good
and what is bad in terms of principles.  For instance, there are thousands of 
laws in the U.S. governing what is legal and what is not.  Often, it is hard
to bring people to justice, because it is not possible to find
a legal way to do it.  If only we could trust judges to be just,
then we could tell them to administer justice fairly, and justice
would be followed.  But since judges don't always get it right,
we have a complicated system involving precedent and bunches
of other stuff which attempt to make the imperfect (the justice
of man) into something perfect.  But what I hear about the justice
system in the U.S. tells me that quite the opposite is true.

There is also a problem that we tend to judge the presentation
more than the material being presented.  So we might consider 
a ranting Christian to be bad, but an eloquent person from another
religion to be good.  This goes along with the American desire
to protect the Constitution at all costs, even if it allows
people to do bad things. 

I think that it is the message that is important.  If a man is
presenting a false message, even if he is ever ever so mild mannered,
then that man is performing a tremendous disservice.

I know that I am rambling here.  I guess that what I am trying to
say is that we shouldn't be looking for principles that tell us
why the Davidians got it wrong.  It is not wrong to follow and
worship a person.  But it is important to choose the right person.
It is simple.  Choose Jesus, and you got it right.  Choose
anyone else, and you got it wrong.  Why?  Because Jesus is the
begotten son of God, and nobody else is.  Jesus was without sin, and
nobody else was.

Stephen
