Although I prefer to write about broader topics, it seems like I keep getting drawn back to issues I was dealing with when I wrote the first edition of my book Fed Up with Fundamentalism (2007). I have shifted to using the term conservative evangelical rather than fundamentalist, but the terms are basically identical—and problematic.
What is a
Cult? According to
Claude, scholars “have defined a cult as a religious group exhibiting some or
all of the following characteristics: a charismatic leader who exercises total
control; an apocalyptic vision; isolation from society; an emphasis on
transcendent spiritual experience; and rigid rules governing members’ behavior.”
Central to this
definition is the element of coercion: the assumption that some form of
coercive persuasion or mind control is used to recruit and retain members by
suppressing their ability to reason, think critically, and make choices in
their own best interest. It is that understanding of cult that I am considering
in this article.
“White
evangelicals: An American cult” is
a piece I recently came across.* Edmond Davis, the author, states that
White evangelical support for Donald Trump “has evolved into something disturbingly
cult-like, forming a theology not rooted in the gospel of Jesus Christ but in
the gospel of white grievance, dominionism and nostalgia for an imagined,
morally superior past.”
I encourage you
to read that perceptive essay (available here), which lists many “major drivers”
behind the formation of the White evangelical cult. For those of you who are
interested in this subject, I also recommend reading the July 2022 article “Escaping
the Evangelical Cult” by Keith Giles (see here).
Despite my
original intention to write much more about those two provocative pieces, for
the rest of this article I am switching to sharing a meaningful discussion I
had with Claude about the matter at hand.
Conservative
evangelical Christianity is more a cultic system than a cult, as the latter is generally
understood. That difference, which Clyde pointed out, is quite helpful. While
Davis’s article, referenced above, uses the word cult, his primary meaning
is that of a cultic system. There certainly isn’t just one “cult
leader.”
Jim Jones and
Peoples Temple (Jonestown, 1978) and David Koresh and the Branch Davidians
(Waco, 1993) are two of the widely known cults of the past. And although not
known broadly, the earlier Alamo Christian Foundation, begun by Tony Alamo in
1969, was a similar type of cult.
Alamo (1934~2017), who was born in Missouri, presented himself as a
born-again evangelical street preacher, amassing followers through communal
living, frugality, and total obedience—all while exploiting members
financially. He died while serving a 175-year prison sentence for raping young
girls, whom he called his “child brides.”
Certainly,
conservative Christianity can’t be considered a cult in the same way those
infamous cults were. So, let’s look at some of the ways evangelicalism can legitimately
be called a “cultic system.”
Conservative
evangelical Christianity promotes a “silo” mentality. According to Claude, even for
conservatives who would never consider joining a dangerous cult such as those
mentioned above, “conservative evangelical culture tends to function as an epistemic
silo—a closed information environment that systematically limits the range of
experiences, friendships, and ideas available to its members.” It that sense,
it is a type of “cultic system.”
A
lifetime inside that “silo” typically means that one’s friends are overwhelmingly
people who share the same theological assumptions, political commitments, and
cultural reference points. Friendships with those who are “different” are often
subtly discouraged, and when such do occur, they are often framed as “mission”
rather than mutual relationship.
For many
conservatives, Christian radio, evangelical publishing, a curated set of
approved authors and speakers are normative. The “gatekeeping” is real; for
example, certain books simply don't appear on the church bookstall, and certain
questions don’t get raised from the pulpit.
Christian
schooling for most and homeschooling for some is specifically designed to
present an alternative epistemic universe, one in which, for example, young-earth
creationism, American exceptionalism, and traditional gender roles are not
debatable positions but settled facts.
I know about that
sort of silo mentality, because that was my basic position when I was in high
school, and I first went to a Baptist college, not realizing then that I was
part of a “cultic system.” It took many years before I began becoming a progressive
Christian, which I now seek to be.**
_____
* That article was posted by Global
Baptist News on May 14. Edmond W. Davis, a retired college history professor,
was the author. He taught at Arkansas Baptist College, a private,
Baptist-affiliated institution recognized as a historically Black
college/university (HBCU). The article identifies him as a HBCU leader.
** If you want to read,
or re-read, my blog post about being a progressive Christian, here is the link
to that May 11 article: https://theviewfromthisseat.blogspot.com/2026/05/why-i-am-progressive-christian.html
Note: Research assistance provided by Claude (Anthropic) A.I.


As is often the case, the first comments received this morning were from local Thinking Friend Sue Wright. Here is what she wrote:
ReplyDelete"Leroy, on drives in the country, I have seen, on occasion, a silo with a vining crop of one sort or another, finding a fracture in that silo, and though still attached to it, managing to stay alive outside the silo’s narrow perimeters. Grown from the same seed still stored inside, perhaps for years, the bit of plant has seemingly escaped for the light of day, barely hanging on it would appear, but at least trying to be free of the darkness it is rooted in.
Thanks for the blog.
LeRoy Roberts, my Thinking Friend in North Carolina who regularly says he is "L with the large R," sent these brief comments:
ReplyDelete"Excellent blog. -- Does Trump have a cult following? After viewing January 6, I don't see how you can think otherwise.
"I am more concerned about what he will do in the future than the damage he has done in the past."
And here are two more brief comments from Thinking Friends who live in Missouri:
ReplyDelete"Thank you again for insightful articles." -- Jeanie McGowan
"Thanks much for today’s post. As usual you are right on target! I found the Edmond Davis article very helpful." -- Don Wilson
Very interesting Leroy. Thank you! Here in the UK we are doing a morning conference/seminar in September on the Far Right in Britain some of whom are embracing a form of Christian nationalism as part of their Islamophobia. Your article is helpful for my preparation for my session at that event.
ReplyDeleteLocal Thinking Friend Debra Sapp-Yarwood shares these highly meaningful comments:
ReplyDelete"Thanks, Leroy. I appreciate your distinguishing 'cult" from "cultic system.' I think conservative evangelicalism is, indeed, a cultic system.
"While we're parsing words (your favorite sport, I think) I might distinguish evangelicalism from evangelical Christianity. If anything, what conservative evangelical "Christians" propagate is Paulism, which would be another word for evangelicalism. Their definition of what it means to be Christian is to accept the gift of an eternal reward by believing in a penal substitutionary atonement interpretation of Jesus' work on the cross, laid out most succinctly in the book of Romans and found nowhere in the Gospels. They use Paul's words to dismiss or justify what Jesus has to say about sin, social order, eternal life or how to live. Their ideas on sin come from Paul's various lists of personal transgressions. They get their ideas on social order, defined by hierarchies, from various epistles -- only men in the pulpit, women submit to men, slaves answer to masters. Social sin, as found in the Gospels, isn't a thing at all for them.
"I heard these things addressed on Bott Radio during my Lenten Discipline of listening for 1/2 hour a day, five days a week. One commenter explained that progressive Christians take Matthew 25 out of context. Jesus isn't preaching to a crowd; he's only talking to his disciples. Therefore, one needs only to care for 'the least of these' who are 'Christian' (accept the penal substitutionary atonement model). Paulists dismiss Jesus' discomfiting message to the rich young man/ruler, Jesus' answer to the attorney, the story of Lazarus and the rich man, or anything else that suggests their materialism, greed or violence might subject them to God's judgment. All those messages are made null and void by Paul. Sure, a Paulist might tell you, I might be materialistic and greedy, and I would shoot someone to stand my ground. If those things are sins, they're the top of an iceberg: I've accepted that I'm a disgusting sinner and God needs me punished, but Jesus was punished in my place, and I believe that so I get to go to heaven (and you don't). Praise Jesus. And I try my best to go and sin no more.
"They cannot fathom that Jesus came to save the world by embodying God's character, producing followers that also live simple, non-materialistic lives of radical love, acceptance, forgiveness, humility and resistance to empire and hierarchy, up to and including a violent death, which God redeems with resurrection. We might call that Gospel Christianity; they would call it liberal hogwash."