Why Are So Many “Cults” Non-Trinitarian?

Why are so many Christian cults, high control groups, and other strange fringe movements, so often non-trinitarian?

In a world where the Trinity doctrine, or other similar Christologies confessing to the full co-equal and co-eternal Deity of the Son Yeshua is mainstream dogma, coming across non-trinitarian groups is naturally going to be far more rare, and by that standard, considered at least “somewhat” strange to those only versed in the typical creeds and doctrines espoused by the many everyday Christian churches.

Of course, labelling someone who simply thinks ‘differently’ to you, or to a mainstream view, is not in of itself enough to justify the use of the term “cultist”, in its negative or derogatory sense. After all, even the 1st Century Christians, were labelled as a “cult” or a “sect” (Acts 24:14) by those around them that preferred what was back then, “mainstream doctrine” (ie; Non-Messianic Judaism for the Jews, or the Greek, Roman and Pagan religions of the Gentiles).

Therefore, calling a non-trinitarian a “cultist” just because they are a non-trinitarian, really doesn’t wash, there has to be more to it than that.

A true “cult”, is something that is to be regarded, not just as “different”, but a group or collective that is either:

• Harmful to its adherents or others around them
• Controlling (be that direct control of a person’s physical life, lifestyle, actions, mind, free will or free speech)
• Supressive (excessively restricts access to infomation, disallows or dissuades listening to negative things about the group or evidence against it, punishes or dissuades the asking of questions, punishes or disallows disagreeing with the group even on minute matters, punishes or disallows leaving)
• Manipulative (lying, cohesive, threatening, etc)
• Separatist (either by physical separation or mental and emotional separation from one’s society)
• Polarising (promoting black and white or “us vs them” psychological tendencies)
• Seclusive (keeping themselves, or their practices, secret)
• Hyper-Exclusivist (believes their members are better or superior to non-members, claims to have some kind of unique quality or access to a higher or divine power that others don’t – even without demonstrative evidence)

Groups that fit into the “cult” categorisation often vary, and may differ in how ‘deep’ on the “cult spectrum” they lie. Sometimes there is a fine line between what is simply civil law and order, and a tyrannical government.

If you break a government’s laws, you go to jail, you’ll be labelled as a criminal, maybe you’ll even get a death sentence if your crime is great enough. These are all ‘technically’ speaking, forms of social and physical “control”. But what makes a government’s laws benefical versus tyrannical, often boils down to how much individual freedom and right to life to it takes away or controls.

And indeed, even the scriptures themselves give Christians certain rules and morals to live by, even stating that we are “no part of this world” (John 17:16) and that there is no salvation besides the Gospel and being a part of God’s Kingdom (John 6:68, John 8:24, Ephesians 2:12-13), but never is this at the expense of one’s own individual freedom of thought, opinion or conscience where scripture allows it, nor does Christianity demand any kind of segregation from non-Christian society (1 Corinthians 5:9-10, 1 Corinthians 10:27, Matthew 9:10, Matthew 5:47).

Christians obey God and the Lord Yeshua, because they have the innate ‘right’ of authority, and because they teach us the objective truth and simple “reality” on the only hope of salvation – but even they give us the freedom and even encourage us to ask questions, and to ‘seek’ proof for what they have said (Proverbs 14:15, Exodus 4:1-5, Exodus 19:9, John 2:11, Acts 17:11, 1 John 4:1, Exodus 32:11-14, Genesis 18:24-25).

Ironically, cults also use propaganda or negative labelling to intensify black and white thinking, not so different to those who would for example… call non-trinitarians “cultists”, simply for having a different interpretation of scripture to them. Slapping a derogatory label on something is an effective weapon against something we don’t like, and desire others not to like along with us.

Nevertheless, though being a non-trinitarian in of itself is not something that is inherently “cultish” in its behaviour or opinion, it is very much often a doctrine of several religious groups and sects, that indeed do fit the bill of being a cult…

Many religious movements throughout the last couple of centuries down to modern times, have involved high control methods, (false) claims to “prophethood”, abusive behaviour, and more. And a great, ‘great’ deal of these Christian movements, have been non-trinitarian. Because of this, it has been very easy for Trinitarian Christians to associate non-trinitarianism, with cultism. And so indeed, it statistically prompts the question; Why are so many cults non-trinitarian?

Some would claim, that the fact so many of the most well known and mainstream non-trinitarian groups throughout history have been cults, that it must mean non-trinitarianism is one of the “fruits” of cultism, or the antichrist, on the basis of Matthew 7:15-20:

• “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves. You will recognise them by their fruits. Are grapes gathered from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? So, every healthy tree bears good fruit, but the diseased tree bears bad fruit. A healthy tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a diseased tree bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Thus, you will recognise them by their fruits”.

And, this is of course, isn’t that bad of reasoning… at least, on the surface. But if one goes deeper into the subject, one will find, it’s not quite so as simple.

For example, a Catholic might say “Protestants have the most splintered and differing group of churches and denominations of all, without the Protestant reformation, all these heretical groups wouldn’t have existed, therefore, these cults are a fruitage of the heresy of Protestantism”.

I’m sure, any Protestant that would be reading this, would be adamantly opposed to that…

But if non-trinitarianism ‘isn’t’ a fruit of heretical or cult-like thinking, then, why do so many groups that believe in it, end up being, well… cults? The answer to this, I believe, is quite multi-faceted, involving layers of history, as well as both social science and psychology.

The first thing to acknowledge, is that for hundreds of years, the Catholic Church had been in control of most of the world, and by ‘force’, made the people adhere to its doctrines, ever since the year 381 A.D. Before this time, however, there were many individuals, groups and congregations of Christians, that all had their own interpretations of scripture – including several non-trinitarian groups (including Subordinationists, Modalists, Adoptionists and Arians), even amongst some of the famous and early Patristic writers.

When Rome made its state religion Christianity, Roman Catholicism and its governing councils of Bishops that saw itself as the “center of official theological doctrine”, became the “official status quo”, and through this, all other groups to disagree with these councils, were deemed heretical. Heresy of course, eventually became punishable by death.

It is common knowledge that the Catholic Church, as well as some of the early Protestant Churches did all in their power to suppress what they believed to be heretical, which included things such as:

• Restricting the Bible from the common people
• The Inquisitions
• Physical torture of heretics
• Slow and painful executions (often by burning at the stake)
• Labelling any who had a theological disagreement to the mainstream Church as a “damnable heretic” or “demon possessed”

All of these methods used to keep heretics in line, though they didn’t pose a threat to society or anyone’s wellbeing, oddly enough, seem to match several of the criteria of what makes a “cult” aforementioned above.

Though today Catholic and Protestant churches are seen as “normal and mainstream” and not cultish at all in the eyes of most, the irony is that historically, they could be labelled as some of the biggest cults in history. Their methods of control were extremely unchristian, using scare tactics, information control and suppression, slanderous name calling, and grotesque violence, all just to silence a few dissenting voices who came to believe the mainstream interpretations of the scriptures from the Churches, were wrong or at the very least, questionable.

Is it any surprise then, that after several centuries of such high control, that these churches, both Catholic and early Protestant, have been able to ‘define’ what should be seen as “normal to believe” when it comes to the scriptures? 

One cannot underestimate the effect this would have had and has had, on the social collective consciousness, when it comes to faith, creed and dogma – so much so that these dogmas, even after the era of control, torture and execution, are embedded into the minds of many to be “essential for salvation”. And for no wonder, it literally was in those times. If you wanted to keep your head and have ‘salvation’ from the chopping block or burning stake, you’d better believe in their doctrines.

Only by the 1600s and onward, after these churches slowly began to lose their power and the world becoming more secularised, with the scriptures finally back into the hands of all people freely to read, were dissenting voices given the breathing room to finally be able to “come out of the closet” so to speak, without threat of torture and violence.

Thus, the notion that any doctrine that is today considered “new” or a “revival of an old heresy” and therefore “cultic” is fallacious thinking. For we cannot say what the “mainstream view” would have been, since there was never an ‘allowance’ of a mainstream view of the common Christian populace to take place, but only the strict dogmas and creeds of the Churches, that were often kept in place merely via adherence to tradition, and not to mention, the complex political history of the ancient Church, which wasn’t as clean or straight forward as the modern version of the tale that is so often spun in regard to “heresy” – Case in point; The Arian Catholic Councils and Creeds of Sirmium ‘after’ the year 325 A.D, which had Trinitarian Christians excommunicated for 60 years, and Arianism declared orthodox, until the rise of Roman Emperor Theodosius, who was friends with the Trinitarian leader Athanasius, and ordered for all his non-trinitarian opponents making up the majority of the Church Council at that time to be executed (a story that deserves a whole article of itself to cover, but I do recommend the book; When Jesus became God: The Struggle to Define Christianity during the Last Days of Rome by Richard E. Rubenstein, to learn more about this fascinating history).

That makes up one of the layers of why non-trinitarianism is so often branded as “cultic and heretical”. The irony, though, that it was cult-like behaviour and practices in the first place on the part of the ‘Trinitarians’, that ended up giving non-trinitarian Christology a bad name and reputation, and such influence has become all encompassing worldwide on the Christian scene ever since.

Of course, this doesn’t yet fully explain the phenoma of there being so many actual non-trinitarian ‘cults’ and “odd-balls” that we have seen in more recent centuries and decades. And this takes me into yet another reason, which is of course, psychological.

Most people are not willing to stand out to be different, but would rather fit in, and so, anyone asking ‘too many’ questions, even if ‘allowed’ to ask questions, will always be the odd one out in any social group or society. Sometimes this is for legitimate reasons (because let’s be honest, there are ‘certain’ fringe views and behaviours out there which are just complete “whack”), but in other times, it’s merely because something is popular – even if it’s wrong.

What this creates, is a very peculiar social and psychological dynamic.

I have found, that to be a non-trinitarian in a world where the Trintiy is mainstream, and constantly upheld by a large voice to be the “center of Christianity” and “vital to salvation”, it takes some big “cahoonas” to stand up against. And this means that only certain kinds of people will:

1. The extremely brave
2. The individualist
3. The contrarian
4. The insane

All of these are not the “common everyday traits” of typical people (though, the fourth one sometimes I do wonder, ha). But why? The answer is because, these people are willing to “look odd” to the people around them. They either don’t care or are unaware of themselves.

Now, we can see that, not all of these possibilities, would preclude to any notion of being a cultist, but at the same time, we do see elements here, that would be ‘ripe’ for building a cult upon.

Have you ever noticed, that it’s always a, “certain type of people”, that so often get caught up into conspiracy theories? Whether they be your local flat-earther, holocaust denier, moon-landing denier, 9/11 insider jober, reptilian alien world leader believer… usually, if I am to be “mild and respectful” about them, are some what shall we say… “eccentric”.

Usually, people with extremely “out there” opinions that are against the status quo or “norm”, are people who are typically thinking outside the box, sometimes, ‘too’ outside the box, that there isn’t even a box left to be in. It’s my personal experience, that in my time exploring several non-trinitarian communities online, I have come across “all kinds of people”, ranging from the mild conspiracy theory types all the way up to full dialed unmedicated schizophrenics.

This is because they don’t just stop at their opinions on the nature of the Son of God… they have ‘all kinds’ of crazy opinions and behaviours in all manner of topics, their entire thinking style is set to the highest levels of paranoia, that they think ‘everything’ they have been taught is a lie, and therefore, these kinds of people will be the ones to believe in “clusters” of “unorthodox” or “heterodox beliefs”, even ones that are blatantly against common sense, and indeed, the teachings of the clear and unambiguous scriptures, that only the most twisted of minds or those with a lack of reading comprehension, could screw up in their understanding of.

Hence, one of the reasons for so many Christian cults or otherwise insane sects that are non-trinitarian, is because many of them will naturally be founded by or made up of people, who are completely insane, even ‘if’ non-trinitarianism happens to be true! It’s because of the social dynamic. If some lies are peddled as truths, then, as the saying goes, a broken clock is right twice a day, and you’re bound to get crazy people with crazy opinions, just so happen to discover some truths.

Take Isaac Newton for example, a genius scientist and mathematician, yet throughout his life he suffered with his mental health and even had delusions and hallucinations. Yet, we all accept his theory of gravity, and his many other scientific works (and it just so happens, Isaac Newton was secretly a non-trinitarian Christian).

In this respect, not all conspiracy theories, are just theories. But throughout history, some conspiracies have turned out to be true, even whilst before the truth came out, the individuals calling them out were seen as just being crazy (e.g; the paid off doctors in the 1950s advertising cigarettes as healthy, the sugar industy that had long advertised natural fats as bad and mocked any nutritionists that said otherwise, etc).

Of course, what makes the difference between a conspiracy being “true” and one being just the delusions of a madman, all lies in the evaluation of evidence and the case made around it. In the case of the non-trinitarian, or at least, the “sane” non-trinitarian, it’s a combination of historical studies and theological hermeneutics, with a brave willingness to go against established tradition and popular opinion.

And then there is yet another reason, one that is far more devious, and that’s individuals who take advantage of truth, to promote falsehood, those who ‘create’ their own cults on purpose, by gaining people’s trust.

Cults often thrive by being “different” to the rest. They attract members by “sticking out” amongst the crowd, and this differentation also serves to seperate them from those around them also, making their members feel like they have something “unique and special”. As non-trinitarianism isn’t as popular as trinitarianism, this makes the doctrine a prime tool to add to the cultist’s arsenal, along with any other doctrines that are not as mainstream, whether or not they be true or false.

The best liars, always mix truth with faslehood, this is part of the reason they are seen as “angels of light” (2 Corinthians 11:14). What better way to make a cult, than to give people some genuine and supressed truth about something? Making their followers believe they have ‘all’ truth, and then lead them into a nest of lies. Such has been demonstrably the case in the last couple of centuries.

For example, the early Anabaptist, Great Awakening and Restorationist movements started out with noble intents, and several of these groups became non-trinitarian, simply by their collective study of the Bible. But eventually, certain individuals made their way into these groups, proclaiming themselves to be prophets and the like, which completely corrupted these movements, and resulted in spawning many of the cult groups which we see to this day. That of course, not boding well for people who hold to certain doctrines that are not mainstream, because sadly, this creates the very association fallacy that so many today weaponise, enabling them to say “x are cultists”.

Part of me does wonder if indeed, that the Devil ‘is’ involved in this, but not in the inspiration of non-trinitarianism, but rather, the corruption and sabotage of Christian movements that seek genuine truth against the massive tide of mainstream falsehoods.

For example, Yeshua and the Apostles warned that in their absense, many false teachers would enter into the flock and would teach deviations of the truth (Matthew 24:24, 2 Timothy 4:3-4, 2 Peter 2:1-3). Of course, the issue is, nobody ever points to ‘themselves’ as the false teachers, the fingers are always pointed the other way, but the important part is here, is that we’re told the false teachers are “in” the congregations, not outside of them. And that the false teachers would be something large and influential.

Therefore, if there is a demonic reason non-trinitarian movements often end up as cults, perhaps it’s because “mr evil” doesn’t want people to pay attention to the actual truths or reasons for non-trinitarian belief, which can be pointed to in the Bible and adequately explained.

However, as a non-trinitarian myself, I am not a cultist, I am not part of a cult, and I know many others like-minded who are also not cultists, and have ‘never’ been part of a cult, but simply came to their conclusions on their own via studying of scripture.

So, though there are many non-trinitarian cults, not all non-trinitarians are cultists, and neither is non-trinitarianism innately cultic. Rather the reason for there being several non-trinitarian cults, is highly socially, societally and psychologically complex, but likewise, historical Trinitarian Christianity from the beginnings of the Roman Catholics and the child Churches it spawned during the early Reformation, has genuinely been one of the largest, controlling and extremely violent cults in ‘all’ of human history, and remains to be today extremely injurous and socially slanderous in its language toward Christians that depart from their man-made “mainstream” doctrines, theologies and creeds.

In fact, if anything, non-trinitarianism might be more mainstream now than people would give credit, if they actually realised that despite the fact so many Christians ‘call themseves’ “Trinitarian”, their actual understanding of scripture when questioned, reveals otherwise. For example a survey by Christianity Today, stated “78% of Christians believe Jesus was the first and greatest being created by God the Father”, an Arian statement.

So, if indeed non-trintarians are cultists, then all I can say is that 78% of Christians must be part of some kind of cult called “the Bible”.