We could say a lot or a little about this; a little is best, I think.
The word "cult" has a pretty fuzzy meaning, but my read is that it tends to be used for relatively fringe-y religious groups with highly uniform beliefs well outside the mainstream, and with high accompanying demands for group-think. QAnon isn't really a religious group, though its adherents do have a sort of religious zeal. Their beliefs are shockingly more popular than they deserve to be, though they're still (I hope!) not mainstream. And there certainly appears to be near-monolithic agreement about many of these beliefs.
Christianity is a lot more complicated. Some parts of it are cultish in the worst possible senses. But the differences between some fundamentalist Christian sects and, say, liberal Episcopalians is a chasm so vast that members of the two groups are likely to find each other more or less incomprehensible.
Put it another way: there seems to be a great deal in the way of generalizations that one can make about QAnon adherents. But contrary to what many non-religious people may think, this is much less true of Christianity. Some Christians think that Jesus was born of a virgin, and some don't. Some believe that Jesus rose bodily from the dead and some don't. Some think that only those who explicitly profess Christianity can be saved. Others don't. Some see evolution as the Devil's tool. Others accept evolution and the rest of science without qualms. The list could go on, and on, and on.
Because it's easy to make tolerably accurate generalizations about QAnon and hard to do the same for Christianity, it's difficult to justify blanket condemnations of Christianity. And I think that's the crucial point. QAnon is, more or less, one thing. Christianity is many things. And so lumping them together is not really helpful.
We could say a lot or a
We could say a lot or a little about this; a little is best, I think.
The word "cult" has a pretty fuzzy meaning, but my read is that it tends to be used for relatively fringe-y religious groups with highly uniform beliefs well outside the mainstream, and with high accompanying demands for group-think. QAnon isn't really a religious group, though its adherents do have a sort of religious zeal. Their beliefs are shockingly more popular than they deserve to be, though they're still (I hope!) not mainstream. And there certainly appears to be near-monolithic agreement about many of these beliefs.
Christianity is a lot more complicated. Some parts of it are cultish in the worst possible senses. But the differences between some fundamentalist Christian sects and, say, liberal Episcopalians is a chasm so vast that members of the two groups are likely to find each other more or less incomprehensible.
Put it another way: there seems to be a great deal in the way of generalizations that one can make about QAnon adherents. But contrary to what many non-religious people may think, this is much less true of Christianity. Some Christians think that Jesus was born of a virgin, and some don't. Some believe that Jesus rose bodily from the dead and some don't. Some think that only those who explicitly profess Christianity can be saved. Others don't. Some see evolution as the Devil's tool. Others accept evolution and the rest of science without qualms. The list could go on, and on, and on.
Because it's easy to make tolerably accurate generalizations about QAnon and hard to do the same for Christianity, it's difficult to justify blanket condemnations of Christianity. And I think that's the crucial point. QAnon is, more or less, one thing. Christianity is many things. And so lumping them together is not really helpful.