Churches With Kitchens

The Cult Next Door: How the Churches of Christ Hide in Plain Sight

Respectable Exterior

That nice brick building down the road looks like any other church. They may have nice landscaping and a vacation bible school with its members being the most welcoming you could ever hope to meet. They look and behave as if they are any other church on the street. Their services resemble a typical Baptist congregation, minus the guitar of course. Their simplistic signage appears charming while the name church of Christ invokes historic protestant imagery.

If you were to make a visit to hear a sermon it is unlikely that you would pick up on anything nefarious. They have an orderly service with lovely acapella singing. Their sermons quote scripture and seem biblical enough. The underlying lingo of the group is unknown to you so you would not hear the subtilties aimed at their members. You would not realize they have a different definition of most Christian terms. Without a trained ear you would have difficulty picking up on the distortions of the gospel, distortions that exist to force the idea that baptism saves by giving you the chance to do enough works to gain your salvation.

A visit to a church of Christ generally starts with a warm welcome, multiple members may inquire as to where you are from and what brings you there. The service will start with announcements, generally going over the sick list. There will be hymns and prayer, followed by communion, the offering, and a scripture reading relating to the sermon. Then the sermon begins, which typically lasts 30-20 minutes. The sermon is followed by prayer, another hymn, and The Invitation. Afterwards you may be approached a few more times by multiple members and asked to fill out a card giving your name and address.

Depending upon your past experience with church services, a church of Christ service may seem plain or more casual than you are accustomed to.

Many good and godly people have been fooled by a cursory glance – Methodist, Baptists, and Presbyterian alike. Even members within the congregations often do not understand they are working for their salvation, that they follow that other gospel. That is, of course, by design of its founder Alexander Campbell, whose existence the members are often ignorant of (Campbell, 1839).

The outward appearance of the building and the souls within mask the inward authoritarianism. Surely, a cult is more obvious isn’t it? Where are the whips and chains? No one is forcing them to stay there! Perhaps they are just misguided? Maybe they are a little legalistic with the whole musical instruments thing but that is not a big deal, right?

Trapped by the One True Church

If you believed that baptism saved by giving you the chance to do good enough and that baptism had to be performed specifically by a church of Christ congregation for the remission (erasure) of past sins only and the act of leaving the congregation is a sin so great that you could lose your salvation, would you be able to leave?

If your church did anything to maintain the perfect unity their founder claimed to seek, would you feel empowered to speak up about abuse? If elders function to declare divisiveness and remove the sinner that dare speak, wouldn’t it be far safer to maintain the delusion of perfect unity.

What if you were raised to believe that all churches except your church were false churches and attendance in one of those churches was a sin? What if you were told that any church that does not do communion weekly was a false church? What if any church doing communion for anything other than literal remembrance was also false? Any church with the wrong number of cups as well. Wouldn’t you do anything to maintain your presence in the one church congregation practicing communion in the only way acceptable to God?

What if you thought all other Christians believed the same things as you, however, those Christians became sinful and decided to have different church practices in rebellion. Meaning, you think what the church of Christ minister says is standard Christian doctrine, with other churches simply deciding not to follow the right practices. You think they are following the other gospel. Those other churches split off from your church, the original. Your church is the only One True Church still following the original pattern laid out for us in the New Testament. Would you speak up, or tolerate whatever the preferred group of people within the church dish out?

Hidden Language

Perhaps one of the most deceptive practices within the churches of Christ is their use of Christianese phrases that sound biblical but have insider meaning. These phrases are not actually Christian in meaning and instead focus on sectarianism, group control, and deemed purity of speech by Alexander Campbell (Stuart, 1890).

“This dialect is made up of Scripture phraseology, used in a certain dogmatic sense, which distinctively indexes the characteristic interpretation of this school in dealing with certain passages of Scripture. This its author calls purity of speech ‘speaking of Bible things by Bible words’ ” (Stuart, The Errors of Campbellism, 1890).

While current members may have no knowledge of their founder or his intent, they still use these phrases today.

  • The Lord’s Church
    • Insider Meaning – only congregations within the Churches of Christ fellowship
    • Purpose- Reinforce Exclusivity
      “We’re the only true Christians”
    • What Outsiders Think It Means – any church that belongs to Jesus
  • Sound Doctrine/Sound Congregation
    • Insider Meaning – Teachings and practices that conform to the churches of Christ blueprint
    • Purpose – Control/Exclusivity. Allows leaders to dismiss disagreement as unsound instead
    • What Outsiders Think It Means – biblically faithful teaching
  • The Pattern or New Testament Pattern
    • Insider Meaning – rigid formula for church organization, worship, and practice that supposedly replicates the first-century church exactly
    • Purpose – Control/Doctrine. Restoration idea that the New Testament is a technical manual
    • What Outsiders Think it Means – following biblical examples
  • Faithful/Unfaithful
    • Insider Meaning – obedient or disobedient to church of Christ traditions and elders
    • Purpose – Control. Ties loyalty to the congregation itself, not just to Christ. Leaving a congregation or questioning leaders is labeled “unfaithfulness.”
    • What Outsiders Think It means – loyal or disloyal to God
  • Scriptural/Unscriptural
    • Insider Meaning – approved vs. forbidden practices within the CoC framework
    • Purpose – Control. The word “unscriptural” signals sin and invites social punishment. is labeled “unfaithfulness.”
    • What Outsiders Think It means – biblical vs. unbiblical
  • Denominational / Denominationalism
    • Insider Meaning – any church that isn’t CoC; often used as a slur meaning “apostate.”
    • Purpose – Control/Reinforce Exclusivity. Maintains the illusion that CoC congregations are not a denomination but the original New Testament church.
    • What Outsiders Think It means – organized Christian groups like Baptist, Methodist, etc.
  • “Speak where the Bible speaks” / “Bible things in Bible words”
    • Insider Meaning – We reject creeds and human authority; our interpretations are the Bible itself.
    • Purpose – Deception/Control. Masks the fact that Campbell’s interpretations are the creed; establishes exclusive authority
    • What Outsiders Think It Means – A humble devotion to Scripture.
  • The Plan of Salvation
    • Insider Meaning – A five-step formula: hear, believe, repent, confess, be baptized (for remission of sins).
    • Purpose – Control/Deception. Reduces salvation to a checklist; gives church measurable control over membership
    • What Outsiders Think It Means – A summary of how Christians are saved
  • “Obey the Gospel” / “Obedience of Faith”
    • Insider Meaning – Submit to baptism in water by the Church of Christ.
    • Purpose -Control/ Exclusivity. Makes baptism a gatekeeping act; obedience = submission to church authority
    • What Outsiders Think It Means – Living out your faith in daily life
  • In Christ
    • Insider Meaning – A spiritual status entered only through baptism in the Church of Christ.
    • Purpose – Control/ Exclusivity. Restricts salvation to those under their system; excludes other Christians.
    • What Outsiders Think It Means – Being a believer or having faith in Christ.
  • Fallen Away
    • Insider Meaning – Has stopped attending or left the congregation; lost salvation
    • Purpose – Control. Keeps members fearful of departure; equates leaving with eternal loss.
    • What Outsiders Think It Means -Someone who’s lost interest in church.
  • “The Invitation” / “Responding to the Invitation”
    • Insider Meaning – A ritual at the end of service where one publicly confesses or seeks baptism.
    • Purpose -Control. Centralizes power in the pulpit; emotional reinforcement of conformity obedience = submission to church authority
    • What Outsiders Think It Means – A call to prayer or spiritual reflection.
  • Faith
    • Insider Meaning – it is an active obedience that leads to baptism.
    • Purpose – Control/Deception. Converts belief into measurable action; justifies the requirement of baptism as the expression of true faith. It creates a theological framework where faith is incomplete without ritual conformity.
    • What Outsiders Think It Means – Faith is trust, reliance, or confidence in Christ’s promises; an internal disposition toward God.

In the churches of Christ, common Christian words and phrases are imbued with highly specific, technical meanings that diverge sharply from their plain or biblical sense. To insiders, these terms define hierarchy status, salvation, and loyalty to the congregation; to outsiders, they appear familiar and harmless. This specialized language functions as a subtle tool of control by measuring conformity, enforcing submission, and differentiates insiders from outsiders without ever appearing overtly coercive.

No Headquarters

Without headquarters, leaders, associations or denominational structures the churches of Christ can appear as if they are self-governing independent churches with no ties to their original cult founders. Each congregation claims independence thereby avoiding the term cult that is easily applied to other charismatic and one true church cult movements. Campbellites struggled with congregational oversight in the beginning with Campbell encouraging only minimal association (Lane, 1958).

This independence is often a point of pride among members, who see it as evidence of faithfulness and biblical simplicity. What is overlooked, however, is that the real control comes not from external authorities, but from the internal doctrine and social pressures that enforce a preferred-member hierarchy. Mutual policing, enforced conformity, and fear of judgment maintain order and compliance, all under the guise of congregational freedom.

The autonomy provided at the local level guards each congregation from the sins of another congregation, providing cover for themselves. Abuse, manipulation, or doctrinal rigidity in one congregation is easily dismissed as an isolated problem. Members rarely consider that the same patterns exist in their own church.

Outsiders can view the lack of church government structures as perhaps preferable to having structure. The movement seen as charming, understandable, and reflective of a desire for simplicity. In truth, the lack of oversight is more likely an attempt to avoid accountability and a fear of past experience with leadership.

Social Conformity

The verbal threats, coercion, physical harm, and imprisonment present in more obvious cults are often not present within churches of Christ, obscuring its true nature as a cult to outsiders. Instead, social conditioning and loss of salvation govern the members beliefs and actions. The high levels of social conformity at play within a church of Christ congregation are an element of the belief system that remains invisible to outsiders and even to a casual visitor. The culture within a church of Christ is the primary method by which members are socially conditioned to conform to a specific set of behaviors, beliefs, and expressions of faith that reinforce the group’s internal authority (O’Reilly & Chatman, 1996, p. 162).

Outwardly they appear welcoming and, as is often quoted, “They seem so nice“. This nice behavior is not evidence of indwelling holy spirit or fruits of the spirit as an outsider may assume. Instead, the niceness is a behavior that it conditioned into its members. The projection of politeness is meant to be an expression of unity and cooperation. Members who project politeness in this way well are often rewarded with spots within the social hierarchy. Outsiders perceive harmony and cohesion within the church culture instead of recognizing that social control mechanisms produce that appearance (O’Reilly & Chatman, 1996, p. 169).

In a church culture that frames disagreement as divisiveness, and divineness as sin, and punishes that sin by threatening exclusion from the group thereby removing salvation, that nice behavior becomes an outward behavior used to project agreeableness. Members are taught, consciously or not, that niceness demonstrates spiritual maturity and unity. The threat of losing salvation by exclusion from the One True Church is more than enough to enforce compliance with elements of social control.

New members are often introduced to this social conditioning from the church culture well before they are taught the beliefs and practices of the church
They learn the rituals, practices, and behaviors incrementally and then slowly adjust their own behaviors and thoughts to align with the culture’s norms (O’Reilly & Chatman, 1996, p. 162). Cults that rely on social conditioning to police behaviors rarely have a new member class that instructs perspective members on the tenets of the faith and beliefs of the church. Instead, the perspective member absorbs the cultural norms first. When they start to grasp the doctrine of the church of Christ, they may have already aligned themselves to believe whatever the minister says is truth, erasing their past beliefs and ignoring contradiction.

“Behavioral conformity can lead to attitudinal change: as members act in line with expectations, they are likely to adopt the beliefs and values associated with those actions.” (O’Reilly & Chatman, 1996, p. 163)

Gradual Indoctrination

Observers looking in perceive a pleasant happy and welcoming congregation, mistaking conditioning for inner joy and never experiencing the indoctrination experienced by members within the church of Christ. Rather than a systematic intentional brainwashing this slow indoctrination by use of social control is more akin to a continual, long term social influence. “The process is best conceived as a continuum of social influence … rather than a qualitatively distinct phenomenon such as ‘brainwashing’.” (Coates, 2016, p. 115).

Surprisingly, the people enforcing the social control of behavior and the slow indoctrination of doctrine are often doing so unaware. These individuals simply behave and believe as they were instructed in their earlier days. “The evolution of belief systems is also driven by social interactions, through which people communicate their beliefs to others“(Rodriguez et al., 2016, p. 1).

The churches of Christ represent a self-perpetuating system of indoctrination handed down for generations directly from Campbell himself.

New members are never told of specific beliefs of the churches of Christ; indoctrination is slow and gathered largely from human inference. Multiple sermons and bible studies are used to teach the doctrine over long periods of time. Instruction is layered overtime, what appears to be uncomplicated simplicity is actually slow indoctrination and instruction on the pattern of salvation. It can be a years before an astute person understands what they actually teach and by then that person is culturally conditioned to accept it. Doing so is a common mechanism used by cults that overtime create reliance on leaders for making all decisions, deciding what is right and wrong (Coates, 2016, p. 106).

The process is so gradual that most members do not recognize it as indoctrination at all. They perceive themselves as simply growing in faith and community.

An outsider observing a few sermons or attending a few events will have great difficulty spotting the errors unless they are trained to look for them. In the past ministers with theological degrees or lay people with significant religious education needed that education to reject Campbellite arguments (Lewis County Herald, 1939). Even then, well established pastors and lay people alike were tricked into the fold, leaving their denominations and families behind. (The Tennessean, 1977).

Isolation Through Exclusivity

The Churches of Christ maintain control not through physical isolation but through ideological exclusivity. Members are conditioned to believe that salvation exists only within their fellowship, only their church has the truth. They are the New Testament Church. Contact with denominational Christians outside their system endangers their faith. The group’s doctrinal exclusivity creates social and emotional isolation that functions as efficiently as physical separation.

Unlike high control sects that physically seclude members from the outside world, the churches of Christ seclude members mentally and spiritually. Through constant reinforcement of the One True Church narrative, members are led to see the outside world, including other Christians, as lost, unfaithful, and dangerous.

This exclusivity is reinforced through repeated use of insider language like faithful, sound, and scriptural. These words not only define salvation but serve as moral boundary markers, signaling who is in and who is out. To question church teaching is to risk being labeled unsound and, by extension, spiritually dead. This labeling mechanism keeps members compliant and discourages critical thought.

To outsiders, this isolation is invisible. Members appear friendly, neighborly, and biblically grounded, attending community events and holding jobs alongside non-members. Yet internally, the social architecture ensures that all meaningful validation, belonging, and salvation flow only through the group. This phenomenon is common among ideologically driven cults, where control is maintained by monopolizing meaning rather than movement (Rodriguez et al., 2016, p. 1).

The result is a subtle but powerful system of control:

  • Emotional isolation, achieved through fear of spiritual contamination.
  • Intellectual isolation, sustained by rejection of denominational theology and external scholarship.
  • Social isolation, reinforced through moral boundary language that classifies outsiders as lost.

Members who attempt to leave face the loss of community and identity but also the existential terror of eternal separation from God. The autonomy and independence so proudly proclaimed are illusions. Every congregation teaches the same underlying exclusivity, ensuring unity through fear and conformity rather than freedom.

Apologetics Defense: Redefining What a Cult Is

Cults are generally described “as a religious or quasi-religious group characterized by unusual or atypical beliefs, seclusion from the outside world, and an authoritarian structure. Cults tend to be highly cohesive, well organized, secretive, and hostile to nonmembers” (American Psychological Association, 2025).

Christian Cults “is a religious group claiming to be Christian but deviating from the core truths of the gospel, particularly the deity of Christ and salvation by grace through faith. Cults mislead people by distorting biblical truth, often using Christian terminology while promoting a false gospel that leads people away from a saving relationship with Jesus Christ.” (CompellingTruth.org, 2025)

Apologetic defenses of the churches of Christ often rely on redefining what constitutes a cult in ways that obscure the actual experiences of members in addition to dismissing those that make accusations as apostates and using insider lingo to single to members to dismiss the claim. They use a colloquial definition of the word cult and extreme examples to refute cult accusations.

The Oak Grove church of Christ explains how they are not a cult with the with this method. Is the Church of Christ a Cult? | Oak Grove Church of Christ

“This question arises because often the media or preachers in denominations make an accusation…“(Cauley. 2025)

Standard in any church of Christ defense apologetics is to call those that make the accusation apostates. Denominationalism is insider code for apostate, those not faithful to the New Testament Church. This article is not written to convince outsiders they are not a cult; it is coded with dialect to instruct members.

“We want to address this question so that the reality can be plainly seen” (Cauley, 2025)

The author further uses insider dialect by injecting the word plainly. By doing so, they are insisting that the argument against them is too complicated thus must not be true. Truth in the bible is simple and plain, they have that truth. They are the authority of truth. Truth is plain. This is an attempt to discourage deeper study, prevent members from seeking outside sources and remind them that they are being truthful as they are speaking plainly, unlike apostates. Plain speaking is evidence of truth.

The author then uses an article from another church of Christ to begin refuting the claim.

The next article also starts their defense with the statement that they are not apostates or a denomination. This is again signaling to member to dismiss claims as coming from apostates.

“Let me first state that the person who made the accusation does not understand the description, church of Christ. In fact, any time someone uses the phrase church of Christ in such a way demonstrates that he or she really thinks that the church of Christ is a denomination” (Cauley, 2025).

More referring to the accusers as apostates follows. Then the author implies that the accuser probably would say this about any church, since they are apostates.

 “I dare say that the person who made this accusation would call the church that belongs to Jesus, a cult. So I am sure that when the accusation was made, the individual in question assumed that in referring to the church of Christ he felt like he was speaking of some denomination” (Cauley, 2025).

The author then describes that a cult has a charismatic leader. Therefore, since they have no charismatic leader, they are not a cult. Here they exploit the common misconception of the word cult to define it. Cults can form for many purposes without a central charismatic leader. “…Each individual is endowed with a network of interacting beliefs … The adoption of beliefs is affected by both internal coherence and social conformity.” (Rodriguez et al., 2016, p. 1)

Although the churches of Christ did have that charismatic leader at one time, they now form around ideology and social conformity. Thus, they can still be a cult without a charismatic leader.

“A Cult Has a Charismatic Leader Who Enforces Control. When one thinks of a cult, of what does one think? The first thing that pops into my head is a single living charismatic person who controls everything his or her devotees practice. You identify the cult by the name of its leader…” (Cauley, 2025).

The author goes on to describe some church, somewhere that did something wrong. He concludes that the cult like behavior in that case was perpetrated by a Pastor. Then He claims that since churches of Christ have a plurality of elders, they cannot be a cult.

This defense is somewhat implausible as cults can also have a plural of leaders or no leader at all. Again, there is not definition of the word cult that says all cults must have a single charismatic leader, the author here is making up that definition and then mounting his defense from that position. Many people who leave the churches of Christ speak of abuse from elders as well as the elders and minister having direction from the preferred member group.

“I heard a story of one who told his members that singles who were part of that congregation had to get the pastors permission before they could go out for the evening. In sharp contrast to this type of system, churches of Christ do not have a one-man pastor rule. In contrast we have a plurality of men referred to as elders” (Cauley, 2025).

The term Pastor has a hidden meaning here. Members of the churches of Christ are forbidden from even using the term. Use of the word Pastor is an attempt to misrepresent the church governments of other churches. For them, a church that has a person titled Pastor is a church that is ran as a dictatorship by that Pastor. Here they are signaling to members that those other churches are not following the biblical pattern for church government; therefore, they are apostate.

It is worth nothing that, in my experience, people within the churches of Christ often think that they are the only church still faithful to having a plurality of elders. They typically understand very little about the government of other churches. For them, they feel unique by having elders, although their elders are more likely to be businessmen-like than fulfilling the biblical role of Elder.

Next, the author ascribes brainwashing to cults and then defines brainwashing as isolating people while feeding them constant doctrine. Brainwashing is more in the pop psychology realm than it is grounded in cognitive science. The author’s use of the term implies he did not bother to research cults and cognitive manipulation before writing this article.

“The second thing that comes to mind is brainwashing” (Cauley, 2025).

Social conditioning, control, and the threat of expulsion from the one true church are far more effective at keeping everyone in line than any sort of brainwashing scenario the author could muster.

The author continues on in much the same way for the rest of the article. Thier defenses are

  • They are not apostates
  • They have elders
  • They do not isolate people
  • They interpret the bible plainly and purely so that anyone can see their doctrine
  • They have not found evidence of themselves being a cult.

The author fails to ever address real concerns, redefines terms, uses insider code words, dismisses claims by covert name calling, and has no empathy for victims making the accusation.

In reality, their defense by redefinition is similar to most cults. Jehovah’s Witnesses often use the same defenses.

From the Jehovah’s Witness Website:

“The term “cult” means different things to different people.”

“…we pattern our worship after that of the first-century Christians, whose example and teachings were recorded in the Bible.“

“Some think of a cult as being a dangerous religious sect with a human leader. Jehovah’s Witnesses do not look to any human as their leader.“

(Watch Tower Bible & Tract Society of Pennsylvania, 2025)

The defenses that cult groups use may seem obvious to some, however, they are rather psychologically elegant. The use of coded language, perceived transparency, claims of autonomy, and warmth make controlling structures look normal. Outsiders see a nice, biblical church rather than a group with systematic social conditioning.

If the average person has their own poor understanding of cults and accepts the churches of Christ’s definition of the word by the cult, then the group’s defense is successful. Outsiders, unfamiliar with the internal dynamics, are likely to interpret these defenses at face value. Churches of Christ appear transparent, reasonable, and welcoming, with no single charismatic leader controlling members. Phrases such as the truth can be plainly seen imply clarity and honesty. The insistence on independence suggests freedom of thought.

In reality, members are gradually indoctrinated through layered instruction, social conformity, and preferred-member hierarchies, processes invisible to casual observers. The friendly demeanor of members and the denial of coercion reinforce the illusion of normalcy, while criticisms are framed as misunderstandings or spiritual blindness.

The Psychological Effect

The invisible cultural conditioning of the members and outward appearances appear warm, welcoming, and entirely harmless. Maybe they’re a little bit quirky with the acapella singing, but lots of churches have their peculiarities. Outsiders notice the well-maintained buildings, potlucks, vacation Bible schools, and orderly, acapella services. Members quote scripture fluently, use phrases like “speaking where the Bible speaks,” and present their faith as simple, plain, and biblical.

In contrast to modern churches services that may be more chaotic and music focused, there is something novel and intriguing to returning to simplicity.

However, the churches of Christ’s simplicity and acapella singing are not what make them a cult. What looks like a loving, participatory community is often a carefully cultivated environment in which social conformity, ideological exclusivity, and doctrinal obedience are enforced subtly and invisibly.

Hidden Systems of Control

Beneath the appearance of biblical purity lies a sophisticated system of social, emotional, and theological control that operates without the visible trappings of hierarchy, or a king like Pastor. The movement’s rejection of denominational structure and insistence on congregational autonomy have not produced freedom but have instead created a network of isolated microcosms, each one subtlety controlled by governed by the same unspoken rules of social conformity.

This system works precisely because it hides behind Christian familiarity. Biblical sounding phrases and practices are redefined internally, transforming ancient words like faith, belief, and obedience into methods of surveillance and self-doubt. The language of simplicity, so often celebrated as virtue, became the language of control. Outsiders see kindness; insiders experience compliance. Outsiders see unity; insiders learn silence.

Campbell sought unity because in his mind, a unified group of Christians of the same mind meant the church was true. To disagree was heretical and evidence of a church congregation or Christian not being faithful and true. In particular, to disagree with Campbell was especially heretical.

To create The One True Church Campbell forbid Creeds and Confessions of Faith, Denominational Names and Structures, Clergy Titles and Centralized Leadership, Instrumental Music and Liturgical Practices, Denominational Ordinances and Sacraments, Theological Vocabulary, Institutional Education and Seminaries, Human Associations and Missionary Societies, and Emotionalism and Revivalism.

Alexander Campbell’s vision of unity through restoration created the perfect environment for a cult to form. His rejection of creeds, denominational oversight, and structured leadership removed external accountability while his insistence on a single New Testament pattern established an internal system of control.

What began as a call for simple Christianity, likely influenced by a mental health disorder, devolved into a culture where conformity was equated with faithfulness and independence with apostasy.

By seeking to eliminate division, Campbell instead eliminated diversity, producing a self-reinforcing ideology that continues to define the churches of Christ.

In the end, the Churches of Christ have succeeded in crafting an invisible hierarchy. A hierarchy without headquarters yet ruled by a man-made tradition. A hierarchy without a pope, yet bound to a prophet long dead. A hierarchy without walls, yet nearly impossible to escape. The path forward begins not with condemnation, but with clarity. To name these structures as systems of control, to free language from distortion, and to restore what the movement claimed to seek all along the liberty found in truth.

“For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.”

Ephesians 2:8-9

Resources

Campbell, A. (1839). The Christian system: In reference to the union of Christians and a restoration of primitive Christianity, as pleaded in the current reformation. Bethany, VA: Printed and published by Alexander Campbell

Stuart, M. T. (1890). The Dialect of Campbellism . In The Errors of Campbellism (p. 35). essay, Cincinnati: Cranson and Stowe. Retrieved November 1, 2025, from https://ia804606.us.archive.org/33/items/errorsofcampbell00stua_0/errorsofcampbell00stua_0.pdf.

Lane, S. D. (1958). Truth magazine. Truth Magazine – Taking His hand, helping each other home. Retrieved November 1, 2025, from https://www.truthmagazine.com/archives/volume2/TM002099.htm

Chapman, J., & O’Reilly, C. (1996). Culture as Social Control: Corporations, Cults, and Commitments. Haas School of Business, UC Berkeley. Retrieved November 1, 2025, from https://faculty.haas.berkeley.edu/chatman/papers/30_cultureassocialcontrol.pdf?

Coates, D. D. (2016). Life inside a deviant “religious” group: Conformity and commitment as ensured through ‘brainwashing’ or as the result of normal processes of socialization. International Journal of Law, Crime and Justice, 44, 103‑121. Retrieved November 1, 2025, from (PDF) Life inside a deviant “religious” group: Conformity and commitment as ensured through ‘brainwashing’ or as the result of normal processes of socialization

Lewis County Herald. (October 12, 1939). Early Religious History, Revivals. Newspapers.com. Retrieved November 1, 2025, from https://www.newspapers.com/article/lewis-county-herald-early-religious-hist/184138483/

The Tennessean, February 27, 1977, Page 30. via Newspapers.com (https://www.newspapers.com/article/the-tennessean-the-apostasy-of-craighead/181202014/ : accessed November 1, 2025), clip page for The Apostasy of Craighead by user Churches With Kitchens

Rodriguez, N., Bollen, J., & Ahn, Y.‑Y. (2016). Collective dynamics of belief evolution under cognitive coherence and social conformity. Retrieved November 1, 2025, from https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0165910

American Psychological Association. (2025). Cult. In APA Dictionary of Psychology. Retrieved November 2, 2025, from https://dictionary.apa.org/cult

CompellingTruth.org. (2025). What is the definition of a cult? Retrieved November 2, 2025, from https://www.compellingtruth.org/definition-cult.html

Cauley, K. (2025). Is the Church of Christ a cult? An answer to the accusation. Oak Grove Church of Christ. Retrieved November 2, 2025, from https://www.ogchurchofchrist.org/is-the-church-of-christ-a-cult/

Watch Tower Bible & Tract Society of Pennsylvania. (2025). Are Jehovah’s Witnesses a cult? JW.ORG. Retrieved November 1, 2025, from, from https://www.jw.org/en/jehovahs-witnesses/faq/are-jehovahs-witnesses-a-cult/