home
RSS
Your take: Is Mormonism a cult?
The Rev. Robert Jeffress, who supports Texas Gov. Rick Perry, stirred a hornet's nest by saying he believes Mormonism is a cult.
October 11th, 2011
12:08 PM ET

Your take: Is Mormonism a cult?

(CNN) - We ran a column Monday from Richard Mouw, president of Fuller Theological Seminary, an evangelical school in Pasadena, California, called "My Take: This evangelical says Mormonism isn’t a cult."

Mouw followed up on comments that the Rev. Robert Jeffress made at the Values Voter Summit, where he introduced and endorsed Texas Gov. Rick Perry.  After Perry spoke, Jeffress told reporters in the hallway and in subsequent interviews that he thought Mormonism is a cult and that evangelicals should not vote for former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney because of his faith and a host of other reasons.

Mouw countered he did not think the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, commonly known as Mormonism, was a cult. He also said he was not ready to say it fit in with orthodox Christianity but noted there was dialogue between evangelicals and Mormons on a broad range of issues.

The piece drew out the passions of readers on all sides of the issue and racked up 11,000 Facebook likes and 2,500 comments.

Here's a nonscientific collection of your thoughts on the matter:

There were a number of comments from Mormons who appreciated the article and shared their thanks.

Tanner

As a Mormon, I appreciate your fair synopsis in defense of my religion, Mr. Mouw.

Mynamesmiketoo

Being a Mormon myself, I can testify that our religion is not a cult and Joseph Smith is not our head. Jesus Christ is the leader and he is the cornerstone of His church "built on a foundation of prophets and apostles." I also know it is through the atonement of Christ all mankind may be saved by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the Gospel. Romney is (definitely) a Christian. We are "the church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints"; we are just nicknamed "Mormon" because of another testament we hold sacred and true. I ask you visit mormon.org for more info.

There were also a number of comments from Christians who said the Church of Jesus Christ of  Latter-day Saints fell outside the bounds of historical Christianity.

Jeff

To a Christian who believes in the historical Jesus and His church, the Mormon church is by definition a cult. It is in no manner offensive to say that to a true believer of Mormonism, for he/she understands the essentials of their belief system and how they differ. Mainstream Christianity shares in the beliefs about the essentials of our faith - who God is, the three persons within the godhead and their roles, what we are called to, and how one must be saved and live their life. None of this takes away the earthly redeemable qualities of Mormonism such as their commitment to taking care of each other, purity in worship, the role of the church in all matters, etc. But it is not the historical Christianity we know. And btw, many large and small denominations that purport to be part of mainstream Christianity have also distorted the historical belief system of the church.

ThsIsNotReal22

Mormonism may not be a cult, but it is a major heresy.

And as always there was a hearty amount of feedback from atheists and nonbelievers about how all religions were cults by definition.

Nodack

All religions are cults. Sorry.

Because this issue was raised in a political spectrum, it got a lot of people thinking about the intersections between religion and politics.

TheTraveler

Don't even care. Every election year we get the same stupid side-tracking non-issues. ...

Don

It is really a non-issue. We can have a Mormon president as long as he puts the nation first and acts responsibly. We can have a Muslim president as long as he puts the nation first and acts responsibly. We can have a Jewish president as long as he puts the nation first and acts responsibly. Christians have no exclusive lock on love for country or responsible behavior. That should be obvious. I look forward (to) the day when our list of U.S. presidents is as diverse as our citizens. When we get to that point we will have been true to the promise of America that all men were created equal and endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights and among these are the right to run for political office and be judged by the content of their character and not the color of their religious beliefs.

David M.

Speaking as a Christian, I'm not concerned about Romney being a Mormon. Nor am I concerned that the next president has to be an evangelical Christian. Jimmy Carter is a devout Christian, but I disagreed with a lot of his politics. I don't vote for someone just because they are a Christian, or not vote for someone because they are not a Christian. I'm concerned about their political positions.

The evangelical church in America thinks if we just get the "right" people in office, then all will be well. Nothing could be further from the truth. God is very clear in Scripture, calling out His people to turn from their wicked ways, call on His name, humble themselves and pray, then He will hear from Heaven and heal their land. It's clearly in the lap of the church, not the lap of the president. Speaking again as a Christian, we in the church have failed miserably, and God will hold us to account.

You can read more from the CNN Belief Blog here and keep the conversation going.

- CNN Belief Blog

Filed under: Belief • Christianity • Church • Church and state • Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints • Mitt Romney • Politics

« Previous entry
soundoff (693 Responses)
  1. Robert

    It's not really a cult, it's a weird religion. They believe in obviously false things, but for it to be a cult it would need to have a negative impact on its followers. From what I've seen, the Mormons I know are all polite and don't drink, so that's actually quite good.

    October 16, 2011 at 7:35 am |
    • Alex

      Joseph Smith's Testament, based on his interpretation of the Old and New Testaments, introduces many of his OWN IDEAS, often inacceptable to Jews and Christians. He set himself up as THE Prophet of the "Latter Day Saints" whose word was law, not the Bible's.
      Run out of town (literally...and from several towns!), he and his clan wound up in the emptiness of Utah. Like many isolated minorities, poligamy was a logical response to creating more Mormons in the middle of nowhere. NOW, however, they are a powerful, rich, closed clan/cult/sect following unorthodox religious ideas...and obsessed by power and wealth. DOESN'T ANYONE REMEMBER THE SCANDALS SURROUNDING THE OLYMPICS GAMES ORGANIZED BY THEM...WITH ALL THE CORRUPTION AND KICK-BACKS YOU COULD IMAGINE (strangely similar to the Vatican and the Banco Ambrosiano, when you think of it). But, while on the subject of cult/not cult, let's not forget the Jehovah's Witnesses!!!

      October 16, 2011 at 9:24 am |
  2. warex

    The facts are Joseph smith was a scammer and a profiteer that collected odd merchandise hoping to resale to museums or the curious to see. Such as the purchase of mummy's, old scrolls, tablets, dead animals and such. He eventually concocted this plan with a hat that turned magical when he put a rock in it allowing him to look into his hat and recite lost golden tablets that later became the book of mormon. Lot of gullible people fell for this but a most people did not. Matter of fact so few people actually fell for this that the local police wound up arresting him for ripping people off due to complaints. Smith while in custody was shot dead by someone in a mob of people who broke into the building to get revenge.

    Now the pro mormons say this historic fact is all published works by anti mormons. And thats ok to say. BUT
    All of the above I mentioned comes from the police log that was kept during the time it happened.

    Of lets not forget the people who in the beginning of the book of mormon state it is true about the book and smiths magic hat, they all but one recanted storys later.

    Oh lets not forget all this happened when people were idiots and believed in almost anything.

    Proof check.....If smith was alive today do you actually think his magic hat story would work today?

    Watercooler conversation;
    Hey bob, I met this guy who says he is a prophet of god who talks to god through his hat using a magic rock............

    October 16, 2011 at 2:31 am |
    • Kev

      What are talking about? If Joseph Smith really was a "scammer" and was "ripping people off", he did a really poor job of it. There was never any point in time where he and his family were living the good life. He earned his own living just like everybody else did such as owning and operating local store. You would figure that if he did effectively scam others of their funds to live the good life, why is it that the Church of JESUS CHRIST of Latter-Day-Saints today have a lay ministry.

      Although Joseph Smith was involved at one time in trying to locate precious metals in upstate New York, because simply times were tough, that venture never really "panned out" (corny pun intended). Joseph Smith never profited from either the sale of precious metals or from any antiquities. Yes Joseph Smith did claim to have obtained a record engraved upon golden plates, but the Lord never intended for that record to be sold. The reason why the ancient scriptual record was made on golden type alloy plates was because that type of medium from which record was made upon would not decay or degrade over time.

      The charge upon which Joseph Smith was arrested for that led to his and his brother Hyrum's incarceration in the jail where the mob did eventually raided and shot and killed both of them, had nothing to do with with ripping people off. The charge was dealing with vandalization of a local press at the time that published certain negative things about the church; a charge which he obviously never went to trial for because he was killed by the mob, and I'm not sure about you but I really don't see how the charge of vandalizing a local press was valid cause for a mob to seek revenge and kill Joseph Smith and his brother Hyrum.

      To make sure that we don't forget regarding the part of the introduction to the Book of Mormon called The Testimony of Three Witnesses, who actually testified to seeing the golden plates from which the Book of Mormon was translated from, and by the way that testimony never mentioned anything regarding a magic hat, it is true that later all three of those witnesses did leave the church, namely over each individual's own personal quarrels with Joseph Smith. However, two of those three witnesses (Oliver Cowdry and Martin Harris) did come back into the church, and although the third witness (David Whitmer) never came back into the church, he never at one point in time ever recanted his testimony of having seen the golden plates, Oliver Cowdry of Martin Harris also never recanted their testimony, even during the time when they were no longer members of the Church did they ever recant their testimony.

      As to whether or not if Joseph Smith were alive today if people would people still buy his magic hat story, first of all, there is no magic hat in this whole story. Joseph Smith did use a hat, a simple hat as a means to cover over the record to further shield the record he was translating from any prying eyes who may have wanted to get a sneak peak at what Joseph Smith was looking at while he was translating.

      Second of all, would it even really make any difference whether or not if Joseph Smith were alive today telling the same story if people would still accept it. It's the same story, and it is being told today by Latter-Day-Saint missionaries and other members of the church all over the world however strange that story is. People all over the world today are invited to find out for themselves if this story is true. This invitation is extended to everyone to read and study both the Bible and Book of Mormon, to attend a Sunday church service or other church activites throughout the week, and even pray to find out if this strange story is true.

      October 18, 2011 at 11:17 am |
  3. Sam McGowan

    Yes, Mormonism is a cult. Any religion that claims to be a part of a broader religion but uses its own writings to "prove" it's theology is a cult. Christianity is based on writings by Jewish and Christian authors who lived at the time of their writings. Mormonism is based on writings by Joseph Smith and his followers who lived almost 2,000 years later. Furthermore, nothing in the Book of Mormon has ever been supported by archealogy.

    October 15, 2011 at 12:11 pm |
  4. dilberth

    All religions are full of it. They are all giant lies. Who took Jesus's picture? How did they know he had a beard? It's just one lie on top of the other.

    October 15, 2011 at 4:00 am |
  5. Tom

    Cult: a small, unpopular religion.
    Religion: a large, popular cult.
    In other words, all the 10,000+ religious groups on earth are cults (just not to the members of any one of them).

    October 15, 2011 at 3:58 am |
  6. HazeyWolf

    Its a semantic argument. By Rev. Robert Jeffress definition, virtually ever "other" religion (besides his) can be described as a cult. By the same virtue, Rev. J's own religion might be deemed a "cult" by other religious or non-religious groups. "Cult" or "Myth" is often a derogatory term, designed to demean another's religion or beliefs
    "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints," is clearly Jesus Christ oriented by their own definition, but their beliefs are distinct from traditional Judeo-Christians, and so the LDS claim to be Christian is a matter of semantics and technical debate. Regardless of that fact and any semantic definition of "cult" or "Christian," :LDSs are subject to bigotry: A bigot is a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices, especially one exhibiting intolerance, and animosity toward those of differing beliefs.

    October 15, 2011 at 3:33 am |
  7. Bother Johnny

    I find it rather revealing that most all the pro, I am a Mormon comments basically say "You know nothing about the church go study Mormon.org" No pro-Mormon has been able to defend or provide a credible position. "Go look somewhere else and see the truth for yourself" is not an answer. It is however cognitive dissonance. Back up your statement with facts. Postmormon.org

    October 14, 2011 at 9:13 pm |
    • Cauthon

      Did you read my post, right before yours? OK, I mainly addressed only one of the Reverend's points, but I'm going along with the old cultural truism that short is better in places like this – if the post is too long, people will ignore all of it:-(

      The big complaint seems to be the LDS belief that Jesus Christ is the son of God, and that when his father said, "This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased", Jesus was not a ventriloquist, he was not trying to deceive us into thinking that his father was speaking to us. It is clear in the New Testament that Jesus created the earth, and that he was always doing “the will of him who sent” him. In the Old Testament, it is sometimes not clear who is speaking, Jesus or his father. It is true that Jesus says in John 17 that he and his father are “one” but he goes right on to say that we should also be one, in the same way. Surely he did not mean to say that I must be you, whoever you are, or that all the billions of us are really only one person, and that our perception of many humans on the earth is just a big mistake. We should all be united in faith, in understanding of the gospel, and in righteous living. A lot of the Bible is devoted to exhorting us to live a righteous life, keep the commandments, love one another, not send our children through the fire, etc; we don’t need to understand the technology of creating the world in order to live a righteous life, and I expect when we meet him, Jesus will be more interested in how we lived than how close we came to understanding all those details. We will have all of eternity to learn the rest, if we qualify for the opportunity.

      October 14, 2011 at 11:07 pm |
    • *frank*

      Wanna know the truth about North Korea? Just go to the official website of the North Korean gov't!

      October 14, 2011 at 11:19 pm |
  8. Cauthon

    Some people complain that the LDS Church was started by Joseph Smith, and he was a human being, not a God. Are we not all humans? Before Peter was an apostle, he was a fisherman. Then Christ called him to be a leader of His Church, and Peter accepted the job. Before Joseph Smith was a prophet, he was a farmer, living on his father's farm. I can't see any reason why we should discriminate and say only fishermen are qualified to listen when God has something to say, and farmers aren't any good. All the protestant churches go back to a founder who was human, mostly Martin Luther or Henry VIII. Wasn't Joseph Smith just as good a person as Henry VIII? The Limeliters used to sing a song about Ann Boleyn 's ghost walking around the bloody tower with her head tucked underneath her arm; maybe if we go there, we could ask her what she thinks about Henry now:-) We humans are very talented at finding reasons to disagree. Some years ago, a friend of mine told me that her husband’s mother said that in order to be a Christian, a person has to publicly declare their faith in Jesus Christ; I was surprised to hear that, because we all know that in the LDS Church, one Sunday per month has the meeting devoted to publicly declaring their faith in Jesus Christ, where anyone can speak who wants to. It would be nice just to stick to the facts.

    October 14, 2011 at 5:45 pm |
    • warex

      The facts are Joseph smith was a scammer and a profiteer that collected odd merchandise hoping to resale to museums or the curious to see. Such as the purchase of mummy's, old scrolls, tablets, dead animals and such. He eventually concocted this plan with a hat that turned magical when he put a rock in it allowing him to look into his hat and recite lost golden tablets that later became the book of mormon. Lot of gullible people fell for this but a most people did not. Matter of fact so few people actually fell for this that the local police wound up arresting him for ripping people off due to complaints. Smith while in custody was shot dead by someone in a mob of people who broke into the building to get revenge.

      Now the pro mormons say this historic fact is all published works by anti mormons. And thats ok to say. BUT
      All of the above I mentioned comes from the police log that was kept during the time it happened.

      Of lets not forget the people who in the beginning of the book of mormon state it is true about the book and smiths magic hat, they all but one recanted storys later.

      Oh lets not forget all this happened when people were idiots and believed in almost anything.

      Proof check.....If smith was alive today do you actually think his magic hat story would work today?

      Watercooler conversation;
      Hey bob, I met this guy who says he is a prophet of god who talks to god through his hat using a magic rock............

      October 16, 2011 at 2:30 am |
  9. Chris Highland

    Yes, of course Mormonism is a cult. Just as Christianity is a cult of Judaism, Buddhism of Hinduism and Islam of Christianity. Maybe the real problem and issue here is the new cult of AmeriCanity whose followers just can't wait until the country becomes one big cult and they can rule with God in the whitehouse. Or something.

    October 14, 2011 at 3:11 pm |
  10. firebird9999

    All of religion is a cult, an opiate of the masses, and the cruelest instrument of terror humankind has ever created.

    October 14, 2011 at 1:39 pm |
    • Reality

      From: http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat0.htm

      Maybe the 20 Worst Things Humans Have Done to Other Humans:

      o The Muslim Conquest of India
      ■"The likely death toll is somewhere between 2 million and 80 million. The geometric mean of those two limits is 12.7 million. "

      Rank Death Toll Cause Centuries Religions/Groups involved*

      1 63 million Second World War 20C (Christians et al and Communists vs. Christians et al, Nazi-Pagan and "Shintoists")

      2 40 million Mao Zedong (mostly famine) 20C (Communism)

      40 million Genghis Khan 13C (Shamanism or Tengriism)

      4 27 million British India (mostly famine) 19C (Anglican)
      5 25 million Fall of the Ming Dynasty 17C (Buddhism, Taoism, Confucianism, Chinese folk religion)

      6 20 million Taiping Rebellion 19C ( Confucianism, Buddhism and Chinese folk religion vs. a form of Christianity)

      20 million Joseph Stalin 20C

      8 19 million Mideast Slave Trade 7C-19C (Islam)

      9 17 million Timur Lenk 14C-15C

      10 16 million Atlantic Slave Trade 15C-19C (Christianity)

      11 15 million First World War 20C (Christians vs. Christians)

      15 million Conquest of the Americas 15C-19C (Christians)

      13 13 million Muslim Conquest of India 11C-18C

      14 10 million An Lushan Revolt 8C

      10 million Xin Dynasty 1C

      16 9 million Russian Civil War 20C (Christians vs Communists)

      17 8 million Fall of Rome 5C (Pagans)

      8 million Congo Free State 19C-20C (Christians)

      19 7½ million Thirty Years War 17C (Christians vs Christians)

      7½ million Fall of the Yuan Dynasty 14C

      *:" Is religion responsible for more more violent deaths than any other cause?

      A: No, of course not – unless you define religion so broadly as to be meaningless. Just take the four deadliest events of the 20th Century – Two World Wars, Red China and the Soviet Union – no religious motivation there, unless you consider every belief system to be a religion."

      Q: So, what you're saying is that religion has never killed anyone.

      A: Arrgh... You all-or-nothing people drive me crazy. There are many doc-umented examples where members of one religion try to exterminate the members of another religion. Causation is always complex, but if the only difference between two warring groups is religion, then that certainly sounds like a religious conflict to me. Is it the number one cause of mass homicide in human history? No. Of the 22 worst episodes of mass killing, maybe four were primarily religious. Is that a lot? Well, it's more than the number of wars fought over soccer, or s-ex (The Trojan and Sabine Wars don't even make the list.), but less than the number fought over land, money, glory or prestige.

      In my Index, I list 41 religious conflicts compared with 27 oppressions under "Communism", 24 under Colonialism, 2 under "Railroads" and 2 under "Scapegoats". Make of that what you will."

      October 14, 2011 at 3:12 pm |
  11. Uhmm

    A cult is usually any organized belief system. Any belief system can be considered one.

    October 14, 2011 at 1:38 pm |
  12. hippypoet

    We believe in one God,
    the Father, the Almighty SUN,
    Creator of heaven and earth,
    of all that is, seen and unseen.
    God from God, Light from Light,
    true God from true God,
    Through him all things were made.
    For us and for our salvation
    he came down from heaven:
    by the power of the Holy LIGHT WAVES
    he became incarnate from the Merry people,
    there will be no judging the living and or the dead,
    and his kingdom will have no end.

    We believe in the LIGHT, the Lord, the giver of life,
    With the SUN he is worshiped and glorified.
    He has spoken through the Prophet Hippypoet.
    We believe in one holy SUN and Church of eternal LIGHT.
    We will look up towards the heavens,
    bathe in the LIGHT OF THE LORD, THE ALMIGHY SUN.
    AMEN.

    October 14, 2011 at 10:46 am |
    • warex

      Amen and so true. All religions can follow this.

      October 16, 2011 at 2:05 am |
  13. Amit-Atlanta-USA

    There's a lot of talk from liberals here being apologetic about their own Christianity etc.painting all religions with the same brush.

    As Bill Maher says "Yes all religions are wacko but there is NOTHING as wacko as radical ISLAM b'coz of the ready recourse to VIOLENCE to settle disputes between their own sects & also with other religions!

    October 14, 2011 at 10:24 am |
  14. carol derry

    All religions are death cults.

    October 14, 2011 at 2:01 am |
  15. warex

    With all the proof that LDS is a cult and there are still people defending this?
    A cult is a formed group with an religious ideology that once has more than more than 1 million followers becomes a actual religion and only after 100 years of being formed.
    Sorry, even by that standard LDS is still a cult.
    So is Scientology,
    so is Jehovah witness,
    Besides anything that involves mind control, aliens and planets is also a cult.

    October 14, 2011 at 1:43 am |
    • Kev

      From what dictionary did you get that definition from?

      October 14, 2011 at 10:47 am |
  16. Brother Johnny

    Anyone know if Mitt Romney will honor aTemple endowment ceremony oath? The oath of vengeance against the United States, to avenge the blood of the Prophet Joseph Smith? Should make for an interesting presidency....

    October 13, 2011 at 7:28 pm |
    • Pearl

      Depends when Mitt may have been married in the Mormon Temple, that part of the oath was taken out awhile back. Otherwise he may be on the hook and held accountable for this. He might lose his temple recommend if he does not obey temple covenants

      October 13, 2011 at 7:55 pm |
    • Caine

      It may be a good question for Pierce Morgan to ask Mitt, about where his true loyalties will be if elected President. A Mormon theocracy? Will he honor temple oaths that may have been made? Or like most Mormons, temple covenants are made with a wink and a nod while fingers are crossed behind the back. No Mormon takes there temple promises seriously.

      October 13, 2011 at 9:19 pm |
    • Caine

      Non Mormoms are just envious of temple marriages that allow you to be sealed to more than one wife, with multiple wives in the after life of the celestial kingdom. Because of pesky civil laws that restrict polygamy we have to wait until the after life where Polygamy and the full Gospel is restored.

      October 13, 2011 at 9:34 pm |
    • PollyPius

      Huh. I'm a temple-going LDS woman and I've never heard such a thing in all the years I've gone to the temple.

      October 14, 2011 at 12:11 am |
    • Molly Mo Mo

      Polly, do you pay attention? The LDS church permits a man to be sealed to more than one wife. Once sealed to a wife, a man remains sealed to her for all eternity. If he divorces his first wife and marries a second, he is not allowed to cancel the sealing to his first wife.

      After the death of Joseph Smith, Jr., Brigham Young added an Oath of vengeance to the Nauvoo Endowment ritual. Participants in the ritual made an oath to pray that God would "avenge the blood of the prophets on this nation"

      The oaths of all temple members that takes precedent over all other oaths – including the oath taken when one becomes president of the United States.

      The Nauvoo Endowment ceremony contained "penalties" for breaking a covenant not to reveal certain names and gestures given as part of the ceremony. These penalties consisted of oaths made while enacting gestures representing four ways in which a person's life could be taken—one each for the first three sacred "tokens" (handshakes) and their accompanying names and signs. In 1990 the LDS church revised this part of the Oath.

      October 14, 2011 at 6:59 am |
    • Kevin

      Say what? Tokens, passwords, oaths, secret handshakes, bakers hats? I've never seen this in any temple ceremony. They are basically the same ritual you would find in a wedding chapel on the Las Vegas strip.

      October 14, 2011 at 7:14 am |
    • Kev

      @ Molly Mo Mo. What does that mean in the quote "avenge the blood of the prophets on this nation" ? That doesn't exactly give specifics as to whom that quote refers to, and considering how that quote is presented, it's hard to tell if that is even a full statement, or just a part of a statement, which one needs to be carefull of because that could be insinuated as a half-truth by the one who originally presented that quote.

      Also, considering that there was over 140 years between the Nauvoo Endowment period you mentioned and the Temple ceremony changes done in 1990, are you saying that the quote "avenge the blood of the prophets on this nation" was still in use in the Temple ceremony as recently as 1989?

      October 14, 2011 at 11:11 am |
    • Molly Mo Mo

      @Key, The main question is "The oaths of all temple members that takes precedent over all other oaths – including the oath taken when one becomes president of the United States." Are you avoiding that issue?

      True or False?

      Then we can move on to what blood atonement oaths were in effect around 1989

      October 14, 2011 at 9:00 pm |
    • Kev

      @ Molly Mo Mo. The answer would be false. I'm not trying to avoid the issue, I'm trying to figure what you're talking about. I've never come across this so called oath above all other oaths including from before 1990.

      Also, considering since no LDS has ever become president, not to mention if you're talking about "all temple members" that would include those outside the U.S. who were never born in the U.S. and therefore cannot become POTUS, as well as regarding those temple members who never set foot in the U.S. and most likely never will, and including those who have been going to LDS temples outside the U.S. for decades, how does this so called "...oath taken when one becomes the president of the United States..." ever apply to those people?

      October 18, 2011 at 1:03 am |
  17. Carolyn

    If being a Mormon means spending Monday nights with my children for Family Home Evening enriching or fostering spiritual and family growth, praying with my family before meals, reading the Old and New Testament of King James, and bridging the history of the Americas with the Book(s) of Mormon, dedicating my life for Christ and his teachings through baptism and temple ordinances, praying for my children and family daily, and being an example to others of strength, faith and compassion, offering my time to benefit my family, church, community and nation whenever needed, than I am going to remain a Mormon and a person who in every sense of the word is "Christ"ian....

    October 13, 2011 at 7:08 pm |
    • beth

      The only problem with that book of mormon, Carolyn, is that it simply is not true. I am Tsalagi (Cherokee) and my ancestors were not then, nor are now descendents of an ancient tribe of jewish people from the middle east. My ancestors did not come to this continent in boats resembling submarines. You may be a nice person but your book is bigoted and so is your religion.

      October 13, 2011 at 7:21 pm |
    • Frank

      Carolyn, every cult needs to guild itself with pretty-sounding things, lest it be eliminated by the societies that it feeds off of outright. Mormonism, Scientology, FLDS, all the same. In fact, with the exception of the child-raping stuff, your beliefs are exactly the same as those of Warren Jeffs. I feel sorry that your brainwashing prevents you from seeing it.

      October 13, 2011 at 11:32 pm |
    • Ben

      Beth, you've never read one page of the Book of Mormon so you have no case to declare it's truth or not. And yes, they were your ancestors. Oral history is not history at all.

      October 14, 2011 at 10:22 am |
    • Theresa

      Carolyn, I am in full agreement with you. As someone who has investigated for several years, I love the family-Christ centered philosophy of the Church. My family has remained with the Catholic Church (oh the remarks that should come from this), but we have incorporated many LDS lifestyle changes into our home – and we are much the better for it.

      October 14, 2011 at 12:44 pm |
  18. Loren

    Cult and anyone who thinks otherwise has been brainwashed.

    October 13, 2011 at 6:31 pm |
    • GodPot

      ALL RELIGIONS ARE CULTS BY DEFINITION. PERIOD. NO NEED FOR DEBATE.

      Definition of CULT
      1: formal religious veneration : worship
      2: a system of religious beliefs and ritual; also : its body of adherents
      3: a religion regarded as unorthodox or spurious; also : its body of adherents
      4: a system for the cure of disease based on dogma set forth by its promulgator
      5a : great devotion to a person, idea, object, movement, or work (as a film or book); especially : such devotion regarded as a literary or intellectual fad b : the object of such devotion c : a usually small group of people characterized by such devotion

      Monday's article ... "is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul."

      October 13, 2011 at 6:38 pm |
    • Erin

      usually when ppl declare something isn't up for a debate...they tend to be wrong

      October 13, 2011 at 6:46 pm |
    • herbert juarez

      The best this poster who calls them self godpot can aspire to, is to be wrong.God bless

      October 14, 2011 at 8:50 am |
    • Ben

      Brainwashed? That was original. I have never heard that before. Brainwashed are the people who declare a religion a cult without ever having attending a meeting at that church. Brainwashed are people who declare a book false without having ever turned a page over.

      October 14, 2011 at 10:24 am |
    • HellBent

      "Brainwashed are people who declare a book false without having ever turned a page over."

      @Ben,
      Have you ever read the Koran? The Epic of Gilgamesh? The Rigveda? The Donghak Scripture? The Liber Linteus?

      Is the only way to dismiss a religious text to read it?

      October 14, 2011 at 10:36 am |
  19. Ida

    Wouldn't having 2 to 3 or more wives be considered adultery?

    October 13, 2011 at 6:30 pm |
    • Ben

      Once again, spreading false information. Thanks for continuing the flood of bigotry.

      October 14, 2011 at 10:24 am |
  20. Caracol

    CNN is a cult =o

    October 13, 2011 at 6:05 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
« Previous entry
Advertisement
About this blog

The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.