October 9th, 2011
07:42 PM ET

My Take: This evangelical says Mormonism isn’t a cult

Editor’s note: Richard J. Mouw is President of Fuller Theological Seminary, an evangelical school in Pasadena, California.

By Richard J. Mouw, Special to CNN

Some prominent evangelical pastors have been telling their constituents not to support Mitt Romney’s bid for the presidential nomination. Because Romney is Mormon, they say, to cast a vote for him is to promote the cause of a cult.

I beg to differ.

For the past dozen years, I’ve been co-chairing, with Professor Robert Millet of Brigham Young University – the respected Mormon school - a behind-closed-doors dialogue between about a dozen evangelicals and an equal number of our Mormon counterparts.

We have talked for many hours about key theological issues: the authority of the Bible, the person and work of Christ, the Trinity, “continuing revelations” and the career of Joseph Smith, the 19th century founder of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church), better known as the Mormon Church.

We evangelicals and our Mormon counterparts disagree about some important theological questions. But we have also found that on some matters we are not as far apart as we thought we were.

I know cults. I have studied them and taught about them for a long time. It’s worth noting that people have wondered whether I belong to a cult, with a reporter once asking me: “Evangelicalism, is that like Scientology and Hare Krishna?”

Religious cults are very much us-versus-them. Their adherents are taught to think that they are the only ones who benefit from divine approval. They don’t like to engage in serious, respectful give-and-take dialogue with people with whom they disagree.

Nor do they promote the kind of scholarship that works alongside others in pursuing the truth. Jehovah’s Witnesses, for instance, haven’t established a university. They don’t sponsor a law school or offer graduate-level courses in world religions. The same goes for Christian Science. If you want to call those groups cults I will not argue with you.

But Brigham Young University is a world-class educational institution, with professors who’ve earned doctorates from some of the best universities in the world. Several of the top leaders of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints have PhDs from Ivy League schools.

These folks talk admiringly of the evangelical Billy Graham and the Catholic Mother Teresa, and they enjoy reading the evangelical C.S. Lewis and Father Henri Nouwen, a Catholic. That is not the kind of thing you run into in anti-Christian cults.

So are Mormons Christians? For me, that’s a complicated question.

My Mormon friends and I disagree on enough subjects that I am not prepared to say that their theology falls within the scope of historic Christian teaching. But the important thing is that we continue to talk about these things, and with increasing candor and mutual openness to correction.

No one has shown any impulse to walk away from the table of dialogue. We do all of this with the blessing of many leaders from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, some of whom have become good friends.

While I am not prepared to reclassify Mormonism as possessing undeniably Christian theology, I do accept many of my Mormon friends as genuine followers of the Jesus whom I worship as the divine Savior.

I find Mormons to be more Christ-centered than they have been in the past. I recently showed a video to my evangelical Fuller Seminary students of Mormon Elder Jeffrey Holland, one of the Twelve Apostles who help lead the LDS church. The video captures Holland speaking to thousands of Mormons about Christ’s death on the cross.

Several of my students remarked that if they had not known that he was a Mormon leader they would have guessed that he was an evangelical preacher.

The current criticisms of Mitt Romney’s religious affiliation recall for many of us the challenges John Kennedy faced when he was campaigning for the presidency in 1960.

Some well-known Protestant preachers (including Norman Vincent Peale) warned against putting a Catholic in the White House. Kennedy’s famous speech to Houston pastors clarifying his religious beliefs as they related to his political leadership helped his cause quite a bit.

But the real changes in popular attitudes toward Catholicism happened more slowly, as Catholic Church leaders and scholars engaged in a new kind of dialogue with each other and representatives of other faith groups, most dramatically at the Second Vatican Council during the early years of the 1960s.

Cults do not engage in those kinds of self-examining conversations. If they do, they do not remain cults.

Those of us who have made the effort to engage Mormons in friendly and sustained give-and-take conversations have come to see them as good citizens whose life of faith often exhibits qualities that are worthy of the Christian label, even as we continue to engage in friendly arguments with them about crucial theological issues.

Mitt Romney deserves what every politician running for office deserves: a careful examination of his views on policy and his philosophy of government. But he does not deserve to be labeled a cultist.

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Richard J. Mouw.

- CNN Belief Blog

Filed under: Christianity • Cults • Mitt Romney • Politics • Rick Perry

soundoff (2,721 Responses)
  1. Tom

    I always hesitate to "label" anyone but God's word (bible) is very specific as to what makes a person a Christian. The book of Acts explains how when Paul was getting ready to baptize with water, the "Holy Spirit" told him the baptism with fire "Holy Spirit" was what God wanted them to do, a new way. It did not prohibit baptism with water, but there was a more perfect way.(Acts Chpt. 1 verse 5) and (Acts Chpt. 10 verse 45). Through the completed works of Jesus Christ we can be born again, that is a Christian according to God's word, the Bible. One problem with Joseph Smith's church is the rumor of their elders receiving revelation that "adds or subtracts" scripture. Please look at the book of Revelation Chapter 22 verses 18 and 19. These verses state that nothing is to be added or subtracted from the Bible. I know several people that are Mormons and they are good people, this statement is NOT a judgement of them but Christianity is well defined by it's author and no one can change what God has put in place.

    October 10, 2011 at 10:09 am |
    • Chris

      Tom, If you look at the books of the Bible in the order they were written and not in the order they are placed in the Bible, you'll see that LOTS of scripture was added after Revelations was written.

      October 10, 2011 at 10:27 am |
    • Zach


      I beg to differ. If Jon was speaking about the Bible, why is it that he himself contributed scripture after the Book of Revelation was written? Why is it that people contributed to the bible after Moses, who said the same thing in the Book of Deuteronomy? Both Moses and John were speaking about their specific revelations, and the Bible has been added to many times since. It was not even compiled into what it is now until several hundred years after everything contained therein was written.

      October 10, 2011 at 10:31 am |
    • Sally

      Tom – that is a huge problem with people like you. You take the bible to have been literally dictated by God and Jesus and believe it word for word. You fail to understand what the other commenters have said – much of it was written long after the death of Jesus and the apostles, but popes and kings wanting to control their population. The bible may be used as a guide, but it should it no way be considered a literal source of God's or Jesus' words. Live your life justly, treat others as you would like to be treated and always follow your conscience, and if there is a heaven you will be welcomed. If there is not a heaven, then you will die knowing that you lived a good life you can be proud of.

      October 10, 2011 at 10:51 am |
    • Dave

      Great post, Tom. I'd like to take a stab at explaining why Mormons like myself disagree with your conclusion if I may.

      I love the Bible, but the "Bible" as we know it didn't come about for hundreds of years after the fact – basically, a committee of men came together to vote on which manuscripts would be included and which would be left out. Prior to that there were various collections of different sacred texts floating around, so nothing in the Bible today could be referring to the Bible as a whole. A very important point here is that there existed at that time writings that (a) were considered scripture and (b) were left out of the compilation that became known as the Bible.

      Your specific reference in the book of Revelation is a good example – many scholars believe that the book of John in the New Testament was actually written /after/ the book of Revelation. By the logic you used, the very author of the book of Revelation would be in trouble because he later went on to write the book of John! 🙂 Obviously that's not the case.

      I *do* think that changing the gospel of Jesus Christ is wrong, very wrong. But identifying changes is not as simple as you think. For example, when that aforementioned committee met to decide on which books to include in our modern Bible, they chose to leave some books out and they chose to put some books in. Did the make the right choices? What if one of the things they left out spelled out the mode of baptism, such that the whole debate of immersion vs sprinkling could have been avoided? Wouldn't that count as change? (I think so)

      As another example, the text of the Bible has been translated and re-translated many times. I've studied translation and it's incredibly difficult to properly pass nuanced meanings from one language to another. I can only imagine what happens if you then translate a translation again. I consider the fact that we have the Bible at all a pretty incredible miracle, but any student of the history of the Bible will tell you that it has been changed literally *thousands* of times over the centuries. Not hundreds, thousands (if you doubt this, I encourage you to go search the internet – the history of the Bible is really quite amazing). By your logic, every single one of those changes is problematic.

      I use the KJV of the Bible. If some scholars come out with an updated translation that corrects some errors in earlier editions, those too would be problematic by that same logic. But some of those changes might be legitimate corrections to earlier errors, right? My point here is that the Bible has an amazing but very complex history – it is not and never has been this completely static, set in stone book, so you have to be careful about using biblical changes as a yardstick for anything. There are many modern translations of the Bible that have big differences among them, and the Catholic bible doesn't even have the exact same set of books as others – don't any of those differences give you pause as well?

      The other key point to remember is that we have no record whatsoever of God ever saying, "that's all I'm ever going to say to my children on earth!" The Bible is a record of people who were called as prophets of God. They wrote down what they learned and that's what we call scripture. To be clear though, it is a record of prophets living during a specific period of time in a specific area of the world. God never once has told us that he was going to call prophets only in that region or only in that period of time. Given that God doesn't change, it seems more likely that he *would* use his established pattern – teaching his children through prophets like Moses and Isaiah – in other times and places. The end result is that *either* God changes *or* there can exist other scripture in addition to the Bible. Given that the Bible as we know it is was formed by a man-made committee, and that there are many known examples of extra-biblical-but-likely-inspired writings, the latter seems the most plausible.

      So what did John mean? He was almost certainly referring specifically to the letter he was writing that became known as the book of Revelation, since the Bible itself would not have existed for hundreds of more years.

      October 10, 2011 at 10:53 am |
  2. aaron

    The best resources for Christians to learn about Mormonism is from Jarald and Sandra Tanner (former Mormons who live in Salt Lake City). Read their online articles here: http://www.utlm.org/navonlineresources.htm

    Read other websites they recommend here: http://www.utlm.org/navotherwebsites.htm

    Do your research. From what I researched in the past and having been to Salt Lake City, spoken to 100+ Mormons, attended their sacrament meetings and sat through 6 sessions with mormons on their 2 year stint, the God they believe in has a Mother, who has a mother ad infiinity. AND Jesus is Satan's brother. Before you judge anyone or any organization sit with them and get to know them and their organization from the inside out. Don't judge from the outside in.

    My summary, if someone believes in a different God but uses the same name for that God it doesn't mean they have the same belief.

    October 10, 2011 at 10:06 am |
    • Binky42

      Sounds like you've wasted a lot of your life worrying about this thing. Give up religion – reclaim your Sundays!

      October 10, 2011 at 10:08 am |
    • Agkcrbs

      The Tanners? Church-hoppers who themselves spent time as "cultists", to use the vernacular - members of a heretical offshoot of the LDS. Do your homework.

      October 10, 2011 at 10:23 am |
  3. HystericallyHistorical

    The problem the above "discourse" shows is somewhere in the 'creation stories'. The John Smith story of the tablets and Moroni , hebrew tribes in prehistoric N. America, polygamy etc. is hard to believe as any kind of truth. It sounds objectively like one man's story, one man who's out to create himself a little religious empire.
    The bible in contrast is a story written, selected, translated and edited by many. And it created empires of political power and religious faith. The "scholarly" problem? The evangelical scholar has to be careful not to discredit too much of mormon founding stories, because the BYU professor can question protestant/ evangelical doctrine just the same. And both "faith groups" know that billions worldwide put no stock in any kind of christianity, for them the bible is just another story. Christians and Mormons have to stick together against Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, etc.
    Of course there are those fundamentalist preachers who Alone have the Only Truth. Well, those are the true cartoonish characters. Amen.

    October 10, 2011 at 10:05 am |
  4. PJ

    Hmmm- Think I'll sing at a 2000 year old Jewish Zombie every Sunday so I can "live forever"! Christianity is a cult. Period. Pass th' Nutter Butter, pls. Get OVER yerselves, freeks. MAAAAAAN!!!!!

    October 10, 2011 at 10:05 am |
  5. Maggie


    Pilot turned him over to the Jews. It was a political move for Pilot.

    October 10, 2011 at 10:03 am |
    • Binky42

      And when Cinderella's fairy godmother sent her to the ball, it was so she could snag a prince. Also a political move.

      October 10, 2011 at 10:06 am |
    • HystericallyHistorical

      Hahaha Maggie, was he on auto-pilot??? If you meant to talk about Pontius Pilate, at least try to spell his name correctly. It's hilarious that Chrystianns [sic ; -) ] can't even spell the names of characters in their most important book.

      October 10, 2011 at 10:09 am |
    • snowdown

      It was a turbulent time for the Pilot. Religious fictions broke wind and created turbulence.

      October 10, 2011 at 10:10 am |
  6. gatorgal

    The mormons believe that Jesus and Lucifer were brothers....that is NOT my Jesus. Mormons believe that they themselves can become gods of their own planets and populate them with spirit children from their many wives. Mormons believe you have a second chance at salvation after death and in baptism by proxy. This is not biblical nor Christian. Call them what you will....they are not Christians.

    October 10, 2011 at 10:03 am |
    • Binky42

      According to you...

      October 10, 2011 at 10:03 am |
    • Greg s

      The Mormons were taught there Gospel by an Angel, same as the Muslims, Paul warned us very specifically about this!!

      “But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.” (Galatians 1:8)

      If you believe in the Bible and Christ then Mormons and the Muslims are a form of cult. If you are selective in what you Believe from the bible then go for it and buy into what this man has to say!

      October 10, 2011 at 10:10 am |
    • Fallacy Spotting 101

      Root post is the No True Scotsman Fallacy


      October 10, 2011 at 10:12 am |
  7. Binky42

    Mormonism, as strange as it's beliefs are, is no stranger than any other religion. If anyone can believe any of that crap they need a psych evaluation. Religion = justified insanity.

    October 10, 2011 at 10:02 am |
    • Greg s

      Thanks for enlightening me, I always new I was Crazy for Christ!!

      October 10, 2011 at 10:18 am |
  8. Brian

    As far as I am concerned, all religions are cults. Fairy stories are all well and good, but science and fact are even better.

    October 10, 2011 at 10:01 am |
    • Greg s

      Every other day another Science fact bites the dust for a New and improved Science Fact. But you have staked your everything in it, As you stand alone out there in life, With nothing to support you but your Confidence in your intellect and well thought out belief that there is no God, You taunt those who believe Otherwise almost as if you wish others to Join you out there all alone! Joining you is a choice as foolish to me as mine is to You.

      October 10, 2011 at 10:28 am |
  9. al196112

    Wow. Why do I think that all you non-believers posting are just one person? I feel sorry for you. You must be very tormented.

    October 10, 2011 at 10:00 am |
    • Binky42

      Believe it or not, but there is more than a single rational person in this crazy over-religious country.

      October 10, 2011 at 10:03 am |
    • Fallacy Spotting 101

      Root post is initiation of Circu-mstantial Ad Hominem fallacy.

      October 10, 2011 at 10:14 am |
    • HystericallyHistorical

      Al, are we being a little paranoid here? I can assure you that I am not Binky or any of the other critical or non-believing commentators, although I agree with Binky in most of what he /she says. You obviously can't believe that there are millions out there in the world who don't believe in your bible. But there are: they are called muslims, jews, buddhists, hindus, new agers, atheists, spiritualists, witches, tree huggers, agnostics and more.
      I have no problem with you believing in your faith. The problems world wide start when one belief group claims exclusivity over all others. They almost have to. How else could you claim to be the Only True Religion? But the result is religious wars, fundamentalism, jihad, crusades, inquisition, northern ireland, Koresh, 9/11, shiites vs sunnis, hindus versus moslems, and and and.
      This religion business has been killing people for centuries. Let's "privatize" religion. Hey, the GOP should like that, they want to privatize most everything. Let's privatize religion and not fight over it. Ok?

      October 10, 2011 at 10:18 am |
    • Greg s

      I dont for a second think there are a million non-believers, There are Billions. But Atheists have taken it upon themselves to preach Non belief, But they do it through taunting and disparaging believers, The whole method of attack against a believer shows to the Believer your Lack of compassion your lack of sensitivity, Your ignorance on the Subject your trying to destroy, You teach us through your comments that you have a underlying hatred For God. You dont believe in God yet you hate everything associated with God, Strange how much one can hate something that doesn't exist.

      October 10, 2011 at 10:39 am |
  10. Wootings

    All religions are cults...the only difference is the number members. Some wacky belief system based on no evidence that is not very popular, and has few adherents, is a "cult" – a wacky belief system based on no evidence that is very popular and has lots of adherents is a "religion."

    Too bad that truth isn't determined by popular vote.

    October 10, 2011 at 10:00 am |
    • sleepytime

      Exactly. It always makes we laugh that the people who seem most concern about the dangers of cults are religious people.

      October 10, 2011 at 10:02 am |
    • The Brain Fumigator

      Wootings you will put me out of business. Keep it up!

      October 10, 2011 at 10:16 am |
  11. gerr

    This is a refreshing article. I were to call any religon a cult it would be Born Again evengelicals who stress their interpretation of the last book of the Bible which Bible scholars almost did not include in the Bible. Worse, they do not recognize baptism as all protestants and catholics have agreed to do. This alone separates them from Christianity.

    October 10, 2011 at 9:59 am |
    • Greg s

      Yes Born again Christians believe in the prophecy of the Bible but Revelations is just one book, A very large part of end time prophecy comes from the Old Testament, In fact you could remove Revelations and one could still see whats coming down the pipe. Well when I say see whats coming, its more like looking through a very smoky Glass, Cracked and scratched. It accurately predicted the Course of the Jews through time, If we see Israel wiped off the face of the Earth by the Arabs you can pretty much chuck the Bible into the Garbage can, Prophecy tells us once Israel is reformed it will never fall again until the end of the earth. There that should give all you God Haters something to wish for!

      October 10, 2011 at 10:52 am |
  12. Cory

    By definition all Religions are cults.

    For me personally, It doesn't matter to me what the person's beliefs are. If they believe in Bhudda, cool. If they believe in Christ, cool. It doesn't matter to me, what matters to me is how these Religions have completely warped their "sacred" book's words to fit for them. How they've manipulated them to kill each other off, enslave people etc.... Oh...Hey isn't that what cults do to some degree? So yea...Religions are cults by definition and action.

    October 10, 2011 at 9:57 am |
    • Greg s

      Christians are guilty of this in the past, But your speaking hundreds of years ago, Your speaking of Men who used religion for there own quest for power. Christians today aren't on Jihad, In fact its mostly the world that is on Jihad against the Jews and Christians.

      October 10, 2011 at 10:58 am |
  13. Improbable1

    Tom Wolfe nailed this years ago: "A 'cult' is a religion that has no political power."

    October 10, 2011 at 9:56 am |
    • Maggie

      Then any religious organization not involving in politics is a cult and also is the true christian organization by that definition because Jesus who started Christianity has no political power and was not involved in politics.

      October 10, 2011 at 10:09 am |
    • snowdown

      Nor was jesus divine. But thanks for coming out, Maggie.

      October 10, 2011 at 10:17 am |
    • HystericallyHistorical

      Maggie, the true christian faith is catholicism. The cath. church wielded more political power over the world for centuries than any modern day super power has been able to. Catholic church history is a fine example of how some poor carpenter's religious beliefs turn into a powergrabbing moneymaking brainwashing industry. Look at fundamentalist evangelicals right now: they are trying to influence who might run for the presidency of the superpower USA. To some degree they are succeeding. You call this "a-political"???
      In my book all churches, pastors , ministers or teleevangelists who talk politics to influence their flock should be slapped and their tax exemption should be revoked.

      October 10, 2011 at 10:34 am |
    • Greg s

      Since the founding fathers were Christians they must have viewed what comes from the pulpit about politics perfectly acceptable, Since most Liberals are non believers they view what comes from the pulpit as something that needs to be regulated. Especially if it talks about a Liberal Politician in a bad light!

      October 10, 2011 at 11:05 am |
  14. mike

    A cult is a teaching, veneration, a worship. Compared with Christianity, Mormonism is a false cult. To them Jesus pointed the way but not the Way as Christians believe. They are polytheist while Christians are not. The Bible is the Christian's absolute source of truth about God, holiness and guidance for Christian living while theirs is the Book of Mormon. To Christians, the great Teacher is the Holy Spirit. Not the author of this article or Lewis or Billy Graham or some Ivy League school graduate. Nor even angels who would be bringing a gospel different from what have been preached already. It's sad, but Paul the apostle said that believers in such a different gospel are eternally condemned.

    October 10, 2011 at 9:56 am |
    • SCAtheist

      How do you know you're right and they're wrong? You don't. They're just 2 sets of myths.

      October 10, 2011 at 9:59 am |
    • Ben

      Mike, you obviously don't know very much about the teachings of the LDS Church. For Mormons, the ultimate source of truth is God. Not the Bible, not the Book of Mormon, and not a prophet, regardless if he carries a staff in the wilderness or has an ivy league degree. The reason I know the Book of Mormon is true, is because the Holy Ghost, a member of the Godhead, has testified to me that it is true, which is the same way in which I know the Bible is also the word of God. And the reason I know Joseph Smith was a prophet of God is because the Holy Ghost has told me so, which is the same way that I know Adam, Moses and Peter were prophets of God.

      October 10, 2011 at 10:17 am |
    • HystericallyHistorical

      christians are polytheistic too: father, son, holy gost, that's three. Throw in mother mary, St. Torquatus (yep, direct disciple of Peter and Paul, look it up), st. Thomas (dozens of them), santa claus and thousands more with a direct line to the CEO god. Don't ignore all the pagan roots of christianity. And the historical jesus did not have white teeth and light skin. He was of semitic hebrew descent in the middle east. Oh, those pesky myths.

      October 10, 2011 at 10:45 am |
    • Greg s

      In the exact same way that you know your right, You think it through and you come to a decision, You think there is no God so all of this is silly He thinks there is a God and The Mormons have it all wrong and Mormons think There is a God but we have it all wrong. Thats just the way it is. No one on this site is going to convince anyone of there position, We all just dont have anything better to do right now!

      October 10, 2011 at 11:10 am |
  15. liz

    Those who label Mormonism as a cult are also those most likely yo tell you that their way is the only way and that if you aren't a member of their religious sect, you are condemned.

    October 10, 2011 at 9:56 am |
    • Greg s

      No true Christian is going to tell you your condemned! Anyway, No one is Condemned until after death so what the hell do we know, Maybe by what one says we can make a educated guess where you might be should the light above your head suddenly fall and take you out! As for telling anyone there condemned...naa what the heck do I know about a mans true heart on the other side of this monitor!

      If a Christian tells you your condemned to Hell condemn the man who tells you such hogwash not the Christian faith, Any man may be saved even in the last seconds of his life, So no one alive is Condemned YET!

      October 10, 2011 at 11:17 am |
  16. Bobisco

    God is not static but Dynamic. His Scripture is also Dynamic. God's word was given to his children at different locations in the past about the 1st coming of Christ; The Book of Mormon of another set of God's children also confirmed that its true. Then Christ came & the Book of Mormon again also confirmed. Concerning the future, the Book of Mormon has again also confirmed. The issue at this 'injury time' should not be about the authenticity of the Book but about your place in God's Divine Eternal Plan. God's plan for the Book is already done. Ephraim & Judah will soon be united again. So let the Book be!!! Time's up!

    October 10, 2011 at 9:55 am |
    • Greg s

      I dont honestly Know if a Mormon believes that only Through Christ can one find salvation, If they don't then in my Opinion if they follow that path to death they are out of luck, No matter what good they did on Earth, If Christ doesn't know you he isnt going to stand for you on that day of Judgment! Ya Know I can say I know Obama, Because of all I hear and read about him but if you ask him if he knows me hes gonna say Who??? Well any way As I said I cant condemn the Mormons as a whole but I can say My bible says there Gospel, since it was taught by an angel and is diffrent then mine, makes there's accursed. Its all I have to go On but it wouldn't stop me for voting for one if he was the right guy or gal, Hell look at the man we have now, We have no real idea what religion he believes in.

      October 10, 2011 at 11:26 am |
  17. demogal

    No, Mormonism is not a cult. Nor does it fall within the parameters of traditional Christian faith. It is a religion, of which there are many and diverse forms in the world–and in this country. American–the land of freedom of religion.

    October 10, 2011 at 9:55 am |
    • liz

      Unless you believe that freedom of religion means you was the freedom to be any uber-capitaliist, neoi-con evangelical WASP you want toi be.

      October 10, 2011 at 9:57 am |
  18. SCAtheist

    Fuller represents the lefties of the fundies. I want to know what the baptist seminary president says.

    October 10, 2011 at 9:55 am |
  19. Dan

    My make-believe man is better than your make-believe man.

    October 10, 2011 at 9:55 am |
  20. lefty avenger

    Christians drink the blood and eat the body of their Christ. This isn't cultish? Sure................

    October 10, 2011 at 9:55 am |
    • Bill Moore

      Please get your facts straight. Catholics believe that fallacy NOT" born again" evangelicals. To us it is purly symbolic

      October 10, 2011 at 10:00 am |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50
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.