Difference between revisions of "Criticism of Mormonism/Mormonism is a cult"

m (→‎Further reading)
m
Line 4: Line 4:
  
 
===Source(s) of the Criticism===
 
===Source(s) of the Criticism===
 +
* Alan W. Gomes, ''Unmasking the Cults'' (Grand Rapids, Michegan: Zondervan, 1995).
 
* ''The Utah Evangel'' 31 (May 1984): 1.
 
* ''The Utah Evangel'' 31 (May 1984): 1.
 
* ''The Utah Evangel'' 33 (May 1986): 3.
 
* ''The Utah Evangel'' 33 (May 1986): 3.
Line 10: Line 11:
  
 
==Response==  
 
==Response==  
−
Websters Dictionary defines cult as a “great devotion to a person, idea, or thing”. So as
+
This claim is a good example of anti-Mormon attempts to use loaded language and emotionally charged words to attack.
−
the Jews revere Moses, Lutherans revere Martin Luther, Seventh-day Adventists have Ellen G.
 
−
White, and mostly Christians reverence Jesus Christ. That would put them under the category of
 
−
cult also.
 
  
−
Alan Gomes, who teaches at BIOLA University’s Talbot school of Theology, admits
+
''Websters Dictionary'' defines cult as a “great devotion to a person, idea, or thing”. So, because the Jews revere Moses, Lutherans revere Martin Luther, Seventh-day Adventists are devoted to the teachings of Ellen G. White, and Christians reverence Jesus Christ, all these groups could be considered "cults" by this definition.
−
right up front that “our English word cult comes from the Latin word cultus, which is a form of
 
−
the verb colere, meaning ‘to worship or give reverence to a deity” (Alan W. Gomes, Unmasking
 
−
the Cults, pg. 7)
 
  
−
Fuller Theological Seminary President Richard Mouw said in Nov. 14 2004 conference in Salt
+
Alan Gomes, who teaches at BIOLA University’s Talbot school of Theology and applies the label to Mormons, among others, admits that “our English word ''cult'' comes from the Latin word ''cultus'', which is a form of the verb ''colere'', meaning ‘to worship or give reverence to a deity.” {{ref|cults1}}
−
Lake City for the unity of Evangelicals and Mormons that “I know that I have learned much in this
 
−
continuing dialogue, and I am now convinced that we evangelicals have often seriously mis-represented
 
−
the beliefs and practices of the Mormon community. Indeed, let me state it bluntly to the LDS folks here
 
−
this evening: we have sinned against you. The God of the Scriptures makes it clear that it is a terrible
 
−
thing to bear false witness against our neighbors, and we have been guilty of that sort of transgression in
 
−
things we have said about you. We have told you what you believe without making a sincere effort first
 
−
of all to ask you what you believe.”
 
  
−
The true Church has always come under the criticism of being a cult. Even the early
+
Yet, this is not simply what sectarian critics of the Church mean when they call it a "cult."  Gomes writes that his "preferred definition" of cult is "a group that deviates doctrinally from a ''parent'' or ''host'' religion; that is, cults grow out of and deviate from a previously established religion."{{ref|gomes2}}
−
Church was regarded as a cult. In Herbert Danbys, "The Jew and Christianity" on pg. 8, it
+
 
−
reads “This new Jewish-Christian party in the eyes of the religious leaders of the time was, at the
+
But, if Gomes wishes to adopt this definition, would he be content to call Christianity "a Jewish cult"?  Christianity certainly grew out of Judaism, and it certainly deviates doctrinally from Judaism.  Is Gomes content to label his own faith "a cult"?  One suspects not.
−
worst, simply regarded as guilty of minuth (cultism), namely, a variety of Jewish heresy, or
+
 
 +
The advantage of the term "cult," for critics, is that it has a negative connotation.  When the public hears the term "cult," they do not simply think, "religious group devoted to some person or ideal." Nor, usually, do they think, "religion that has deviated from the beliefs of a parent religion."  A "cult" implies a fanatical, probably dangerous, religious group—and it is this image which critics seek to exploit.  Hence Gomes' desire, for example, to "unmask" cults (who must have something to hide) and the necessity of a chapter on "Keeping People Out of Cults." 
 +
 
 +
If the "cult" is a Jewish cult (i.e. Christianity) then presumably Gomes would not want to keep them out.  Thus, "cult" is clearly intended to communicate something additional.
 +
 
 +
Gomes also insists there are other criteria for being "a cult," such as "den[ying] (either explicitly or implicitly) one or more of the central doctrines of the Christian faith."{{ref|gomes3}}  Gomes considers these to include "the Trinity," yet this creates problems for his definition, since the first century Christians clearly had no doctrine of [[Godhead_and_the_Trinity|creedal Trinitarianism]] as Gomes' present denomination does.  By Gomes' definition, ''he'' would then be part of a Christian cult, since he's altered the doctrines of the "parent" religion, early Christianity.
 +
 
 +
Clearly, such linguistic games become laughable, and rather pointless.
 +
 
 +
It should not surprise us that the Church is so labelled—new religious groups, when considered 'strange' or 'heretical', and still in the minority, have often been labelled as "cults" to keep people away from them, or to justify poor treatment of them. Unsurprisingly, the early Christians had the same experience:
 +
 
 +
:This new Jewish-Christian party in the eyes of the religious leaders of the time was, at the
 +
worst, simply regarded as guilty of ''minuth'' (cultism), namely, a variety of Jewish heresy, or
 
rather, Jewish sectarianism...early passages in the Talmud still contain hostile references to the
 
rather, Jewish sectarianism...early passages in the Talmud still contain hostile references to the
−
minim (cults), among whom were numbered the Jewish Christians...”
+
''minim'' (cults), among whom were numbered the Jewish Christians...{{ref|cults2}}
 +
 
 
Pliny, an early Roman leader also said that Christians were a “superstition, a foreign
 
Pliny, an early Roman leader also said that Christians were a “superstition, a foreign
−
cult” this was re-iterated by two more Roman writers, Tacitus, and Suetonius. Tacitus said that is
+
cult,” and this characterization was re-iterated by two more Roman writers, Tacitus, and Suetonius. Tacitus explained the attacks on Christians as being due to their 'cult' status, and also because “of their hatred toward mankind”. Tacitus also said that they were “an enemy to mankind”, and a “deadly superstition”. Suetonius called the Christians a “mischievous superstition” or, in other words, a cult.{{ref|cults3}}
−
why the Christians were being killed, and also because “of their hatred toward mankind”. Tacitus
 
−
also said that they were “an enemy to mankind”, and a “deadly superstition”. And also Suetonius
 
−
who said that they were a “mischievous superstition” or in other words, a cult. (The Christians as
 
−
the Romans Saw Them, pg. 22,49-50,66)
 
  
 
==Conclusion==  
 
==Conclusion==  
  
−
A summary of the argument against the criticism.
+
Simply put, "cult" is simply a label that implies "religion I don't like" or "religion that I disagree with."  When the early Christians were unpopular, uncommon, and powerless, they were labelled a "cult."  When they reached prominence and power, they began applying the label in turn to religions with whom they disagreed.
 +
 
 +
A book-length treatment of these issues has been written, and no cogent response to its arguments has been forthcoming.{{ref|offenders1}}  "Cult" is not a useful term, since it merely expresses the speaker's prejudices, but tells us nothing useful about the religion being considered.  It is likely impossible for sectarian critics of the Church to formulate a definition for "cult" that would include the LDS Church but ''not include'' the first century Christian Church.  The usefulness of the label "cult," is therefore questionable—except as a short-hand for bigotry or prejudice.
  
 
==Endnotes==
 
==Endnotes==
−
 
+
#{{note|cults1}} Alan W. Gomes, ''Unmasking the Cults'' (Grand Rapids, Michegan: Zondervan, 1995), 7 (italics added).
 +
#{{note|gomes2}} ''Ibid.''
 +
#{{note|gomes3}} ''Ibid.'', 10.
 +
#{{note|cults2}} Herbert Danbys, "The Jew and Christianity," p. 8.  {{NeedCite}}
 +
#{{note|cults3}} Robert Louis Wilken, ''The Christians as the Romans Saw Them'' (Yale University Press; 2nd edition, 2003), 22, 49–50, 66. ISBN 0300098391.
 +
#{{note|offenders1}}{{Offenders1|start=1}}
 
==Further reading==  
 
==Further reading==  
  

Revision as of 16:40, 3 October 2006

This article is a draft. FairMormon editors are currently editing it. We welcome your suggestions on improving the content.

Criticism

Critics claim that the Church is "a cult."

Source(s) of the Criticism

  • Alan W. Gomes, Unmasking the Cults (Grand Rapids, Michegan: Zondervan, 1995).
  • The Utah Evangel 31 (May 1984): 1.
  • The Utah Evangel 33 (May 1986): 3.
  • Walter Martin, The Kingdom of the Cults, revised and expanded, (Minneapolis: Bethan House, 1985), 173.
  • James R. Spencer, Beyond Mormonism: An Elder's Story (Grand Rapids: Chosen Books, 1984), 138.

Response

This claim is a good example of anti-Mormon attempts to use loaded language and emotionally charged words to attack.

Websters Dictionary defines cult as a “great devotion to a person, idea, or thing”. So, because the Jews revere Moses, Lutherans revere Martin Luther, Seventh-day Adventists are devoted to the teachings of Ellen G. White, and Christians reverence Jesus Christ, all these groups could be considered "cults" by this definition.

Alan Gomes, who teaches at BIOLA University’s Talbot school of Theology and applies the label to Mormons, among others, admits that “our English word cult comes from the Latin word cultus, which is a form of the verb colere, meaning ‘to worship or give reverence to a deity.” [1]

Yet, this is not simply what sectarian critics of the Church mean when they call it a "cult." Gomes writes that his "preferred definition" of cult is "a group that deviates doctrinally from a parent or host religion; that is, cults grow out of and deviate from a previously established religion."[2]

But, if Gomes wishes to adopt this definition, would he be content to call Christianity "a Jewish cult"? Christianity certainly grew out of Judaism, and it certainly deviates doctrinally from Judaism. Is Gomes content to label his own faith "a cult"? One suspects not.

The advantage of the term "cult," for critics, is that it has a negative connotation. When the public hears the term "cult," they do not simply think, "religious group devoted to some person or ideal." Nor, usually, do they think, "religion that has deviated from the beliefs of a parent religion." A "cult" implies a fanatical, probably dangerous, religious group—and it is this image which critics seek to exploit. Hence Gomes' desire, for example, to "unmask" cults (who must have something to hide) and the necessity of a chapter on "Keeping People Out of Cults."

If the "cult" is a Jewish cult (i.e. Christianity) then presumably Gomes would not want to keep them out. Thus, "cult" is clearly intended to communicate something additional.

Gomes also insists there are other criteria for being "a cult," such as "den[ying] (either explicitly or implicitly) one or more of the central doctrines of the Christian faith."[3] Gomes considers these to include "the Trinity," yet this creates problems for his definition, since the first century Christians clearly had no doctrine of creedal Trinitarianism as Gomes' present denomination does. By Gomes' definition, he would then be part of a Christian cult, since he's altered the doctrines of the "parent" religion, early Christianity.

Clearly, such linguistic games become laughable, and rather pointless.

It should not surprise us that the Church is so labelled—new religious groups, when considered 'strange' or 'heretical', and still in the minority, have often been labelled as "cults" to keep people away from them, or to justify poor treatment of them. Unsurprisingly, the early Christians had the same experience:

This new Jewish-Christian party in the eyes of the religious leaders of the time was, at the

worst, simply regarded as guilty of minuth (cultism), namely, a variety of Jewish heresy, or rather, Jewish sectarianism...early passages in the Talmud still contain hostile references to the minim (cults), among whom were numbered the Jewish Christians...[4]

Pliny, an early Roman leader also said that Christians were a “superstition, a foreign cult,” and this characterization was re-iterated by two more Roman writers, Tacitus, and Suetonius. Tacitus explained the attacks on Christians as being due to their 'cult' status, and also because “of their hatred toward mankind”. Tacitus also said that they were “an enemy to mankind”, and a “deadly superstition”. Suetonius called the Christians a “mischievous superstition” or, in other words, a cult.[5]

Conclusion

Simply put, "cult" is simply a label that implies "religion I don't like" or "religion that I disagree with." When the early Christians were unpopular, uncommon, and powerless, they were labelled a "cult." When they reached prominence and power, they began applying the label in turn to religions with whom they disagreed.

A book-length treatment of these issues has been written, and no cogent response to its arguments has been forthcoming.[6] "Cult" is not a useful term, since it merely expresses the speaker's prejudices, but tells us nothing useful about the religion being considered. It is likely impossible for sectarian critics of the Church to formulate a definition for "cult" that would include the LDS Church but not include the first century Christian Church. The usefulness of the label "cult," is therefore questionable—except as a short-hand for bigotry or prejudice.

Endnotes

  1. [note]  Alan W. Gomes, Unmasking the Cults (Grand Rapids, Michegan: Zondervan, 1995), 7 (italics added).
  2. [note]  Ibid.
  3. [note]  Ibid., 10.
  4. [note]  Herbert Danbys, "The Jew and Christianity," p. 8. [citation needed]
  5. [note]  Robert Louis Wilken, The Christians as the Romans Saw Them (Yale University Press; 2nd edition, 2003), 22, 49–50, 66. ISBN 0300098391.
  6. [note] Daniel C. Peterson and Stephen D. Ricks, Offenders for a Word: How Anti-Mormons Play Word Games to Attack the Latter-day Saints (Provo, Utah: FARMS (reprint edition), 1992), 1. ISBN 0934893357. off-site

Further reading

FAIR wiki articles

Definitional fallacies wiki articles

FAIR web site

External links

  • Orson Scott Card, "Hey, Who Are You Calling a Cult?" off-site
  • Stephen E. Robinson, Are Mormons Christians? (Salt Lake City, Utah: Deseret Book Company, 1993). off-site FAIR link

Printed material

  • Daniel C. Peterson and Stephen D. Ricks, Offenders for a Word: How Anti-Mormons Play Word Games to Attack the Latter-day Saints (Provo, Utah: FARMS (reprint edition), 1992), 1. ISBN 0934893357. off-site
Retrieved from "https://www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/answers/index.php?title=Criticism_of_Mormonism/Mormonism_is_a_cult&oldid=6487"