You said — “You can throw the term “cult” around all you want but it doesn’t make it so. And I’d take Romney’s Mormonism over Hoover and Nixon’s Quakerism any day of the week.”
It’s a standard definition of the Christian community and its theology. It’s not something made up by me. In short, it means any group that does not fit the core essence of Christianity from the basic, historic and foundational teachings and doctrines.
It’s no more sinister than that, and shouldn’t be mistaken (in its definition) for something akin to a “Jim Jones cult” (as some people use it, in a “secular sense”). It’s strictly a theological definition and construct within the Christian community, in order to know and identify which groups meet the core essence of Christianity and which groups do not.
And, of course, no matter what groups (themselves) “wish” to be “included” within the definition of “Christianity” — it is the Christian group, itself, which defines what it means to be “Christian” and what those teachings and doctrines are. It’s not some “outsider group” who gets to define that meaning. LOL!
That’s why I say you won’t find a single Christian seminary in the country which will ever include Mormon teachings and doctrines as matching anything of Christian teaching and theology and its doctrines. That’s pretty plain by a comparison of the one to the other (i.e., Mormon teachings to Christian teachings).
And that’s how it is called a cult...
Regards,
Star Traveler
You are correct. The LDS church is a cult in the same sense that the Watchtower group is. The essentials of the faith cannot be compromised.
Not that I’m basing my political support or lack thereof on that. My problem with Romney is his Massachusetts liberalism.
Jesus died for me. I’m a Mormon. It doesn’t matter that you call us names (”cult” members). We are used to it - and much worse. We are a peculiar people; I will grant you that.