Changes

If you don't say ''which'' Christians and cite a published source for the statement, then this is pure weasel-wording, a simple unsupported statement of opinion which is not magically transformed into a fact by adding the phrase "some Christians consider."

If you don't say ''which'' Christians and cite a published source for the statement, then this is pure weasel-wording, a simple unsupported statement of opinion which is not magically transformed into a fact by adding the phrase "some Christians consider."

I don't doubt that there are Christians who consider it to be a cult. There are probably some Catholics who consider the Pope to be the Antichrist (i.e. would answer the question "is the Pope Catholic?" with "No.") It is perfectly legitimate to cite facts about opinions, but the reader is entitled to know ''whose'' opinions they are. Who is calling them "a cult?" A U. N. official annoyed by their identification of the U. N. with the Beast of the Revelation? A hospital official troubled by their stance on blood transfusions? A Catholic retaliating for their Catholic-bashing? Who, when, and what, exactly did they say? [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 18:22, 20 March 2007 (EDT)

I don't doubt that there are Christians who consider it to be a cult. There are probably some Catholics who consider the Pope to be the Antichrist (i.e. would answer the question "is the Pope Catholic?" with "No.") It is perfectly legitimate to cite facts about opinions, but the reader is entitled to know ''whose'' opinions they are. Who is calling them "a cult?" A U. N. official annoyed by their identification of the U. N. with the Beast of the Revelation? A hospital official troubled by their stance on blood transfusions? A Catholic retaliating for their Catholic-bashing? Who, when, and what, exactly did they say?  

 

''With'' a good published source, this would be a valid addition to the article. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 18:23, 20 March 2007 (EDT)