The Four Major Cults: Christian Science, Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormonism, Seventh-day Adventism

by Anthony A. Hoekema

This is a print on demand book and is therefore non- returnable.

This standard work gives a history of each cult (Jehovah's Witnesses, Christian Science, Seventh-Day Adventism, and Mormonism) and sets out its doctrines, following the customary divisions of theology. The major teachings peculiar to each cult are examined in five appendices.

Genres: Nonfiction, Religion, Christian, Theology, Cults

464 pages, Paperback

First published December 1, 1963

About the author

Anthony A. Hoekema (1913-1988) was a Christian theologian of the Dutch Reformed tradition who served as professor of Systematic theology at Calvin Theological Seminary for twenty-one years.

Hoekema was born in the Netherlands but immigrated to the United States in 1923. He attended Calvin College (A.B.), the University of Michigan (M.A.), Calvin Theological Seminary (Th.B.) and Princeton Theological Seminary (Th.D., 1953). After pastoring several Christian Reformed churches (1944-56), he became Associate Professor of Bible at Calvin College (1956-58). From 1958 to 1979, when he retired, he was Professor of Systematic Theology at Calvin Theological Seminary in Grand Rapids, Michigan.

Reviews

[Joseph · Rating 2 out of 5]

Given the high reputation this book has had, I was rather disappointed by it.

It does give a useful overview of the teachings and doctrines of the four groups, and Hoekema's emphasis on using their own primary sources adds reliability.

However, questionable logic and reasoning mar almost every aspect of this work.

First of all, Hoekema applies a wooden literalism not only to the biblical texts he looks at, but also towards the writings he looks at. Even when a source explicitly explains their view, he finds quotes (sometimes form the same work), and taking the quote as literally as possible, assumes that they contradict themselves or are lying. I get it; these are cults. It's understandable that we don't trust their leaders to always be honest or consistent. Nevertheless, it seems that Hoekema is quick to assume the worst about these groups. Maybe there are nuances to what they say (as is the case with the Bible). Maybe their beliefs aren't always totally consistent (it's not like we've never met a Christian who hasn't suffered from cognitive dissonance). What Hoekema infers based on extrapolating from something in their writing always takes precedence over the explicit teachings in their writings and statements.

TREATMENT OF SEVENTH DAY ADVENTISM
I'm not a big fan of Seventh-Day Adventism. On the other hand, it was by no means comparable to the other three groups, given the many orthodox beliefs that are core to it. However, whether or not Hoekema is right to consider the group a cult, I highlight his treatment of SDA's because it exemplifies most clearly what is wrong with this book in the other sections as well.

Hoekema raises some legitimate concerns regarding SDA doctrine. However, while some of his concerns are legitimate, many of them, if consistently applied, would put many mainstream Christian denominations under his "cult" umbrella. For example, he points to the fact that Seventh-Day Adventists consider scripture their only authoritative source of doctrine, but argues that their reliance on the teachings of their prophetess Ellen White places her above scripture. Since they never indicate that she was wrong, he surmises that they believe that she is always right, and therefore, if she disagrees with scripture, they side with her. Since they are not free to question or teachings (or a least, according to Hoekema they are not), her word takes precedence over scripture. That does sound quite bad. However, what would happen if a Christian Reformed pastor tried to question that the Belgic confession or Canons of Dort were innaccurate...? Any Christian group that holds to a confession and forces its pastors and seminary professors to affirm them (e.g. Presbyterians, Southern Baptists, Lutherans, Hoekema's own denomination) is as cultic as Seventh-Day Adventists, following Hoekema's reasoning. Would Hoekema say that THEY put something above scripture, and are cultic?

Similarly, he looks at a bizarre (and admittedly unbiblical) belief of SDA's that in the end times, God will open everybody's eyes so that they understand that they are supposed to in fact honor the seventh-day sabbath. Those who still refuse will then take the mark of the beast and be condemned. He argues that this is works-based salvation. The thing is, if that is works-based salvation, does Revelation then teach works-based salvation? After all, it teaches that all who take the mark of the beast (whatever it is) will be condemned, and all who refuse it will be saved. Now of course, reformed Christians like Hoekema, and other evangelicals like myself, would explain that those who do right (not taking the mark of the beast) do so because they were saved and because of the Holy Spirit. Therefore, they don't earn their salvation, since it is because of God that they do what saves them. However, the same would be true of this SDA belief!

A lot of little things could go either way. I am not very familiar with some of the particulars he pointed to, such as the “investigative judgment” that Christ does in heaven after a person dies. However, I question if it is as clear-cu as he makes it seem. Do SDA's really believe that Jesus doesn't know whether a person is saved or not until after He looks at some sort of heavenly record, or is that just Hoekema's take on it?

Little things pop up as well. Because they do not hold to predestination, they impugn God's sovereignty. However, a lot of Christians don't believe in Calvinistic predestination (and many of them, including myself, view God as no less sovereign and powerful than in Calvinism).

APPENDICES
Several of the appendices which attempt to defend his position on a doctrinal topic are not particularly helpful. Nobody who didn't already agree with Hoekema would be persuaded by his shallow use of prooftexts. In some ways that was inevitable, given the length. However, his use of scripture in attempting to refute annihilationism, for example, is just not very good. More relevant to the book in general, he doesn't always seem to have a very thorough grasp of why the other side believes what it does. This doesn't give me the most secure feeling when I read what he says about groups I was not previously familiar with (like Christian Scientists).

CONCLUSION
Their are some useful elements to this book, which is why it gets two stars. It gives some overview of the beliefs of the groups. It gives useful advice for how to go about approaching the cultist. It is even balanced enough to point out areas where we can learn from cults (such as their zeal for missions and their willingness to endure ridicule for what they think is the truth). I just don't think it is that great of an overall resource, given its shortcomings.

[Philip Brown · Rating 5 out of 5]

A masterpiece. I was expecting this to be a dry reference book, but Hoekema has arranged the material to be accessible and fascinating, and yet thorough. This dude knows the primary sources well. With each group, he lays out their history, giving an overview of how this system of thought came about. He then systematically lays out their understandings around key areas of Christian belief, showing where they divert from the narrow way laid out by the apostles. The chapter on how to define a cult was great. In this chapter, he defends his view that SDA are a cult, and not just an evangelical sect with the odd heterodox belief here and there. If each SDA church and all their members held to all of the historical distinctives he cites, his case is pretty strong. Whether the average SDA even knows what investigative judgement is or what the prophecies of Ellen G. White are is another story. I'd doubt it in 2024. His chapter on how to approach the cultist holistically was full of sage wisdom. I also thoroughly enjoyed Hoekema's interaction with the Watchtower Society's translations of various passages that affirm the deity of Christ. I did find the copious pages wading through various details of Jehovah's Witness theology to be dry and soul crushing. The appendices on conditional immortality and soul-extinction were great! Highly recommended, though it may well be due for an update. I will be returning!

[Scott Cox · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is an excellent study and comparison between the historic Reformed Protestant faith and the major 20th century cults: Christian Science, Jehovah Witnesses, Mormonism, and Seventh-day Adventism (though there has been some debate regarding the latter being regarded as a cult).

[Lauren Calandrilla · Rating 4 out of 5]

Excellent book, some parts are quite scholarly. I really enjoyed the history of each cult and their differing belief systems.

[Veronica Reynoso · Rating 3 out of 5]

I picked this up because it was part of W.C. Stevenson’s 1975 Year of Doom. I prefer personal accounts, but the colorful detailed histories in this book turned out to be more interesting than I expected.

[Cory Legall · Rating 4 out of 5]

A cursory effusion of ignorance with respect to Protestantism and even sectarian biases.

[Neliamariano_26rocketmail.com]

its good