That's a stupid question isn't it? All apostates "know" that the era of Witness growth is well and truly over. The Internet has revealed the man behind the Watchtower curtain and people are leaving in droves, especially in the Western world! It is only a matter of time before big decreases are seen in developed countries surely.
But what if apostates are wrong? The eagerly awaited decline that was to be precipitated by widespread Internet access has certainly been a long time coming. Then came this year's service report with reasonable increases: USA 3%, Britain 3%, France 2%, Norway 3%, Australia 2% and so on. They don't match the increases of the 1980s for sure, but it certainly doesn't show decline either, and JWs do much better than most denominations in Western countries.
American sociologist Rodney Stark wrote an article in 1997 trying to explain why Witnesses grow so rapidly:
http://www.geocities.com/rogueactivex/JWGrow-O.pdf
Stark has become renowned for also predicting the rise of the Mormon Church to become a new World Religion in the twenty first century. He also writes books with generally pro-religion provocative arguments such as that Christianity grew in the Roman empire because of its message of love and that Christianity is responsible for the growth of capitalism and liberal democracies.
In 1997 he also argued that JWs have shown remarkable growth in their history, which is no doubt true. What is more interesting is that he predicts in the new century they will grow exponentially. Not only on the basis of past growth, but because their structure is well calibrated for future growth in a number of key respects that he outlines by means of concise axioms including:
- New religious movements are likely to succeed to the extent that they maintain a medium level of tension with their surrounding environment - they are strict, but not too strict.
- Religious movements must socialise the young sufficiently well as to minimise both defection and the appeal of reduced strictness.
- New religious movements are likely to succeed to the extent that their doctrines are non-empirical.
I suspect more than a few former Witnesses would argue that the last one at least may prove problematic for JWs since they stress a number of key doctrines that involve knowledge claims that can be tested empirically, including the 607 BCE date and presentations of their own history. But other than that Stark makes a reasonable case for viewing the prospects as good for the future growth of JWs. British sociologist Andrew Holden attached some importance to Stark's argument in his book Jehovah's Witness: A Portrait of a Contemporary Religious Movement where he used the projected growth as an argument for the increasing importance of studying JWs as a sociological phenomenon. Others have not been as impressed by Stark's projections however, such as ex-Witness scholar Richard Singelenberd who largely devoted his review of Holden's book to disputing the claim that JWs continue to experience significant Witness growth.
l. New religious movementsare likely to succeed to the extent that they retain cultural continuity with the conventional faith(s) of the societies in which they seek converts. l. New religious movementsare likely to succeed to the extent that they retain cultural continuity with the conventional faith(s) of the societies in which they seek converts.