Perhaps if they would address the problems leading to the doubts, or think about their doctrines before finalizing them so they would have little to doubt about, that would have solved the problems.
It is true that we do not have all the answers to mankind's problems. The "secret society" I checked out to slap Jehovah in the face even said that--in fact, until we can integrate our thinking without any bias, we will never be able to solve our problems on a global level. All well and good--one person could have an idea, I could have doubts about that idea, and have a rational discussion about it. Others get involved in it, and before long a clearer picture of the issue emerges. And everyone benefits--just because one person doubted an idea and posted that doubt.
But, when you insist that you have all the answers and demand that everyone follow them, the game changes. Now, when someone doubts, it is viewed as an attack. You start cutting off the doubter, and making this person look like s*** instead of looking at it. The original idea is still there, still faulty, and nothing is ever going to be done to fix it (in the "secret society", even if the original idea and the doubter are both faulty, everyone can develop a better system and everyone benefits). And, people are punished for trying to improve the situation.
