I thought I would add a little to the discussion of a “cult”. I am sure this will draw some fire, but I am trying to reach for balance. It is easy to label any authoritative, controlling institution or religion as a cult. Truly, many are so steeped in controlling every aspect of one’s life that they likely deserve the title of “cult”. But, is it so easy to simply put a label on them, thereby negating them, and then walk away, having satisfied ourselves that we have thoroughly examined them and can therefore now execute judgment on them? I am in favor of a thorough examination of any and all religions, institutions, organizations, etc., but to do so in fairness requires that we apply the same rules of examination. If we use “mind-control” (or any other criteria) as a test platform, then how do they all stack up? There are many deeper issues here. We may come to find out that what we define as “cult” is more widespread and common then we previously realized. “Cultism” has infected nearly every human institution, for example we could easily claim that Amway is a cult, Avon is similar, and Mary Kay is not far behind. The military is a “cult”, I was in it for a long time, I know. I found the following very helpful to me. I quoted a little of this earlier on another post. I found it helpful, because I have come to realize that in any human organization (WT included) there is no absolute “truth”. I quit expecting to find in among JW’s or any one else. The Myth of Certainty (Daniel Taylor) – Chapter 2 “The Reflective Christian and the Church” Quote from Blaise Pascal – “Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction”. It is simultaneously the blessing and the curse of the reflective Christian that believers are called to live out heir faith in the church. No institution has accomplished so much good in the world; none has fallen so short of its calling! The church is God-ordained, God-inspired, but accomplishes its work through human beings subject to every possible failing. Above all, Christians who find themselves in conflict with the church should recognize that the church is, at the same time, both a divine and a human institution. The church does not like thinking of itself as an institution, certainly not in the same sense as all other human institutions. It prefers the New Testament metaphors of the church as the body of Christ – an organism not an organization – or as Christ’s bride, or as the communion of saints. The primary goal of all institutions and subcultures is self-preservation. Preserving the faith is central to God’s plan for human history; preserving particular religious institutions is not. Do not expect those who run the institutions to be sensitive to the difference. God needs no particular person, church, denomination, creed, or organization to accomplish His purpose. He will make use of those, in all their diversity, who are ready to be used, but will leave to themselves those who labor for their own ends. Nonetheless, questioning the institution is synonymous, for many, with attacking God – something not long to be tolerated. Supposedly they are protecting God, an almost humorous notion if its consequences were not so hurtful. Apparently God is fragile, His feelings easily hurt, sort of like Mr. Snuffleupagus on “Sesame Street” who feels sad and frustrated when people don’t believe he exists. Actually they are protecting themselves, their view of the world, and their sense of security. The religious institution has given them meaning, a sense of purpose, and, in some cases, careers. Anyone perceived as a threat to these things is a threat indeed. This threat is often met, or suppressed before it even arises, with power. All institutions and subcultures have power. It is granted by its members and is exercised in many ways for various purposes. There is nothing inherently good or evil in this situation. Power can be exercised for benefit or harm … Power is so easily misused, however, that even the most sincere often exercise it improperly. Every institution has its rules and ways of enforcing them, some clearly stated, others unstated but no less real. … The unique feature of religious institutions is the claim that their rules come from God. (Secular institutions often appeal to a similar transcendent source – tradition, reason, the will of the people, and so on.) To varying degrees, the believer accepts this claim. It is painfully clear, however, to anyone who has a passing acquaintance with church history, past and present, that much of what passes for God’s word and God’s way is man’s word and man’s way. Churches, at the same time that they are aspects of God’s plan for human history, are also sociological, culturally conditioned, human institutions. Next the author discusses legalism, the great weapon of authoritarianism, as a means for exercising control in the institution. Legalistic authoritarianism shows itself in the confusion of the Christian principle of unity with a human insistence on unanimity. Unity is a profound, even mystical quality. It takes great effort to achieve, yet mere effort will never produce it; it is a source of great security, yet demands great risk. Unanimity, on the other hand, is very tidy. It can be measured, monitored, and enforced. It is largely external, whereas unity is essentially internal. Its primary goal is correct behavior, while unity’s is a right spirit. Unanimity insists on many orthodoxies in addition to those of belief and behavior, including orthodoxy of experience and vocabulary. That is, believers are expected to come to God in similar ways, to have similar experiences with God, and to use accepted phrases in describing those experiences. …Only the most extreme elements of Christendom actually insist on thorough uniformity, but the entire subculture tends that way, as do most subcultures (including, in its own way, the secular, intellectual one). It is easy to see why the reflective Christian often leads a precarious existence in any subculture, particularly the conservative Christian one. In environments tainted with authoritarianism, every question creates a mini-crisis. It raises, even if only momentarily, the possibility that the belief system is flawed or incomplete. During the moment the question is in the air, before the reassuring answer can be given, unanimity teeters on the edge. Ultimately, unanimity is impossible… A single dissenter destroys it (so the dissenter may have to be dealt with harshly for the good of the group). For this reason, real questions are generally discouraged. Phony questions, however, where the answer is known by all, are part of a pleasurable ritual. They are asked and answered in a wonderful, nonthreatening confirmation of “group think.” So, the conclusion I lean toward is that “cult” can apply to much, much more than even religion and that, for the most part, all religion could be embraced in the label “cult”. Real truth is found in Jesus Christ (John 14:6).
