The Cult

It's interesting that over the years we have been branded a cult by those who have never been in our religion or read what's on the net. Most on the net could not live up to the standards and thus spread lies about our religion. When I standards these are the majority of the standards which are found in the bible itself. It was mentioned the other day to me that I lied about preaching to a girl which isn't the case. I do not recall ever preaching to this girl. I did however say what my son will do and I did quote scripture based on what she was telling me, I would say things like, this reminds me of this or reminds me of that and then I would quote a scripture based on what was said to me. So if telling this girl about what my son is going to do then yes I am guilty.

It was also said to me that we were a cult. Since I've never been in a cult it's kinda hard for me to explain what a cult is but based on what I've read and research we have done because we were called a cult. Let me also mention to those that know me or have known me for several years - does it seem as if I am in a cult? If you answered yes then I would ask you just how if you answered no then we can move forward.

Cult typically refers to a cohesive social group devoted to beliefs or practices that the surrounding population considers to be outside the mainstream, with a notably positive or negative popular perception. The spelling c-u-l-t also has at least eight homonym meanings that have confused the public since 1920 onward. A group's cult status begins as rumors spread of its novel belief system, its great devotions, its idiosyncratic practices, its perceived harmful or beneficial effects on members or its perceived opposition to the interests of mainstream cultures and governments. Persistent rumors may follow relatively small and recently founded religious or non-religious groups when they are perceived to engage in excessive member control or exploitation.

New religions are often considered "cults" before they are considered religions by social scientists, by Christian Evangelical/Fundamentalist theologians, and also by the secular public – yet these three groups do not usually have the same understanding of the term "cult". People understand the term "cult" through the most popular usage in their cultures and subcultures, which can result in homonymic conflict, a communicative conflict with people who hold a different definition of the same term. This often results in confusion, misunderstanding, and resentment between members of "cult" groups and non-members.During the 20th century, groups referred to as cults by governments and media became globally controversial. The televised rise and fall of less than 20 destructive cults known for mass suicide and murder tarred hundreds of NRM (New Religious Movement)groups having less serious government and civil legal entanglements, against a background of thousands of unremarkable NRM groups known only to their neighbors.

"Destructive cult" is a term used to refer to religions and other groups which have caused harm to their own members or to others. Some researchers define "harm" in this case with a narrow focus, specifically groups which have deliberately physically injured or killed other individuals, while others define the term more broadly and include emotional abuse among the types of harm inflicted. Use of the term has been criticized by some researchers, who assert that it is used to discredit the groups it is applied to, and unfairly compare them with historically more harmful groups and movements. Authors have also compared destructive cults with terrorism, and have used the term to characterize Osama bin Laden as a destructive cult leader.

Take for example what happened what happened on FEBRUARY 28, 1993—more than a hundred law-enforcement agents raided a compound of buildings housing dozens of men, women, and children. The object was to search for illegal weapons and to arrest a suspected criminal. The agents, however, were caught by surprise when a hail of bullets came flying toward them from inside the buildings. They returned the fire.

This confrontation left ten dead and several wounded. During the following 50 days, hundreds of government agents laid siege to the compound with enough guns to wage a small war. The standoff ended in a showdown that left 86 dead, including at least 17 children.

But who was the enemy? An army of drug-dealing mobsters? A guerrilla faction? No. As you may know, the “enemy” was a group of religious devotees, members of a cult. Their tragedy made an inconspicuous community on the plains of central Texas, U.S.A., the focus of international attention. The news media flooded the airwaves and the printed page with a barrage of reports, analyses, and comments on the dangers of fanatical cults.

The public was reminded of previous instances in which cult members were led to death by their leaders: the 1969 Manson murders in California; the 1978 mass suicide of cult members in Jonestown, Guyana; the 1987 murder-suicide pact engineered by cult leader Park Soon-ja of Korea, which resulted in the death of 32 members. Significantly, most of these people claimed to be Christians and professed belief in the Bible.

Understandably, many who respect the Bible as the Word of God are appalled at the brazen misuse of the Scriptures by these cults. As a result, over the years hundreds of organizations have been established for the purpose of monitoring cults and exposing their dangerous practices. Experts on cult behavior predict that the coming of a new millennium in a few years may trigger the proliferation of cults. One news magazine noted that according to anticult groups, there are thousands of cults “out there poised to snatch your body, control your mind, corrupt your soul. . . . Few are armed but most are considered dangerous. They’ll seduce you and fleece you, marry and bury you.”

The term “cult” is used loosely by many who may not be fully aware of its connotations. To prevent confusion, some theologians actually avoid using the term. The World Book Encyclopedia explains that “traditionally, the term cult referred to any form of worship or ritual observance.” By that criterion, all religious organizations could be classified as cults. However, in general usage today, the word “cult” has a different meaning. The same encyclopedia notes that “since the mid-1900’s, publicity about cults has altered the meaning of the term. Today, the term is applied to groups that follow a living leader who promotes new and unorthodox doctrines and practices.”

Endorsing the popular usage of the term, Newsweek magazine explains that cults “are normally small, fringe groups whose members derive their identity and purpose from a single, charismatic individual.” Similarly, Asiaweek magazine notes that “the term [cult] itself is vague, but it usually denotes a new religious creed built around a charismatic leader, who often proclaims himself to be the personification of God.”

The language used in a joint resolution of the 100th Congress of the State of Maryland, U.S.A., also conveys the derogatory connotation of the term cult. The resolution states that “a cult is a group or movement exhibiting excessive devotion to a person or idea and employing unethically manipulative techniques of persuasion and control to advance the goals of its leaders.”Clearly, cults are generally understood to be religious groups with radical views and practices that clash with what is accepted today as normal social behavior. Usually they conduct their religious activities in secrecy. Many of these cultic groups actually isolate themselves in communes. Their devotion to a self-proclaimed human leader is likely to be unconditional and exclusive. Often these leaders boast of having been divinely chosen or even of being themselves divine in nature.

Occasionally, anticult organizations and the media have referred to Jehovah’s Witnesses as a cult. A number of recent newspaper articles lump the Witnesses with religious groups known for their questionable practices. But would it be accurate to refer to Jehovah’s Witnesses as a small fringe religious group? Cult members often isolate themselves from friends, family, and even society in general. Is that the case with Jehovah’s Witnesses? Are the Witnesses using deceptive and unethical techniques to recruit members? Cult leaders are known to use manipulative methods to control the minds of their followers. Is there any evidence that Jehovah’s Witnesses do this? Is their worship cloaked in secrecy? Are they following and venerating a human leader? Pointedly, are Jehovah’s Witnesses a cult?

JESUS CHRIST was accused of being a drunkard, a glutton, a Sabbath breaker, a false witness, a blasphemer of God, and a messenger of Satan. He was also accused of being subversive. After Jesus’ death and resurrection, his disciples were likewise the target of serious accusations. One group of first-century Christians were dragged to the city rulers by people crying out: ‘These men have overturned the inhabited earth.On another occasion the apostle Paul and his companion Silas were taken to the authorities and charged with greatly disturbing the city of Philippi.

Paul was later accused of being a “pestilent fellow and stirring up seditions among all the Jews throughout the inhabited earth” and of trying “to profane the temple.” The principal men of the Jews in Rome accurately described the situation of Jesus’ followers when they acknowledged: “For truly as regards this sect it is known to us that everywhere it is spoken against.”(Acts 28:22)

Evidently, this new group established by Jesus Christ was considered by some to be a religious group with radical views and practices that clashed with what was accepted in those days as normal social behavior. Undoubtedly, many today would have considered the Christians a destructive cult. The accusers were often prominent and respected members of the community, and this seems to have added weight to the allegations. Many believed the accusations against Jesus and his disciples. Yet, as you probably know, every one of these charges was false! The fact that people said these things did not make them true. What about today? Would it be accurate to refer to Jehovah’s Witnesses as a religious group with radical views and practices that clash with what is accepted as normal social behavior? Again are Jehovah’s Witnesses a cult? Let me continue with research and this is what the evidence shows. Those that know me know I have no reason to lie to you.

A government official of the city of St. Petersburg, Russia, explained: “Jehovah’s Witnesses were presented to us as some kind of underground sect sitting in the darkness and slaughtering children and killing themselves.” However, the people of Russia have recently become better acquainted with the true nature of the Witnesses. After working with Jehovah’s Witnesses in connection with an international convention, the same official observed: “Now I see normal, smiling people, even better than many people I know. They are peaceful and calm, and they love one another very much.” He added: “I really do not understand why people tell such lies about them.”

Jehovah’s Witnesses do not hold ritualistic meetings, nor is their worship cloaked in secrecy. Non-Witness author Julia Mitchell Corbett notes: “When they meet, usually more than once a week, in Kingdom Halls (their meeting sites are not called churches), most of their time is spent in Bible study and discussion.” Their meeting places are clearly marked with a sign. The meetings are open, and the general public is invited to attend. Unannounced guests are more than welcome.

The “Witnesses have earned the reputation of being honest, courteous, and industrious,” adds Corbett in her book Religion in America. Many who are not Witnesses readily acknowledge that there is nothing freakish or bizarre about Jehovah’s Witnesses. Their conduct does not clash with what is accepted as normal social behavior. The New Encyclopædia Britannica accurately states that the Witnesses “insist upon a high moral code in personal conduct.”

The director of news and special projects for a television station in the United States wrote to Jehovah’s Witnesses in response to a biased report about the Witnesses on the TV news show 60 Minutes. He said: “If more people lived the way your faith does, this nation wouldn’t be in the shape it is in. I am one newsman who knows that your organization is founded on love and a strong faith in the Creator. I want you to know that not all News people are as biased.”

Is it fair to say that Jehovah’s Witnesses are a small fringe religious group? In a sense, Jehovah’s Witnesses are few in number compared to some religions. However, recall what Jesus said: “Narrow is the gate and cramped the road leading off into life, and few are the ones finding it.”—Matthew 7:13, 14.

At any rate, the Witnesses are far from being a small fringe cult. In the spring of 1993, more than 11 million people attended the Witnesses’ Memorial of Christ’s death. But more important than their number are their moral character and exemplary behavior, which have brought them worldwide commendation. Undoubtedly this has been a factor in countries that have given them official recognition as a known, bona fide religion.

Outstanding was the ruling by the European Court of Human Rights. It declared that the Witnesses should enjoy freedom of thought, conscience, and religion and that they have the right to speak about their faith and teach it to others. This would hardly be the case if Jehovah’s Witnesses were known to use deceptive and unethical techniques to recruit members or if they used manipulative methods to control the minds of their followers.

Multitudes around the world are well acquainted with Jehovah’s Witnesses. Of the millions of non-Witnesses who are studying the Bible with the Witnesses or who have studied with them at one time or another, we ask, Were there any attempts to brainwash you? Did the Witnesses employ mind-control techniques on you? “No” would doubtless be your frank response. Obviously, if these methods had been used, there would be an overwhelming number of victims in contradiction to any argument in favor of Jehovah’s Witnesses.

Cult members often isolate themselves from family, friends, and even society in general. Is that the case with Jehovah’s Witnesses? “I do not belong to Jehovah’s Witnesses,” wrote a newsman in the Czech Republic. Yet he added: “It is obvious that they [Jehovah’s Witnesses] have tremendous moral strength. . . . They recognize governmental authorities but believe that only God’s Kingdom is capable of solving all human problems. But watch it—they are not fanatics. They are people who are absorbed in humanity.”

And they do not live in communes, isolating themselves from relatives and others. Jehovah’s Witnesses recognize that it is their Scriptural responsibility to love and care for their families. They live and work with people of all races and religions. When disasters strike, they are quick to respond with relief supplies and other humanitarian assistance.More important, they are engaged in an educational program that has no comparison. How many religions have an organized system to pay personal visits to every individual in their community? Jehovah’s Witnesses do this in more than 200+ lands and in more than 200+ languages! Clearly, Jehovah’s Witnesses are “absorbed in humanity.”

Admittedly, the teachings of Jehovah’s Witnesses are different from those provided by the churches. Jehovah’s Witnesses believe that Jehovah is the almighty God and that Jesus is his Son, not part of a triune deity. Their faith is anchored in the belief that God’s Kingdom alone can bring relief to suffering humanity. They warn people of the imminent destruction of this corrupt system of things. They preach about God’s promise of an earthly paradise for obedient mankind. They do not venerate the cross. They do not celebrate Christmas. They believe that the soul is mortal and that there is no hellfire. They will not eat blood, nor will they accept blood transfusions. They abstain from involvement in politics and participation in warfare. Have you ever asked yourself why the teachings of Jehovah’s Witnesses are so different?

A Massachusetts newspaper, the Daily Hampshire Gazette, explains that Jehovah’s Witnesses’ “strict interpretation of the Bible forbids many activities others take for granted . . . , all in an effort to follow the example of first-century Christians and the word of the Bible.” The Encyclopedia of Religion agrees that “all that they believe is based on the Bible. They ‘proof text’ (that is, supply a biblical citation to support) almost every statement of faith, taking for granted the authority of the Bible, which entirely supplants tradition.” The book Religion in America states: “The group has never wavered from its focus on Bible study, and its teachings are supported by an elaborate system of references to scripture.”

It is precisely because of this close adherence to Bible teachings that the veneration and idolization of human leaders so characteristic of cults today is not to be found among Jehovah’s Witnesses. They reject the concept of a clergy-laity distinction. The Encyclopedia of Religion aptly states about Jehovah’s Witnesses: “A clergy class and distinctive titles are prohibited.”

They follow Jesus Christ as their Leader and as Head of the Christian congregation. It was Jesus who said: “Do not you be called Rabbi, for one is your teacher, whereas all you are brothers. Moreover, do not call anyone your father on earth, for one is your Father, the heavenly One. Neither be called ‘leaders,’ for your Leader is one, the Christ.”—Matthew 23:8-12.

It is clear that Jehovah’s Witnesses are as far from being a cult as Jesus was from being a glutton and a drunkard. Admittedly, not everyone who was influenced by the false reports about Jesus and his disciples fell into the trap of slandering him. Some may simply have been misinformed. If you have questions about Jehovah’s Witnesses and their beliefs, why not get to know them better? The doors to their Kingdom Halls are wide open to all who seek truth. Don't knock it till you try it personally. I'll give you an illustration.

Let's say you wanted to buy a car. You have about 20,000 in hand and you are set to go car shopping. Yes you look on the net and find information about the car but wouldn't most people go to the dealership and test drive the car to see if they will purchase the car? In like manner it's easy to look on the net and read bad reviews or hear stories about witnesses but until you test drive the car you have no clue. So again the question is Are Jehovah’s Witnesses a sect or a cult?

Some define sect to mean a group that has broken away from an established religion. Others apply the term to a group that follows a particular human leader or teacher. The term is usually used in a derogatory way. Jehovah’s Witnesses are not an offshoot of some church but include persons from all walks of life and from many religious backgrounds. They do not look to any human, but rather to Jesus Christ, as their leader.

A cult is a religion that is said to be unorthodox or that emphasizes devotion according to prescribed ritual. Many cults follow a living human leader, and often their adherents live in groups apart from the rest of society. The standard for what is orthodox, however, should be God’s Word, and Jehovah’s Witnesses strictly adhere to the Bible. Their worship is a way of life, not a ritual devotion. They neither follow a human nor isolate themselves from the rest of society. They live and work in the midst of other people. The fact that people who read this know me on a personal level and have known me for years should already know what I'm pointing out here today. Witnesses are not a cult no more than Jesus and his followers were a cult. I hope this opened your eyes and allowed you to see clearly the differences between cults and Jehovah's Witnesses. Thank you.