Whenever a Christian encounters
a cultist, certain primary thoughts must be paramount in his mind:
(1) He must strive to direct the conversation to the problem of terminology and maneuver the cult adherent into a position where he must define his usage of terms and his authority, if any, for drastic, unbiblical redefinitions, which are certain to emerge;
(2) the Christian must then compare these "definitions" with the various contexts of the verses upon which the cultist draws support of his doctrinal interpretations;
(3) he must define the words "interpretation," "historic orthodoxy," and standard doctrinal phrases such as "the new birth," "the Atonement," "context," "exegesis," "eternal judgment," etc., so that no misunderstanding will exist when these things come under discussion, as they inevitably will;
(4) the Christian must attempt to lead the cultist to a review of the importance of properly defining terms for all important doctrines involved, particularly the doctrine of personal redemption from sin, which most cult systems define in a markedly unbiblical manner;
(5) it is the responsibility of the Christian to present a clear testimony of his own regenerative experience with Jesus Christ in terminology which has been carefully clarified regarding the necessity of such regeneration on the part of the cultist in the light of the certain reality of God's inevitable justice.
It may be necessary also, in the
course of discussing terminology and its dishonest recasting by
cult systems, to resort to occasional polemic utterances. In such
cases, the Christian should be certain that they are tempered
with patience and love, so that the cultist appreciates that such
tactics are motivated by one's personal concern for his eternal
welfare and not simply to "win the argument."
Let it never be forgotten that
cultists are experts at lifting texts out of their respective
contexts without proper concern for the laws of language or the
established principles of biblical interpretation. There are those
of whom Peter warns us, who "wrest [the Scriptures] unto
their own destruction" (2 Peter 3:16). This is an accurate
picture of the kingdom of the cults in the realm of terminology.
Looking back over the picture of
cult semantics, the following facts emerge.
1. The average cultist knows his own terminology very thoroughly. He also has a historic knowledge of Christian usage and is therefore prepared to discuss many areas of Christian theology intelligently.
2. The well-trained cultist will carefully avoid definition of terms concerning cardinal doctrines such as the Trinity, the deity of Christ, the Atonement, the bodily resurrection of our Lord, the process of salvation by grace and justification by faith. If pressed in these areas, he will redefine the terms to fit the semantic framework of orthodoxy unless he is forced to define his terms explicitly.
3. The informed Christian must seek for a point of departure, preferably the authority of the Scriptures, which can become a powerful and useful tool in the hands of the Christian, if properly exercised.
4. The concerned Christian worker must familiarize himself to some extent with the terminology of the major cult systems if he is to enjoy any measure of success in understanding the cultist's mind when bearing a witness for Christ.
We have stressed heavily the issue
of terminology and a proper definition of terms throughout this
entire chapter. It will not have been wasted effort if the reader
has come to realize its importance and will be guided accordingly
when approaching the language barrier, which is an extremely formidable
obstacle both to evangelizing cultists and to giving a systematic
and effective defense of the Christian faith against their perversions.
To conclude our observations in
this once seldom considered area of cultic analysis, let us consider
examples of how the cult systems of Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormonism,
and Christian Science condition their adherents to respond to
the "outside world" of unbelievers.
In the case of Jehovah's Witnesses,
the literature of the Watchtower is replete with examples of a
psychological conditioning that elicits a definite pattern of
religious reflexes in response to stimuli. As Pavlov's dog salivated
at the sound of a bell that represented food, so a true Jehovah's
Witness will spiritually and emotionally salivate whenever the
Watchtower rings the conditioning bell of Russellite theology.
The example that I believe best demonstrates this is taken in
context from Watchtower publications and speaks for itself.
The extensive quotes following
this paragraph give the historical foundation for the teaching
that the Jehovah's Witnesses continue to proclaim consistently
today. All religious bodies except theirs are corrupt and of the
devil. While the historical quotes are much more flowery and pretentious
sounding than statements in Watchtower literature today, they
express the same sentiment. For example, in a recent publication
(Mankind's Search for God, 1990), the Watchtower surveys church
history and first dismisses Roman Catholicism, then Eastern orthodoxy,
and even the Reformation, commenting, "Nearly all the Protestant
churches subscribe to the same creeds-the Nicene, Athanasian,
and Apostles' creeds-and these profess some of the very doctrines
that Catholicism has been teaching for centuries, such as the
Trinity, the immortal soul, and hellfire. Such unscriptural teachings
gave the people a distorted picture of God and His purpose. Rather
than aid them in their search for the true God, the numerous sects
and denominations that came into existence as a result of the
free spirit of the Protestant Reformation have only steered people
in many diverse directions" (p. 328). In fact, the book concludes,
any religious body other than the Watchtower Society and its followers
is the "great whore of Babylon" condemned by the apostle
John and to be destroyed by the coming judgment of God (pp. 370371).
Listen to the venom historically spouted by the Watchtower:
In Christendom, as surprising as it may seem to some, the false religious teachings create traditions, and commands of men are both directly and indirectly responsible for the physical and spiritual miseries of the poor, notwithstanding Christendom's showy display of charity.
Christendom's pretended interest
in the poor is sheer hypocrisy her priests have done violence
to my law and have profaned my holy things her princes in the
midst thereof are like wolves ravening the prey to shed blood
and to destroy souls that they may get dishonest gain and her
prophets have daubed them with untempered mortar, seeing false
visions in divining lies unto them, saying thus says Jehovah when
Jehovah hath not spoken the people of the land have used oppression
and exercised robbery, yea they have vexed the poor and needy
and have oppressed the sojourners wrongfully oh, wicked Christendom,
why have you forsaken God's clean worship? Why have you joined
forces and become part of Satan's wicked organization that oppresses
the people? Why have you failed to show concern for the poor as
Jehovah commands?
The little charitable help the
poor get from Christendom is like the crumbs that beggar Lazarus
picked up from the rich man's table while the dog licked his ulcerous
sores. Neither the crumbs nor the licking remedied the beggarly
condition. Only Jehovah can effect a rescue. How comforting then
for the dejected, down-trodden people of the earth to learn that
there is One higher than the highest of Christendom's moguls,
yes, Jehovah the Almighty hears the cries of the half-dead ones,
and in hearing He answers their prayers and sends His good Samaritans
to the rescue, even the witnesses who are despised by Christendom.
Haters of God and His people are
to be hated, but this does not mean that we will take any opportunity
of bringing physical hurt to them in the spirit of malice or spite,
for both malice and spite belong to the devil, whereas, pure hatred
does not.
We must hate in the truest sense,
which is to regard with extreme and active aversion, to consider
as loathsome, odious, filthy, to detest. Surely any haters of
God are not fit to live on His beautiful earth. The earth will
be rid of the wicked, and we shall not need to lift a finger to
cause physical harm to come to them, for God will attend to that,
but we must have a proper perspective of these enemies. His name
signifies recompense to the enemies.
Jehovah's enemies are recognized
by their intense dislike for His people and the work these are
doing. For they would break it down and have all of Jehovah's
Witnesses sentenced to jail or concentration camps if they could.
Not because they have anything against the Witnesses personally,
but on account of their work. They publish blasphemous lies and
reproach the holy name Jehovah. Do we not hate those who hate
God? We cannot love those hateful enemies, for they are fit only
for destruction. We utter the prayer of the Psalmist, "How
long, oh God, shall the adversary reproach, shall the enemy blaspheme
thy name forever? Why drawest thou back thy hand, even thy right
hand? Pluck it out of thy bosom and consume them" (Psalm
74:1011). We pray with intensity and cry out this prayer
for Jehovah to delay no longer and plead that His anger be made
manifest; oh Jehovah, God of hosts be not merciful to any wicked
transgressors. consume them in wrath, consume them so that they
shall be no more (Psalm 59:46, 1113). These are the
true sentiments, desires, and prayers of the righteous ones today.
Are they yours how we despise the workers of iniquity and those
who would tear down God's organization! "Oh, Jehovah. Let
them be put to shame and dismayed forever, yea, let them be confounded
and perish that they may know that Thou alone whose name is Jehovah
art the most high over all the earth" (Psalm 83:918).
The near neighbors of Judah have
been the opposers of the Israelites right from the time when refusal
was given by them to supply provisions to Israel as they journeyed
to the promised land. Moab hired Baalam to curse Israel they had
much contempt for Jehovah's people and prided themselves in their
own lofty city, her counterpart today being that rich, lofty city,
the mighty religious organization standing for the whole of Satan's
organization. The modern-day Moabites are the professing Christians
whose words and actions are as far removed from Christianity and
true worship of Jehovah as Moab was removed from true worship
in the covenant of Jehovah. Jehovah had warned Moab of His proposed
punishment for her iniquity and opposition.
The modern-day Moabites have opposed
Jehovah's Witnesses with a hatred not born of righteousness but
from the devil and against all righteousness. Their hatred for
God's true people increases as they see upon us the very plain
evidence of Jehovah's favor in the obvious disfavor they themselves
are in. They put forth every effort to prevent the people of goodwill
from entering the new world. They are richer than Jehovah's Witnesses
in material things and with it they have much pride and arrogance.
The modern-day Moabites will be
brought low, for Jehovah has completely finished with them. Hear
just a part of the punishment.
"For in this mountain will
the hand of Jehovah rest and Moab shall be trodden down in his
place, even as straw is trodden down in the water of the dung
hill. He shall spread forth his hands in the midst thereof as
he that swimmeth spreadeth forth his hands to win, but Jehovah
will lay low his pride together with the craft of his hands."
It is a sure thing that one cannot
have much pride left when one is being pressed down into a manure
pile, showing the utter contempt Jehovah has for modern-day Moab,
keeping her wallowing in the mire of shame. "For thou has
made of a city a heap, of a fortified city a ruin, a palace of
strangers to be no city; it shall never be built."
He hath put down them that dwell
on high; the lofty city, he layeth it low, he layeth it low even
to the ground, he bringeth it even to the dust. The foot shall
tread it down, even the feet of the poor and the steps of the
needy.
When this happens, what a tremendous
change will take place; the tables will be turned! Brought down
will be the lofty from dwelling on high as the great, high influential
ones of this world to the lowest possible place imaginable, so
low and degraded they can only be compared to being trampled under
foot by the poor, like straw in a manure heap. Christendom's lofty
looks, boastful words, bragging tongue are her superior attitude
toward the holy Word of God, her trust in idols, men and riches,
such as belong to this world will not provide her with security
or any safety from Jehovah's storm and blast. They have no defense
nor disgrace.
Christendom's defenses are of no
value, but Jehovah's Witnesses have a strong city and this is
something to sing about. There are millions who want a safe place
and are in need of security; let them know we have a strong city!
"Thou shalt call thy walls Salvation, and thy gates Praise"
(Isaiah 60:18). Only God's kingdom offers such protection and
salvation, for inside the city one is safe. Those desiring salvation
must make for God's organization, and find entrance into it and
remain there permanently. God has been grossly misrepresented
by the clergy. If this statement is true, then that alone is proof
conclusive that the clergy do not, in fact, represent God and
Christ but do represent God's enemy, the devil. If the Bible plainly
proves that the doctrines they teach are wrong and their course
of action is wrong, then the most that can be said in extenuation
of their wrongful teachings and their wrongful course of action
is that they have been misled by the evil and seductive influence
of Satan, the enemy of God. If the doctrines taught and the course
taken by the clergy differ from that which is declared in the
Word of God, then the clergy are in no wise safe guides for the
people and should no longer be followed by the people.
These doctrines originated with
the devil. They have long been taught by his representatives.
The clergy have been his instruments freely used to instill these
false doctrines into the minds of men. Whether the clergy have
willingly done so or not does not alter the fact. If they have
now learned that they are wrong they should be eager to get that
false thought out of the minds of the people. They do not take
such a course.
The clergy have at all times posed
as the representatives of God on earth. Satan overreached the
minds of these clergymen and injected into their minds doctrines,
which doctrines the clergy have taught the people concerning Jesus
and His sacrifice. These doctrines have brought great confusion.
The apostles taught the truth, but it was not long after their
death until the devil found some clergyman wise in his own conceit
who thought he could teach more than the inspired apostles.
The clergy are willingly or unwillingly
the instruments in the hands of the god of this world, Satan,
the devil, who has used them to blind the minds of the people,
to prevent the people from understanding God's great plan of salvation
and reconciliation.
According to the Watchtower, then,
the clergy of Christendom are obviously the villains and are the
object of "pure hatred." Just how pure hatred differs
from good old-fashioned hatred the Watchtower never gets around
to explaining, but it is clear that Christendom (all historic
denominations and churches) led by the allegedly corrupt clergy
has foisted the "satanically conceived" Trinity doctrine
and the doctrines of hell and eternal punishment upon the unsuspecting
masses of mankind. Clergymen are therefore always suspect and
their theology is to be regarded as untrustworthy and inspired
by Satan.
Is it any wonder that the usually
calm and detached Stanley High, writing in the Reader's Digest
of June 1940, could state, Jehovah's Witnesses hate everybody
and try to make it mutual. Jehovah's Witnesses make hate a religion.
The doctrines of hell and eternal
punishment that stimulate fear of judgment are "unreasonable"
and not in accord with the Watchtower concept of the character
of God; therefore, it and the doctrine of the Trinity are satanic
in origin and all must be rejected and hated as false.
What the Watchtower does in essence
is attach polemic significance to certain common theological terms
(Holy Trinity, deity of Christ, hell, eternal punishment, Christendom,
immortal soul, etc.). Thus, every time these terms are mentioned
by anyone, the reflex action on the part of the Jehovah's Witnesses
is instantaneous and hostile.
If we couple this with the Watchtower's
heavy emphasis upon the fulfillment of prophecy and a distorted
eschatology, the sense of urgency they radiate about Armageddon
(which they believe will solve all these problems by annihilating
the clergy and all organized religion) begins to make sense and
the reason for their actions becomes clear.
When dealing with the average Jehovah's
Witness, this entire pattern of preconditioning must be understood
so that the Christian can avoid, where possible, direct usage
of terms that will almost certainly evoke a theologically conditioned
reflex and sever the lines of communication. Another important
point where Jehovah's Witnesses are concerned is the fact that
an intricate part of their belief system is the conviction that
Christians will always attack Jehovah's Witnesses on a personal
as well as a religious level, hence the Witnesses readily assume
a martyr or persecution complex the moment any antagonism is manifested
toward Russell, Rutherford, their theology, the Watchtower, or
themselves. It is apparently a comfortable, somewhat heroic feeling
to believe that you are standing alone against the massed forces
of "the devil's organization" (a Watchtower synonym
for Christendom), and this illusion is made to seem all the more
real when unthinking Christians unfortunately accommodate the
Witnesses by appearing overly aggressive toward the Watchtower
theology or the Witnesses personally.
In the light of Jehovah's Witnesses'
insistence upon "pure hatred," one wonders how they
live with their own New World Translation of Matthew 5:4344,
which reads,
You heard that it was said you
must love your neighbor and hate your enemy. However, I say to
you: continue to love your enemies and pray for those persecuting
you; that you may prove yourselves sons of your Father who is
in the heavens.
The Watchtower, then, does not
hesitate to accuse the clergy and Christendom of provoking all
kinds of evil; in fact, they have not hesitated to suggest that
Christendom encouraged and did nothing to prevent the two great
world wars:
"Had Christendom chosen to
do so, she could easily have prevented World Wars I and II."
Some of the basic motivations of
the Watchtower are clearly seen in stark contrast with the teachings
of Holy Scripture and reveal that there is more than a spiritual
disorder involved. Indeed there exist deep psychological overtones,
which cannot be considered healthy in any sense of the term. Whereas
Jehovah's Witnesses are preoccupied with Armageddon, the theocracy,
the end of the age, and "pure hatred," the Mormons have
quite different psychological and theological emphases.
At the very core of Mormon theology
there is a tremendous emphasis upon authority as it is invested
in the priesthood, rituals, and symbols presided over by the hierarchy
of the Mormon Church. Mormons are taught from their earliest days
that the priesthood has the key to authority, and that one of
the marks which identifies the "restoration" of the
true church of Jesus Christ on earth is the fact that this priesthood
exists and perpetuates that authority.
A devout Mormon will wear symbolic
underclothing, which perpetually reminds him of his responsibility
and duties as a Mormon. When this is coupled with Mormonism's
tremendous emphasis upon baptism for the remission of sins, tithing,
and voluntary missionary service, it is seen to bind its followers
into a tight, homogeneous circle, escape from which, apart from
severe spiritual as well as economic penalties, is virtually impossible.
Every Mormon is indoctrinated with the concept that his is the
true Christian religion, or to use their terms, "the restoration
of Christianity to earth." The secret rites in the Mormon
temples, the rituals connected with baptism for the dead, and
the secret handshakes, signs, and symbols bind the average Mormon
and his family into what might be called in psychological terms
the "in group." Apart from acceptance by this group,
the average Mormon can find no peace or, for that matter, community
status or prestige.
Instances of discrimination against
Mormons who have experienced true Christian conversion are not
infrequent in Mormon-dominated areas where a man can lose his
business very easily by incurring the disfavor of the Mormon Church.
The social welfare program of the
Mormons is another excellent inducement to Mormons to remain faithful,
since if the "breadwinner" of the family is injured,
loses his job, or dies, the church undertakes the care and support
of his family. So effective is this work that during the Great
Depression of the 1930s, no Mormon family went hungry and no soup
kitchens or bread lines disfigured the domain of Mormondom.
The Mormons also conscientiously
invoke the biblical principle of helping each other. They lend
to each other, work for each other, and cooperate toward the common
goal of bringing "restored Christianity" to the masses
of mankind. These and other forces make Mormonism a family-centered
religion, which ties the faith of the church to the indissoluble
bonds of family unity and loyalty. This forges an incredibly complex
system of pressures and intertwining values over which is superimposed
the theological structure of the Mormon Church, which stands between
the average Mormon and the attainment of "exaltation"
or progression to godhood. (See chapter on Mormonism for a discussion
of this.)
With such great psychological,
economic, and religious forces concentrated upon him, it is a
courageous person indeed who shakes off these varied yokes and
steps into the freedom of a genuine experience with the Son of
God. But a growing number are doing just this as the Spirit of
God continues to call out the church, which is Christ's body.
Christian Science, unlike the two
other cults we have considered, is neither interested in bestowing
godhood on its adherents (Mormonism) nor pushing the eschatological
panic button of Armageddon (Jehovah's Witnesses).
Christian Science is an ingenious
mixture of first-century Gnostic theology, eighteenth-century
Hegelian philosophy, and nineteenth-century idealism woven into
a redefined framework of Christian theology with an emphasis upon
the healing of the body by the highly questionable practice of
denying its objective material reality.
In Christian Science there is a
complete separation between the objective world of physical reality
(matter) and the spiritual world of supernatural existence (mind).
Mrs. Eddy taught that "man as God's idea is already saved
with an everlasting salvation."
Hence, it is unnecessary for Christian
Scientists to think of themselves as sinners in need of a salvation
they believe is already theirs by virtue of the fact that "man
is already saved" because he is a reflection of the divine
mind. However, in Christian Science there are disturbing psychological
aberrations. Mrs. Eddy demanded of her followers that they abstain
from any critical contact with the nonspiritual elements of the
illusory material world. She forbade the reading of "obnoxious
literature," lest Christian Scientists become convinced that
the physical body and its diseases, suffering, and inevitable
death were real.
There is in Christian Science a
subconscious repression, a conscious putting out of one's mind
certain things which are disconcerting to the entire configuration
of psychological patterns of conditioning. Christian Scientists
are conditioned to believe in the nonexistence of the material
world even though their senses testify to its objective reality.
They continually affirm that matter has no true existence, and
thus, in a very real sense, entertain a type of religious schizophrenia.
One side of their personality testifies to the reality of the
material world and its inexorable decay, while the conditioning
process of Christian Science theology hammers relentlessly to
suppress this testimony and affirm that the only true reality
is spiritual or mental.
In Margaret Mitchell's classic
novel Gone With the Wind, Scarlet O'Hara, the heroine, when confronted
with the harsh realities of life in the wake of the Civil War,
repeatedly states, "I'll think about that tomorrow,"
as if not thinking about it today would eliminate the reality
of its claim at that moment.
When working with sensory data,
Christian Scientists totally disassociate their religious convictions,
for, if they did not, they would not continue to feed, clothe,
or house their bodies. But in still another sense, they attempt
to master the all-too-obvious frailties of the body by the application
of a religion which denies the material reality of that body.
A psychologist of the behaviorist school in one sense does the
same thing. In the office he may talk about "conditioning"
and may associate everything, including his home, with mechanistic
psychology; however, at home he still loves his wife and children,
and doesn't respond in that same manner. This is one of the chief
reasons why Christian Scientists sometimes appear to be almost
immune to the conviction of personal guilt as a result of sin.
Guilt implies the threat of judgment and a standard which is the
basis of that judgment; hence the reality of the concept of sin,
which is transgression of the law of God. Christian Scientists
desperately want only a "good" world, a pleasant place
full of happiness, life, love, and security. This they can have
only if they deny the empirical evidence of the opposites of those
concepts. In effect, they affirm the reality of "good"
at the expense of the antithesis of "good," as if by
denying the existence of evil one had annihilated evil!
There can be no doubt that there
is "selective perception" in the mind of the Christian
Scientist, which enables him to select those things which are
of a metaphysical nature, disassociate them from the sense perception
of the physical world, and still maintain his idealistic philosophy
and Gnostic theology. This he accomplishes by repressing or suppressing
any evidence to the contrary.
By following Mrs. Eddy's advice
and avoiding what she would call "obnoxious literature,"
i.e., evidence that controverts the idealism of Christian Science
philosophy, Christian Scientists avoid facing the damaging data
of physical reality. It is in effect an act of unconscious suppression,
utilized in order to escape the data. Concluding our thoughts
in this area we might say that in the kingdom of the cults we
are actually seeing a mosaic of abnormal conditioned behavior
patterns that express themselves in a theological framework, utilizing
Christian terms perverted by redefinition and represented as "new
insight," when in truth they are only old errors with new
faces. The defense mechanisms on a psychological level are apparent
when one considers the background and vocabulary of the cult systems.
There exists, beyond a shadow of a doubt, an abnormal behavior
syndrome operating in the mentality of most cultists, which causes
the cultist (in the case of Christian Scientists) to build his
theological system upon a preconditioned and artificially induced
criterion of evaluation, i.e., the divine mission and inspiration
of Mary Baker Eddy. In the case of other cultists, the names Joseph
Smith, "Pastor" Russell, Brigham Young, or any other
cult authority figure could be supplied and the conditioned reflex
would be virtually the same.
There are many more observations
that could be made, but space will not permit. It is my hope that
in observing and analyzing the facets of cult behavior patterns
already discussed, the reader may obtain a deeper insight and
appreciation of the psychological structure of cultism as it continues
to influence a growing segment of professing Christendom, which
is ill-prepared for the subtleties and dangers of such psychological
and theological deviations.
The problem of semantics has always
played an important part in human affairs, for by its use or abuse,
whichever the case may be, entire churches, thrones, and governments
have been erected, sustained, or overthrown. The late George Orwell's
stirring novel 1984, in which he points out that the redefinition
of common political terms can lead to slavery when it is allowed
to pass unchallenged by a lethargic populace, is a classic illustration
of the dangers of perverted semantics. It should be of no particular
surprise to any student of world history that trick terminology
is a powerful propaganda weapon. The communist dictatorship of
China, which even the Russian theorists rejected as incalculably
brutal and inept, dares to call itself the People's Republic of
China. As history testifies, the people have very little, if any,
say in the actual operation of communism, and if democracy is
to be understood as the rule of the people, the Chinese communists
have canonized the greatest misnomer of all time!
Both the Chinese communists and
the Russians have paid a terrible price for not defining terminology,
and for listening to the siren song of Marxism without carefully
studying and analyzing the atheistic collectivism through which
the music came.
We must beware of similar language
twisting in our own culture, as the current controversies over
"politically correct" speech illustrate. In our conscientious
concern not to offend or cause emotional turmoil, we talk about
"a woman's choice" instead of the willful killing of
an unborn child, "revenue enhancement" instead of new
taxes, and "fuel conservation" instead of speed limits.
The careful Christian will thoughtfully and conscientiously learn
the cult's unique vocabularies and properly represent that cult's
beliefs in order to carry on a meaningful and significant dialogue
with a cultist. Careful attention to actual cult beliefs not only
ensures that Christian doctrine is not confused with cultic, but
also shows the cultist that the Christian has enough concern about
what the cultist believes to make an honest endeavor to understand
it and represent it responsibly.
Applying this analogy to the field
of cults, it is at once evident that a distinct parallel exists
between the two systems. For cultism, like communism, plays a
type of hypnotic music upon a semantic harp of terminological
deception. And there are many who historically have followed these
strains down the broad road to spiritual eternal judgment. There
is a common denominator then, and it is inextricably connected
with language and the precise definition of terminology. It is
what we might call the key to understanding cultism.
Precisely how to utilize the key
that will help unlock the jargon of cult semantics is best illustrated
by the following facts, drawn from research and practical field
work with cultists of every variety.
The average non-Christian cult
owes its very existence to the fact that it has utilized the terminology
of Christianity, has borrowed liberally from the Bible (almost
always out of context), and sprinkled its format with evangelical
cliches and terms wherever possible or advantageous. Up to now
this has been a highly successful attempt to represent their respective
systems of thought as "Christian."
On encountering a cultist, then,
always remember that you are dealing with a person who is familiar
with Christian terminology, and who has carefully redefined it
to fit the system of thought he or she now embraces. A concrete
example of a redefinition of terms can be illustrated in the case
of almost any of the Gnostic cult systems that emphasize healing
and hold in common a pantheistic concept of God (Christian Science,
New Thought, Unity, Christ Unity Science, Metaphysics, Religious
Science, Divine Science).
In the course of numerous contacts
with this type of cultist, the author has had many opportunities
to see the semantic maze in full operation, and it is awesome
to behold. Such a cult adherent will begin talking at length about
God and Christ. He will speak especially about love, tolerance,
forgiveness, the Sermon on the Mount, and, as always, the out-of-context
perversion of James' "faith without works is dead."
It should be noted that hardly
ever in their discourses will such cultists discuss the essential
problem of evil, the existence of personal sin, or the necessity
of the substitutionary atonement of Christ as the sole means of
salvation from sin, through the agency of divine grace and the
exercise of faith. In fact, they conscientiously avoid such distasteful
subjects like the proverbial plague and discuss them only with
great reluctance. Of course there are exceptions to this rule,
but on the average it is safe to assume that reticence will characterize
any exploration of these touchy issues. Both Christian Science
and Unity talk of God as Trinity; but their real concept of God
is a pantheistic abstraction (Life, Truth, and Love constitute
the triune divine principles-Christian Science).
The historic doctrine of the Trinity
is seldom, if ever, considered without careful redefinition. If
the reader consults the Metaphysical Bible Dictionary, published
by the Unity School of Christianity, he will see the masterpiece
of redefinition for himself. For in this particular volume, Unity
has redefined exhaustively many of the cardinal terms of biblical
theology, much as Mary Baker Eddy did in her Glossary of Terms
in the book Science and Health With Key to the Scriptures. The
reader will be positively amazed to find what has happened to
biblical history, the person of Adam, the concept of human sin,
spiritual depravity, and eternal judgment. One thing, however,
will emerge very clearly from this study: Unity may use the terminology
of the Bible, but by no stretch of the imagination can the redefinition
be equated with the thing itself. Another confusing aspect of
non-Christian cultists' approach to semantics is the manner in
which they will surprise the Christian with voluminous quotations
from no less authority than the Bible, and give the appearance
of agreeing with nearly every statement the Christian makes in
attempting to evangelize the cultist. Such stock phrases as "We
believe that way too; we agree on this point" or the more
familiar, "[Mrs. Eddy, Mr. or Mrs. Fillmore, Mr. Evans, Dr.
Buchman, Joseph Smith, or Brigham Young] says exactly the same
thing; we are completely in agreement." All such tactics
based upon the juggling of terms usually have the effect of frustrating
the average Christian, for he is unable to put his finger on what
he knows is error, and is repeatedly tantalized by seeming agreement
which, as he knows, does not exist. He is therefore often forced
into silence because he is unaware of what the cultist is actually
doing. Often, even though he may be aware of this in a limited
sense, he hesitates to plunge into a discussion for fear of ridicule
because of an inadequate background or a lack of biblical information.
The solution to this perplexing
problem is far from simple. The Christian must realize that for
every biblical or doctrinal term he mentions, a redefinition light
flashes on in the mind of the cultist, and a lightning-fast redefinition
is accomplished. Realizing that the cultist will apparently agree
with the doctrine under discussion while firmly disagreeing in
reality with the historical and biblical concept, the Christian
is on his way to dealing effectively with cult terminology. This
amazing operation of terminological redefinition works very much
like a word association test in psychology.
It is simple for a cultist to spiritualize
and redefine the clear meaning of biblical texts and teachings
so as to be in apparent harmony with the historic Christian faith.
However, such a harmony is at best a surface agreement, based
upon double meanings of words that cannot stand the test of biblical
context, grammar, or sound exegesis. Language is, to be sure,
a complex subject; all are agreed on this. But one thing is beyond
dispute, and that is that in context words mean just what they
say. Either we admit this or we must be prepared to surrender
all the accomplishments of grammar and scholastic progress and
return to writing on cave walls with charcoal sticks in the tradition
of our alleged stone-age ancestors. To illustrate this point more
sharply, the experience of everyday life points out the absurdity
of terminological redefinitions in every way of life.
An attorney who is retained by
his client must know the laws that govern trial procedure, cross-examination,
and evidence. But above all else he must believe in the innocence
of his client. A client who tells his attorney that he is guilty
of a misdemeanor but not a felony is using the vocabulary of law.
But if his attorney finds out that his client has perverted that
vocabulary so that the terms are interchangeable, he will either
refuse to defend him or will clarify the terminology before the
court, because by definition a misdemeanor is a misdemeanor and
a felony is a felony. A man who says he stole only ninety dollars
(petty theft), but who really means that it was ninety dollars
more or less, and in reality knows that it was in excess of five
hundred dollars (grand theft), is playing a game that the law
will not tolerate. He will most certainly be punished for such
perversions of standard legal terms. In the realm of medicine,
a doctor who announces that he will perform an open-heart operation,
then proceeds in the presence of his colleagues to remove the
gall bladder, and then attempts to defend his action by the claim
that open-heart surgery actually means removal of the gall bladder
in his vocabulary, could not practice medicine for long! Open-heart
surgery is delicate repair of the heart muscle. Removal of the
gall bladder is, by definition, surgery of another type. In law
and in medicine, therefore, terms are what they are by definition.
On the business and professional level this also holds true. But
to the cultists words do not always mean what they have always
meant by definition in specific context. And just as the American
Bar Association will not tolerate confusion of terminology in
the trial of cases, and as the American Medical Association will
not tolerate redefinition of terminology in diagnostic and surgical
medicine, so also the church of Jesus Christ has every right not
to tolerate the gross perversions and redefinitions of historical,
biblical terminology simply to accommodate a culture and a society
that cannot tolerate an absolute standard or criterion of truth,
even if it be revealed by God in His Word and through the true
witness of His Spirit.
The major cult systems, then, change
the definition of historical terms without a quibble. They answer
the objections of Christian theologians with the meaningless phrase,
"You interpret it your way and I'll interpret it mine. Let's
be broad-minded. After all, one interpretation is as good as another."
A quick survey of how cults redefine
Christian terminology illustrates this important observation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Is it any wonder, then, that orthodox
Christians feel called upon to openly denounce such perversions
of clearly defined and historically accepted biblical terminology,
and claim that the cults have no rights-scholastically, biblically,
or linguistically-to redefine biblical terms as they do?
We ought never to forget for one
moment that things are what they are by definition. Any geometric
figure whose circumference is pi X 2r is by definition circular.
Any two figures whose congruency can be determined by the application
of angle-side-angle, side-angle-side, or side-side-side is, by
definition, a triangle. To expand this, we might point out that
any formula that expresses hydrogen to be in two parts and oxygen
to be in one is water, and hydrogen to be in two parts, sulfur
in one part, and oxygen in four parts is sulfuric acid. H2O can
never be H2SO4. Nor can the Atonement become atonement as the
theology of the Gnostic cults (Christian Science, Unity, New Thought)
explains it. It simply cannot be, if language means anything.
To spiritualize texts and doctrines
or attempt to explain them away on the basis of the nebulous word
"interpretation" is scholastic dishonesty, and it is
not uncommonly found in leading cult literature. Cultists are
destined to find out that the power of Christianity is not in
its terminology but in the relationship of the individual to the
historical Christ of revelation. The divine-human encounter must
take place. One must become a new creation in Christ Jesus, and
the emptying of Christian terminology of all its historical meanings
serves only the purpose of confusion and can never vitiate the
force of the gospel, which is the person of the Savior performing
the historical function of redeeming the sinner by grace.
The Christ of Scripture is an eternal,
divine personality who cannot be dismissed by a flip of the cultist's
redefinition switch, regardless of how deftly it is done. The
average Christian will do well to remember the basic conflict
of terminology that he is certain to encounter when dealing with
cultists of practically every variety.