Are Jehovah's Witnesses a Cult?

Chester Harris

The term "cult" has taken on a very negative definition to most people. To accuse someone of being a cultist will most likely insult them. Identifying worthy candidates for this insulting word is a rather subjective exercise -- a fact often overlooked by those who freely sling it around. The Watchtower religion has been accused countless times, and by countless people of being a cult. In many cases the accusers have been ignorant of Watchtower beliefs, which practically nullifies their accusation. If pressed, many such ones would have a hard time defining "cult" in such a way as to avoid including their own religion.

Not so the Jehovah's Witnesses! Jehovah's Witnesses are completely equipped to define this term, thanks to their thinkers in Brooklyn. Anyone can prove this by asking the next Jehovah's Witness who comes calling to provide a definition for this word. If the Jehovah's Witness provides an ad-lib definition, as most people would, he can probably be shown that his definition is seriously flawed by prejudice, or that he has just defined his own religion, or both. If on the other hand, he is a seasoned Jehovah's Witness, he might remember that "Mother" has provided all that he needs for use in the field service and that he should rely on her definitions. He will go to the 'most holy' of all Watchtower publications for help, the Watchtower Publications Index.

His hand will most likely first reach for the index covering the years 1930-1985, since it is the largest, and contains the most information. Under "Cult", he finds only three citations; but the last one appears promising. The last citation reads: "Witnesses not a cult", and refers him to his most valuable of tools for door-to-door preaching: the Reasoning book. Surely, this will provide the safe answer for the inquisitive householder. Or will it?

Unorthodox

Reasoning From the Scriptures, page 202, gives the Watchtower Society's definition of "sect" and "cult". According to that manual, "a cult is a religion that is said to be unorthodox or that emphasizes devotion according to prescribed ritual." (italics added) Does that fit the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society (WTBTS)? I call to the Witnesses: The Watchtower of September 15, 1983. Page 5 says, "All these churches [Roman Catholic, Episcopalians, Lutheran, Calvinist, Baptist, Methodist and others], consider themselves to be 'established,' 'orthodox,' 'respectable' religions."

George D. Gangas said, in The Watchtower of October 15, 1966, p. 636, that "the Orthodox Church taught it" [the "hellfire" doctrine]. Do all these churches agree doctrinally with the WTBTS? Hardly! So, isn't it true that the Watchtower religion is "said to be unorthodox" by all these churches? And doesn't George Gangas' reference to the Orthodox Church's belief in the hellfire doctrine exclude the Watchtower religion from the ranks of orthodoxy? Will someone argue otherwise?

The Reasoning book states that, "The standard for what is orthodox, however, should be God's Word". That is true -- no argument there; but that has no bearing upon the question: "Is the Watchtower said to be unorthodox?" The reader must determine for himself if it is spoken of as unorthodox.

Ritual

In addition, per their definition of "cult", the Jehovah's Witnesses "emphasize devotion according to [the] prescribed ritual" of Saturday morning door-banging. To answer those who would protest the word "ritual" being applied to Jehovah's Witnesses' field service, the following definition is taken from Webster's New Universal Unabridged Dictionary: "rit'ual, n. 1. a set form or system of rites, as in public worship." Well, does field service qualify as a "rite"? You decide. Webster's says: "rite, n. 1. a ceremonial or formal, solemn act, observance, or procedure in accordance with prescribed rule or custom, as in religious use." Again, the reader may determine whether field service is a "procedure in accordance with prescribed rule or custom."

Living Human Leader

The second criterion in the Reasoning book which cults must meet is that "Many cults follow a living human leader [...]". Does the Watchtower religion have a "living human leader?" The fact that the WTBTS has a president over its corporation does not of itself prove that it has a "leader." Actually, the lead is taken by a corporate group -- a "governing body." This body is the figurehead of the Watchtower's "faithful and discreet slave."

About that "slave", the Watchtower publication, Insight on the Scriptures, volume 1, says on page 806:

«This [hypothetical impossibility] however, does not require that the 'slave' prefigure only one particular person who would be so privileged [as to be placed over all the master's belongings]. The scriptures contain examples of the use of a singular noun to refer to a collective group, as when Jehovah addressed the collective group of the Israelite nation and told them: "You are my witnesses [plural],... even my servant [singular] whom I have chosen."»

This argues very strongly that the so-called "faithful and discreet slave" is a singular entity. It ostensibly functions as a singular unit, each member in harmony with all its other members.

Having established its functional singularity, the question arises: "Does this slave function as leader over Jehovah's Witnesses?" Volumes have been written and distributed amongst Jehovah's Witnesses in efforts to inculcate in them the proper view of their slave. A few of these many statements will suffice in demonstrating that this "slave" does serve as leader over the worldwide congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses.

The Watchtower of June 1, 1982, p. 23, tells us:

Since Christ Jesus is now the enthroned Leader and Commander of all fighters for truth and righteousness, we can unitedly 'learn from watching him' as the 300 learned from watching Gideon. (Judges 7:17) But how can we today 'watch' Christ, since he is invisible? We 'watch' him in the sense that we discern his signals as given through his visible "slave" appointee over all the earthly interests of his kingdom. (Matthew 24:45-47) Through this spirit-appointed channel [the governing body] his direction and strategy are communicated to all who are his "soldiers."

It is an accepted conclusion to Christians that Christ Jesus is their leader, but what is the purpose of the above quoted statement if it is not to cause Jehovah's Witnesses to look to their "slave class" as leader? In another place (The Watchtower of December 1, 1981, pp. 27, 28), it was stated: "This 'faithful and discreet slave,' which is associated with Jehovah's Witnesses, has indeed been used by Jehovah God to guide, strengthen and direct his people." Ask yourself: What is the purpose of a guide? Is a guide not to lead? What are Jehovah's Witnesses expected to do but follow this guide? Of course, nowhere has The Watchtower brazenly stated: "We are your leader, follow us", but isn't it the obvious intent of the above quoted assertions to create the impression in the minds of loyal Jehovah's Witnesses that their "slave class" is also their leader?

Ask any Jehovah's Witness to tell you how Peter replied to Jesus when Jesus, at John 6:67, asked him: "You do not want to go also, do you?" I asked that same question of Jehovah's Witnesses many times when in their club, and I got the same answer each time. Peter is always misquoted as having said: "Lord, where shall we go away to?" Why do you suppose that it seems to be a universal misunderstanding amongst Jehovah's Witnesses that Peter asked, "where", rather than, "whom"? Could it be, perhaps, that The Watchtower has purposely caused this misunderstanding? I think so. An incriminating example of misrepresentation is found in the issue of February 15, 1981, p. 19. There, it says:

... the record that the 'faithful and discreet slave' organization has made for the past more than 100 years forces us to the conclusion that Peter expressed when Jesus asked if his apostles also wanted to leave him, namely, 'whom shall we go away to?' (John 6:66-69) No question about it. We all need to understand the Bible, and we cannot find the Scriptural guidance we need outside the 'faithful and discreet slave' organization.

Peter's question, juxtaposed with The Watchtower's comment, perpetuates the Jehovah's Witnesses' mistaken notion that it is where a Christian goes, rather then to whom a Christian goes, that leads to spiritual satisfaction and salvation.

I believe that the quotations above, viewed together, support the charge that the WTBTS incorporates a "living human leader." Some staunch supporters of the WTBTS might struggle to deny that conclusion. These words, borrowed from the last quoted article, on page 18, apply to them: "If he is determined not to believe, then no amount of evidence will convince him; for if a person looks for them he can always find excuses, plausible reasons for not accepting the accountability that belief will bring upon him."

Isolation From Society

Returning to the Reasoning book's definition of "cult", we find the following determinant: "often their adherents live in groups apart from the rest of society." "Often" is the key word here. "Often" is not "always", so little effort will be spent to demonstrate that Jehovah's Witnesses isolate themselves from society. They don't geographically isolate themselves (except in the various Bethels around the world); but they do isolate themselves socially and culturally.

Freedom of Thought, Conscience, and Religion

The Watchtower Society is beginning to feel the pinch. The February 15, 1994, issue of The Watchtower magazine responded to its detractors with a two part article attempting to counter the negative reaction it is deservedly experiencing. Some of its statements are revolting in their degree of hypocrisy. Take, for instance, its quotation on page 6 of the European Court of Human Rights. They say:"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." That they should! The Watchtower Society itself is the biggest obstacle preventing them from doing it though!

I'll offer one specific example of their hypocrisy. I have in my files a letter, dated March 14, 1989, from the WTBTS. It is addressed to me. It says, in part: "You have admitted to the elders that if you were not in agreement with the Society on some things, you would have to follow your own conscience." The Society used that "admission" (it wasn't an admission; it was a boast!) as evidence that I was no longer fit to be used as an "elder" in their religion. Does it sound as though they're encouraging me to "enjoy [my own] freedom of thought, conscience and religion...."? How does it compare with the statement on page 205, in the 1989 Yearbook of Jehovah's Witnesses: "We oblige no one to go against his conscience. We want people to reason on the Scriptures, as this is the way we come to correct conclusions"? (italics added) A copy of the entire letter, quoted above, will be sent to anyone requesting it for verification.

All the quotations printed above were provided by the Watchtower Society, not by any of its opposers. Jesus foretold:

"I tell you that every unprofitable saying that men speak, they will render an account concerning it on Judgment Day; for by your words you will be declared righteous, and by your words you will be condemned." (Matthew 12:36, 37)