In the cult that I was a part of for many years, one of the attractions was that the cult leader was insistent that he would teach us how to read and interpret the Bible for ourselves and we would not be subject to any man's interpretation. He preached that the Bible in fact interpreted itself, and if you just kept in mind several "keys to interpretation", everything in the Bible was crystal clear and unambiguous. This, as I later realized, was bullshit. Even if you accept the idea that there is a way to glean the Bible's meaning without any ambiguity or contradictions, the shear number of groups, all insisting on different interpretations should put that idea to bed.
When I first became involved in this cult there were few churches who claimed to encourage their members to study the Bible, rather than merely listen to what the pastor had to say about it on Sunday. Anyone who was saying that study of the Bible would result in understanding the Bible was rare, if not unique. This is no longer the case, evangelical and fundamentalist churches and their members have multiplied across the land, and they all believe that their interpretation is the right one, despite multitudes of differing interpretations, all insisting that they're right. It's not so different in the political realm. Everyone is a Constitutional scholar these days, and anyone who thinks that the Constitution is clear and not open to interpretation is engaged in wishful thinking. But I digress.
In any cult that professes to show the way by allowing self-study, you'll sooner or later run up against a disagreement with the cult leader. And the cult leader always wins the argument. Have you been studying as long as the leader? No? Then how can you even consider disagreeing with his conclusions? Do you have the spiritual connections that the leader has? No? Maybe come back when you do. Or perhaps the rebukes are a little softer. It's suggested that you should hold your objection "in abeyance", put it "on hold" until you are spiritually mature enough to understand. It doesn't take long, if you stick around, for you to simply stop questioning and accept whatever is presented to you. Interpretations and explanations by the leader that are clearly unsupported start to sound logical. You start spouting them yourself, even though you really can't explain them. You internalize what you've been told and convince yourself that it all makes sense. You eventually reach the point where you can barely tolerate differing opinions, because in your mind, what you believe is so self-evidently true, and anyone who thinks otherwise is a fool.
One example of the cult I was in parroting something the leader said despite the evidence of their eyes involves a book called Witness of the Stars. It was written in the 1800's by an ultra-dispensationalist Anglican minister — its premise was that God had arranged the constellations in such a way that they told the story that is written in the Bible. The cult's founder latched on to this theory. One of the things he used to say regarding it was "there's no stars in the north" (never mind why he said that — it's a long story). But if you look at the northern sky there is no shortage of stars! Years later his successor claimed that he had figured out what he meant: there were no stars in the "gap" between the constellations of Ursa major and Ursa Minor. But guess what? There are stars visible to the naked eye there too! I once asked a leader to explain that to me. The "answer" was that there were no telescopes in Biblical times, so they couldn't see those stars. What? Even something that could clearly be seen to be false had to be "explained" so that it wouldn't look like the Man of God had made a mistake.
Things that can be checked physically, however, are rarely where a cult leader invests his authority. It's usually the interpretation where he claims his connection to truth. As I have pointed out in other parts of this series, the road to establishing an aspiring prophet's bona fides begins with undermining conventional authority. For a religious cult examples of how mainstream Christianity deviates from what's actually written in the Bible aren't difficult to find. Oftentimes they're insignificant, not having any real effect on core doctrine, but they serve the purpose of pointing out the perception of erroneous teaching. Contradictions, real or perceived, within the Bible are also abundant. The cult leader, now that he has succeeded in undermining the credibility of the consensus authorities, offers his own explanations for the contradictions, how they're not really contradictions, at the same time chastising the mainstream denominations for ignoring these apparent contradictions. By now it's clearly established that the cult leader knows what he's talking about and can graduate to inventing his own unique doctrines. The cult members had been groomed to be so enamored with the cult leader's wisdom and godliness, that they will accept virtually anything he says as truth.
In order for a cult to maintain control whatever the leader says has to be treated as Truth. The core beliefs have to be treated as beyond question and dissenting views as ridiculous or even dangerous.
Start from the beginning: Part I
No comments:
Post a Comment