VERITAS
"They Became Fools..."
By Craig Branch
July-August-Sept 2002
One
of the important principles on which America was founded
was that of religious freedom. The predominate population
came from Europe whose ethics and morals were shaped primarily
by the Judeo-Christian tradition. The religious freedom
they sought was freedom from human governmental control
of religion. It was a freedom of religion, not a freedom
from religion. Our culture of laws, customs, and traditions
were shaped by Christianity and immigrants by-and-large
adapted to that culture. This process of assimilation gave
rise to the term “melting pot.”
But today
our country and the West in general have become a mosaic
of
different cultures and the religions they bring. With
all of our freedoms, America is also
a marketplace of competing ideas and those ideas have consequences. The more
apt metaphor for America today is not “melting pot,” but “tossed
salad.”
Man’s
sinful response to this growing multiculturalism is a philosophical
perspective called pluralism. Pluralism embraces the idea
that
all religious
paths are equally valid, or that it doesn’t really matter what religious
or spiritual path one takes—one cannot claim to be absolute. This view
is born in and reinforces a culture that has become predominately relativistic.
Barna’s
research in the early 90's showed 40% of Americans strongly
concurred that Christians, Jews, Buddhists and Muslims all pray to the
same god and only
17% strongly disagreed with this view. But by 2002, 64% of American adults
believe that truth is always relative to a person's own beliefs and to
their situation.
Among teenagers, this figure is 83%. Barna’s conclusion was that
this mentality "esteems
pluralism, relativism, tolerance, and diversity without critical reflection
of the implications of particular views and actions."1 In fact, relativism
absolutizes pluralism and this is practically synonymous with universalism.
Multiculturalism,
pluralism, tolerance and political correctness used to be descriptive
of movements in our culture. Now, they are prescriptive.
Christians are increasingly
marginalized for freely expressing our basic belief in the exclusivity
of Christ
and the one true God, and for our practice of evangelism. It sometimes
seems that the press and academia are “Talibanizing” Christianity.
For example, the media vilified the Southern Baptists for printing and
distributing
materials on evangelizing Jews, Muslims, Hindus and Buddhists. Recently
on the new Phil Donahue Show, a Jewish spokesman called Baptists set
on evangelizing
Jews, “spiritual Neanderthals.” A representative of the Anti-defamation
League, speaking on Fox’s O’Reilly Report, repeated the mantra
that Baptist policies on Jewish evangelism lead to hate crimes and precipitates
a
holocaust-like atmosphere.
This issue
of Areopagus Journal seeks to awaken, educate, and to help
equip the church to Biblically respond to the rapid
growth and proliferation
of cults and
other religions here in America and beyond. Cults, new religious movements,
and the occult are growing and being spawned at increasing rates. The
populations
of the older world religions are also seeing huge increases. There
is an old expression that should arrest our attention and
bring the focus
of
responsibility back to us: “Cults are the unpaid bills of the
Church.” Other
religions and cults especially have become the largest, yet least evangelized
mission fields.
For example, Islam, which is the second largest religion in the world
(1.2 billion), now has from 4-6 million adherents in the U.S. Yet,
Islam receives the attention
of only 6% of the entire U.S. Christian missionary force. Also, Hinduism
and Buddhism have grown over 200% in America in the past ten years,
numbering into
the millions.
The largest
of pseudo-Christian cults, Mormonism (Church of Jesus Christ
of Latter-day Saints) and Jehovah’s Witnesses
count 5.2 million and about 1 million (actually 2.1 million if you
count “regular visitors” and those in the initiation
process) members respectively. Mormons number 12 million worldwide
and Jehovah’s
Witnesses number 6.1 million (15.4 million attended their annual
Memorial). Mormonism has become the 5th largest religious body in
the U.S.
Add to
that thousands of other groups including the International
Church of Christ, most other churches of Christ, Baha’i’s,
neopaganism and WICCA, Scientology, the many forms of the popular
New Age Movement, the Unification Church, Native
American Spirituality, Christian Science, Unity, The Way, Seventh-day
Adventism, The Family, the Local Church Movement, and Unitarianism,
and it is estimated
that there are well over 20 million Americans involved in cults
or the occult.
And then
there are “therapy” cults such
as Landmark/Forum, Silva Mind Control, Lifespring, etc. which arguably
employ many new age concepts. Several
recent polls reveal that between 30-35% of Americans believe in
reincarnation and 26% believe in astrology.
Seldom before have we seen such fulfillment of the biblical indictment
of fallen humanity in Romans 1:21-23:
For even
though they knew God, they did not honor him as God, or
give thanks; but they
became futile in their speculations,
and
their foolish
heart was
darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
and exchanged the glory
of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible
man and of birds and four-footed animals and crawling creatures.
Everywhere,
people are “trading the truth of God for a lie” and “becoming
fools” by worshipping “the creature rather than
the creator.”
As we travel
around the country ministering in a wide spectrum of Christian
churches, we can affirm that
the growth and
proliferation of cults
and world religions
are indeed partly due to the Church’s negligence.
Very few churches have an incarnational evangelism strategy
even
for their next door neighbors, much
less one for reaching followers of cult and other religions.
All Christians
have a sacred duty, a stewardship, entrused to them to
share the gospel: “For if I preach the
gospel I have nothing to boast of, for I am under compulsion;
for woe is me if I do not proclaim the gospel. For if
I do
this voluntarily, I have a reward, but if against my
will, I have a stewardship entrusted to me” (1
Cor. 9:16-17). In fact, the context of
this passage makes it clear that
we are to learn how to adapt our approaches to fit the
different
cultures and belief systems of those we encounter (1
Cor. 9:19-23). It is intentional and
it will not happen until
we surrender to Christ and His agenda. Paul writes, “I
have made myself a servant to all so that I might win
the more” (1
Cor. 9:19).
The
Great Commission was given to all. In Matthew
28:18-20, Jesus commissions the twelve to go
to “all
the nations” (v.
19). Nations (ethne) throughout the Old Testament
refers to all the Gentile people
groups which God’s covenantal
promises were to include after Christ’s atonement
(Isa.
2:2-4; 25:6-8;
Micah
4:1-4; Jer.
16:19; Zech.
14:16; Gal.
3:28-29; Eph.
2:11-22). And the twelve were commanded
to multiply this commission, “teaching
them to observe all that I commanded you” (v.
20a). And as Paul reinforced, “Imitate me as
I imitate Christ” (1
Cor. 11:1). As Jesus said, “As
You have sent me into the world, I also have sent them
into the world” (Jn.
17:18). This means investing of our time and
resources to prepare
to engage those involved in cults and false religions.
It is incarnational and costly. It means leaving
our comfort zones.
When Barna
polled evangelicals, over 90% indicated that personal evangelism
is a high priority
for the Christian,
but Barna
also uncovered the
fact that only
1% are actively involved in this calling. When the
Church ignores God’s
command, we inevitably retreat and deform into a “Christian” ghetto.
We hide our light under a basket and lose our saltiness
(Matt.
5:13-16).
Another
part of the problem is a lack of emphasis on the necessity
of teaching sound doctrine
and theology—discipleship. This not only is
the essential ingredient for the transformation of
our
minds in the sanctification process,
but serves to provide protection and discernment
from heresy and the seductive techniques of cultism
(Heb.
5:12-14). This need is elaborated in ARC’s
Steve Cowan’s article in this issue, “The
Genuine Article” where
he expounds the essential or defining doctrines of
the Christian faith, without which “there would
be no Christianity.” One first must have a
clear plumb-line before he evaluates illegitimate
teachings.
So, I invite
you to read and study the following
articles in this Areopagus
Journal so that you
may “be
prepared to give an apologia (reasoned answer)
to anyone (including heretics) the reason for the hope
that is in us, yet with gentleness
and kindness (1
Pet. 3:15; 2
Tim. 2:23-26).
Dr. Winfried
Corduan, professor at Taylor University, introduces the
subject of “The (True/False) Origin of (True/False)
Religion,” wherein he
explores anthropological-theological-philosophical
origins of Christianity compared with subsequent religions
of human (ultimately demonic, 1
Tim. 4:1) invention. The content of Corduan’s
article is of real value in a missiological-dialogical
approach
to
those who have “suppressed the truth” of
general revelation and have “speculated” to
the point of worshipping that which they have
created (Rom.
1:18-25). Corduan argues persuasively
that a legitimate
assessment of the historical and anthropological
data points to an explicit monotheism as the
original religion of mankind—a view that
is consistent with the revelation of the Bible.
Anthropology
and history reflect the reality recorded
in Rom.
1:18-25 and 2:14-15,
that all men have an innate sense of right and
wrong in virtue
of being image-bearers of God, and that they
understand
that
there is an all-powerful God who created all
things. But rather than bow down and worship
him, men sinfully
choose to look to creation and to gods of their
own invention.
Also included
is an article by Dr. Thomas Howe, professor at The Southern
Evangelical
Seminary, “How the Cults Misinterpret
the Bible.” This is a very
helpful study in how cults (and too often even
Christians) use faulty hermeneutics (rules
for proper interpretation of the Bible). Paul
explicitly
warns Christians
to beware of the false teachers’ “twisting
of the Scriptures” to
their own and their follower’s destruction
(2
Pet. 3:16-18; 2
Cor. 4:2), and for the Christian
to study to be able to “handle accurately
the word of truth” (2
Tim. 2:15).
ARC cult mission specialist, Clete
Hux, tackles
the subject “What Is a
Cult?” He helps the reader to understand
the two defining characteristics of cults from
a Christian framework. These two characteristics
are the classic
doctrinal parameters of cults and the destructive
psychological methodologies involving undue
influence and mind control.
Regarding
the latter, a few supplemental comments
are in order. It is critical for evangelicals
to understand
the
dynamics
of manipulation and coercion,
as well as the negative psychological conditioning
and damage done in
these groups
so we can educate the public and church both
as a preventative and
in order to better facilitate the exiting,
rehabilitation, and assimilation of cult
members.
We evangelicals
have been slow to come out of our purely doctrinal boxes
in order to
understand the
psychological
model and its
Biblical derivation.
We
read in
the Bible about deceivers, making merchandise
of people, exploitation, etc., but did
not connect
the methodological
mechanisms that
are employed in the
deception process, nor did we adequately
connect the emotional/mental effects on
the cult
members.
For example,
if someone left an intensive and abusive Bible based cult
like the International
Church
of Christ, or
a shepherding group, and
he had a
strong aversion
to Bible studies, church meetings, the
Bible itself, or even spiritually oriented
conversation,
we typically
assumed
he
was
just hardened
in rebellion and dismissed
him as not yet ready for our straightforward,
well-intentioned evangelistic agenda.
Instead,
we should recognize that, biblically, people are both
sinners and victims of
other’s sins. There can exist
both real guilt and false guilt. We
see significantly
better results in evangelism and in
assimilation when we sensitively
demonstrate how they were manipulated,
deceived, and left with a lot of false
guilt and damage inflicted by the cult
system. At some point, we need to communicate
the true Christian message which includes
both repentance and faith, but in a
God who offers unconditional love,
grace,
forgiveness, transformation and a promise
to never leave or forsake us.
There
have been a few evangelical pioneers
in calling attention to the psychological
dynamic of cultism.2
The father of
most contemporary countercult
ministries,
the late Walter Martin, recognized
the psychological component to
some extent. He included a chapter
in his classic book, Kingdom of the
Cults,
titled, “The
Psychological Structure of Cultism.”3
Martin did not fully develop his
model, but recognized that cults
utilized
certain methods that produced a “closed
mind” psychologically. These
methods include producing a fearful
environment, authoritarianism and
control, isolation, and various internal
cultic
methods
of “brainwashing.” Martin
referred to this “pattern of
psychological preconditioning” as “a
very real mental and emotional chain
which has a strong hold on the cultist’s
ability to discern between truth
and error, light from darkness,” producing “an
abnormal behavior syndrome operating
in the mentality of most cultists.”4
Christians,
of course, are naturally suspicious
of any language of victimization
and mind
control. Christianity
sees people
as morally
responsible for
their choices, including “mistakes” or
errors in judgment. Christianity
says that no matter how much pressure
or coercion one is subjected to,
(s)he still is ultimately
responsible for the choices s(he)
makes. Because of this, some in
the evangelical community have
opposed
the mind control cult model, arguing
that it violates
biblical anthropology, and that
people who are psychologically
deceived
are still morally responsible for
their misguided choices.5
These
evangelicals have argued well
for their point, but they
have misunderstood
and misrepresented
the actual model
of undue
influence
that has been
so helpful in ministry to cult
members. Properly understood,
the view is
that the methods
of deception and coercion (2
Cor. 4:4) do not
rob people of their moral responsibility
and produce mindless
robots, but
that these
powerful
techniques serve to
diminish and mitigate a person’s
ability to reason and his moral
culpability (Luke
12:47-48; Matt.
11:20-24). These
people are still responsible
to respond to the
gospel, but in the case of cultic
deception and coercion, they
are the victims of others’ sins
as well (Matt.
18:6-7).
The reminder
of the journal is full of references
via books,
web sites
and links
that will
help you go deeper
and expand
your own
borders
so as to be
fruitful
in His Kingdom. “I do
all things for the sake of
the gospel
so that I may become a fellow
partaker of it” (1
Cor. 9:23).
1 See Barna’s report “Americans Are Most
Likely to Base Truth on Feelings,” (Feb. 12,
2002) at www.barna.org).
2 For example,
men like Dr. Ronald Enroth, Sociology professor
at
Westmont College
in California and
writer of many books
on cults including Youth,
Brainwashing and Extremist
Cults, Churches that Abuse,
and Recovering
from Churches
That Abuse.
Another voice has been Randy
Watters of Freeminds ministry.
Randy is
a former Jehovah’s
Witness who recognized the
need to
first undermine the credibility
of the Watchtower’s
authoritative stranglehold
on the minds and
wills of its members before
they would ever even consider
looking at the Bible without
the Watchtower lenses. Probably
the most helpful activist
and researcher in the
area of abuse in the name
of religion is evangelical
and
clinical Psychologist Dr.
Paul Martin, director of
the only
residential acute care cult
rehabilitation
facility in the world, Wellspring
Retreat and Resource Center
in Ohio (see www.wellspringretreat.org).
Dr. Martin has written Cult
Proofing Your Kids (Zondervan),
and has published a number
of very helpful articles
in the Christian Research
Journal
and the Cultic
Studies Journal (see www.csj.org).
3
Walter Martin, Kingdom
of the Cults (Minneapolis:
Bethany
Fellowship,
1977), 24-33. It is
important to note that
this chapter appeared
in the original
edition of Martin’s
work. The current, revised
edition [ed. Hank Hanegraaf
(Bethany House, 1997)]
adds a chapter critical
of the
mind control model which
was not
authorized by the Martin
family which owns the rights
to the book.
4 Ibid.,
27, 37.
5 See,
e.g., Bob and Gretchen Passintino, “Overcoming
the Bondage of Victimization:
A Critical Evaluation
of Cult Mind-control
Theories,” Cornerstone
(1994): 31-34; and Doug
Groothuis’ letter
to the editor of Cornerstone
in a subsequent issue.
(top) |
