Blog

Human beings do not have the power of life and death. A search through oral and written history till date has not delivered concrete and scientifically verifiable evidence of the existence of such power.

No human being can or could determine when they would be born, where they will be born and by who they would be born. Neither can or could a human being determine when they will die, where they will die and who or what will be the instrument of their demise. The preceding statement is made in view of scientifically proving the two events in question, life and death.

Scientifically, no human being has ever been able to determine when they would be born, where they would be born and by who they would be born. Neither has any human being, been able to determine when they die, where they die and who or what was the instrument of their death. The birth aspect is beyond debate; however, the death aspect sometimes falsely leave room for debate. Such as, cases of suicide, and euthanasia (see blog topic: Destiny Control; https://adonai4oo.wordpress.com/blog/page/1/ The flaw in such scenario is that the individual with hindsight will certainly not choose to put themselves in such hopeless or fatal disease/illness, condition that results in either the loss of the will to continue to live or the physical shutdown of the human body.). Aside from the previous circumstances, there are anecdotical stories and examples of “men of God” who raise the dead, but they themselves have no power over their own demise. Such instances are referred to as anecdotical, because most of them lack scientifically verifiable proof, that is, the “dead” individual being certified and pronounced clinically dead in an hospital and preserved in a mortuary for two to three days, and subsequently having the “man of God” going there and commanding the corpse to come back to life. Even in the eventuality of such verification, the definitive proof of power over death is and remains, that of the individual himself dying, certified and pronounced clinically dead, and subsequently raising himself or herself from the dead. That is what you call DEMONSTRABLE show of power over death. As far as we know that has NOT happened yet.

However, there is power of life and death, and since no single human being has this power inherent in themselves, this leads us into the sphere of a Being, outside of us, that holds this power. In IT parlance, a software system has characteristics, and these are usability, portability, correctness, efficiency, integrity or security, testability, flexibility and reusability. This Being or System or Entity or Spirit, with the power of life and death demonstrates these characteristics all the time; birth (being born again, born of the Spirit), and death (dying on the cross, dying everyday 1 Cor.15:31; that is metaphoric, and eventually literally, physical death that leads to resurrection of a spiritual body, 1 Cor.15:35-57).

This piece was prefaced with the statement that no human being has the power of life and death. According to the Scriptures, the only One that does is God, that is Jesus Christ is God in human flesh.

Some say the Archangel Michael plays some role in the process from passing from this world to the next, but no Bible verse or passage supports this notion. In Scripture, Michael appears to fight spiritual battles and carry out the commands of God, none of which seem to indicate a grim reaper role. The name Azrael never appears in the Bible as well.

The idea of a grim reaper has not only pervaded popular culture, such as in books like The Book Thief and Scythe, but it has also taken a featured spot in many religions. Judaism, for instance, attributes this role to Azrael, an angel of destruction. Islam has a name for this figure, “Malak Almawt,” as do other religions such as Hinduism.

Does Christianity have a similar figure by a different name? Does a sole Angel of Death exist, realizing the idea of the Grim Reaper?

Some say the Archangel Michael plays some role in the process from passing from this world to the next, but no Bible verse or passage supports this notion. In Scripture, Michael appears to fight spiritual battles and carry out the commands of God, none of which seem to indicate a grim reaper role. The name Azrael never appears in the Bible as well.

Although angels may appear to cause death in some cases in the Bible, we should make a note that no sole angel (or demon) can do so without God willing it. Job makes it clear God has numbered our days, but He alone chooses when we reach the end of our life on earth (Job 14:5).

Death Angels in the Bible

When looking at Scripture, it appears angels do have a hand in some instances of death and destruction.

For instance, an angel of the Lord in 2 Kings 19:35 goes out at night and kills 185,000 Assyrians. Considering the Assyrians made themselves out to be enemies of God’s people, God willed this angel to commit such a mass destruction.

In Revelation, God gives one of the angels the power to cause death, and the four horsemen have the power to wipe out one-fourth of the earth’s population (Revelation 6:8). Although, one could argue that the four horsemen may not necessarily be angels or demons, but rather, symbolize rulers and authorities on earth.

However, it appears demons may also try to have a hand in death. Jesus encounters a demon-possessed boy whose demon tries to kill him. The demon often throws him into fire and water to burn or drown him (Mark 9:22).

Does this mean that angels and demons can kill us?

Technically yes, but we need to keep in mind, they cannot harm a hair on our head unless God wills it. Let’s take a look at God’s power over the most infamous of all angels, Satan.

Satan has to go to God for permission to harm Job in any way. God gives him permission to wipe out Job’s family and possessions (Job 1) and eventually Job’s health (Job 2), but God tells Satan he cannot take away Job’s life. He does not have the authority to do so.

If Satan, one of the most powerful angels, has to obey God, it shows us that God will not allow for our lives to be taken until the determined time.

The Bible describes angels as God’s servants (Psalm 103:20). A servant will obey whoever is in charge, not straying from commands.

What about the Angel of Death? Does it exist?

The Angel of Death is a misnomer. Although angels, if given the command of God, can take away a life, they will not do so unless they have received that command or if God wills it. The Grim Reaper, so to speak, does not exist in the way we have perceived it as a culture to exist.

Nothing personifies death. We all will experience death, but no one single angel by the name of Azrael carries out all of the death duties, so to speak.

We need to keep in mind, as well, that God will one day destroy death itself (Revelation 20:14). Whether or not He placed a single angel in charge of death or in charge of ushering us from one life to the next (which Scripture does not indicate), we need to understand that that angel’s role will become obsolete after Christ returns. Although interesting to speculate, in the coming age, it does not hold as great of a weight as other matters.

Reference: https://www.christianity.com/wiki/angels-and-demons/who-is-the-angel-of-death-in-the-bible.html

How to Identify Religious Brainwashing; The Dispensing of Existence (Part 8 of 8)

November oaks lined the road, their feet sunk in last night’s rain and cluttered with leaves. The scent of wood smoke curled beneath a pale sky. It was cold. We circled slowly in my pastor’s blue Buick, talking of the past. This was my old neighbourhood in North Yarmouth, Maine. Rural. Isolated. A throw-back to the old days when neighbours knew neighbours and children played unafraid on little-used streets.

I smiled to myself, remembering.

We passed a small subdivision. I saw a middle-aged woman in a red coat walking her dog on the gravel shoulder. Ferris* seemed oblivious. He inched past her on the rural road, talking about God and my life.

The woman watched us as we rolled past. She waved.

Ferris ignored her.

I felt heat creeping beneath my collar.

Ferris continued to talk about God’s plans for me.

I watched the woman in my side-mirror. We barely outpaced her as Ferris cruised along, then he pulled to the side of the road fifty feet in front of her.

I tried to put myself in the woman’s place, alone with my dog on a bleak road, with two strange men in a car pulled to the side of the road in front of me. Kidnappers? Rapists? My face flushed.

Undisturbed, Ferris continued his slow monologue.

From my peripheral vision I saw the woman approach the car.

She waved through the closed window at Ferris. “Are you gentlemen lost?” she said pleasantly, her voice muffled by the glass. “Do you need directions?”

I smiled at her.

Ferris ignored her and continued to talk.

The woman cocked her head, puzzled.

My skin prickled. I felt confused. Surely Ferris could see and hear her, couldn’t he? But he acted as if the woman wasn’t there, as if she didn’t exist. Ferris threw the car in gear and began to cruise slowly along the road.

The woman stepped back from the car and I could see her in the rear-view mirror, still looking puzzled, getting smaller and smaller until we finally drove out of sight, her kindness unanswered.

Her red coat blinked like a berry against the grey oaks.

I heard Ferris telling me how much God loved me.

*Not his real name

—

Perhaps the saddest aspect of religious brainwashing is what Dr. Robert Lifton calls “The Dispensing of Existence.” Lifton writes:

“The totalist environment draws a sharp line between those who have a right to exist and those who do not. They claim that those outside their group have no right to exist, or at least say that those outside their group are inferior. The group thus has an arrogant and elitist mentality, considering themselves superior rather than having equal rights as other humans. Those who do not conform to their path of existence are targets of rejection or annihilation.”

This concept can be easily seen in history. Crusaders pillaged and burned their way to the Holy Land, then slaughtered entire Muslim populations. Hitler unforgettably used Nietzsche’s concept of the “Superman” to justify his favouring of the Aryan race and persecution of so-called “inferior” races such as Jews, Gypsies, and Poles.

Horrible.

Serbs used this same logic to prosecute “ethnic cleansing” against Muslims in the Balkans during the 1990s. Taliban leaders promoted such thinking in the late 1990s in Afghanistan, and al-Qaeda declared jihad against westerners and “impure” Muslims in the 2000s. 9/11 taught us much about the modern realities of existential elitism.

Terrible.

But these are extreme examples. What does “the dispensing of existence” look like in unhealthy religious groups or cults today? Surely Christians in America would never practice such obvious bigotry.

Or perhaps they would.

Here are three steps that cult leaders use to promote “The Dispensing of Existence” today:

1.)    Exclusive vs. Inclusive.

First, unhealthy religious groups establish an exclusive orientation. They believe that they alone have the truth of God, that they alone interpret the Bible correctly, and that they alone are privy to the secrets of God. Leaders of such groups cultivate an orientation of secrecy, elitism, and superiority. Often, they claim that all other professing Christians are false, deceived, or are wolves in sheep’s clothing.

“But,” you may ask, “doesn’t the Bible say that Jesus is the only way to heaven? Isn’t Christianity exclusive?” The answer is that, yes, Christianity is exclusive in doctrine—the Bible says that Jesus is the only way to be saved (Acts 4:12). But Christians should not be exclusive in practice. Indeed, both Jesus’ disciples and early Jewish believers struggled with understanding God’s heart of inclusivity within the exclusivity of Jesus’ claims.

For example, in Mark 9:38-41, Jesus’ disciples tried to prevent other people from casting out demons since those folks were not part of the Twelve. When they told Jesus this, he corrected their perspective: “’Don’t stop him!’ Jesus said. ‘No one who performs miracles in my name will soon be able to speak evil of me. Anyone who is not against us is for us. If anyone gives you even a cup of water because you belong to the Messiah, I assure you, that person will be rewarded.’”

And in Galatians 2, Paul had to confront Peter because Peter had succumbed to hypocrisy by ostracizing Gentile believers and surrounding himself with Jews only. Paul reminded Peter and those with him that the gospel is for all people, not for exclusive ethnicities, religious clubs, or holy rollers. Both Paul and the Prophet Joel remind God’s people that “…the same Lord is Lord of all and richly blesses all who call on him, for, ‘Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved’” (Romans 10:12, 13; Joel 2:32).

2.)    Us vs. Them

The result of exclusivity is an “Us vs. Them” mentality which unhealthy religious groups develop. Such groups spend most of their time denouncing other denominations or churches rather than focusing on the good news of the gospel. They develop a fighting mentality which bristles often, takes offense easily, and delights in cutting other people down. Such practices stem from a fear of contamination by outsiders, a belief in the superiority of the particular group’s doctrine, and an unwillingness to engage intelligently and humbly with other beliefs or practices. Groups like this put up walls against “outsiders.” Talking with them feels like talking to a brick wall.

The Bible condemns this. In Ephesians 2:12-19, Paul writes that prior to Christ there were natural divisions between Jews and Gentiles, but that Christ has torn down such walls of division and has made one new person. Christ has torn down the dividing wall, reconciled warring factions, and made peace in himself. He came and preached peace to those who were far away, and peace to those who were near.

Indeed, the Bible confronts religious people who believe that their own religious group or sect has all of the truth. In Galatians 5:20, Paul explains that it is the natural man—the sinful part of us—that promotes factions, dissension, and strife. Yet unhealthy religious groups take pride in their narrow exclusivity and claim God’s favour.

They are deceived.

The Corinthian church was probably the most carnal of all of Paul’s church plants. They thought that they were wise, but in reality, they were foolish. Paul spent much time correcting their errant beliefs and practices. Not incidentally, the Corinthians in their carnality promoted religious factions, exclusivity, and combative behaviour which brought the name of Christ into disrepute—just like unhealthy religious groups today.

What does the Bible say about this? Romans 12:3 reminds believers not to think more highly of themselves than they ought to, and in 1 Corinthians 14:36 Paul asks the Corinthians why they thought that they alone had the truth. In 1 Corinthians 1:10-12 Paul appeals to the Corinthians to stop having divisions among themselves and to stop following charismatic personalities. In 1 Corinthians 3:1-4, Paul says that it is the Corinthians’ immaturity and fleshliness which makes them promote division in the Body of Christ.

To all of this, cults respond with the following, and final, point.

3.)    Sub-Speciation i.e. lack of humanity and value.

Cults agree that the first two points as I have laid them out are bad. They agree that there should not be divisions in the church, and that there should be inclusivity within the Body of Christ. They just define the church very narrowly.

As their own little group.

And while they claim to believe that there are many other Christians around the world—somewhere—and down through history, in practice they act as if they alone have the truth and are the only ones who are saved.

They believe that most professing Christians are in fact deceived and are led by false prophets. They also believe that people who profess the name of Christ but who do not live as their own particular group leader teaches are worse than human: they are sub-human. This allows them to speak horribly about them, reject them, and eventually treat them as non-human.

This is why my pastor could ignore the woman who was talking pleasantly to him and trying to be helpful: in his mind, she wasn’t worth the breath to answer. She was sub-human. A non-being. Ferris just wanted to focus on God and his own acolyte, namely, me.

Unhealthy religious groups brainwash their followers by convincing them that people outside of their group are sub-human. They use passages like Hebrews 6:4-8 to justify this. Hebrews 6 is a warning passage about falling away from the faith. The writer uses strong language to describe people who claim to have faith in Christ but who eventually reject Christ and fall away. The passage is not describing someone losing their salvation; it describes a person who never had genuine faith in the first place. Since it describes such people using a metaphor of “worthless” ground, cult leaders use this passage as justification for treating people outside their group as worthless and sub-human.

Or cult leaders misinterpret Jesus’ words in Matthew 18:6 which describe church discipline. Jesus says that someone who is unrepentant and who will not listen to wise rebukes should be cut off from the church and treated like a “Gentile and tax collector.” Unhealthy religious groups take this to mean that a person should be excommunicated, shunned, ignored, or, in extreme cases, persecuted.

Yet they forget that Jesus treated tax collectors and Gentiles with more respect and consideration than did other first-century Jews (Matt 9:11; Mk 2:16; Lk 5:30); that Jesus came to save sinners and not the (self) righteous (Matt 9:13; Mk 2:17; Lk 5:32); and that in Jesus’ death on the cross he abolished natural barriers and social boundaries (cf. Eph 2). Jesus’ instruction in Matthew 18:6—and the author of Hebrews’ warning in chapter 6—are warnings and calls to wise boundaries, not a license to ostracize, ignore, or treat other people as sub-human.

“The Dispensing of Existence” is a false idea promoted by deceived religious leaders. Don’t let them brainwash you into believing it.

Christ came to save sinners.

That’s all of us.

—

How to Identify Religious Brainwashing: The Dispensing of Existence (Part 8 of 8)

Identifying Religious Brainwashing Doctrine Over Person (Part 7 of 8)

“Hey there Spike!” my pastor said as I walked tentatively into his office. Outside of the church the air was cool, but now I felt my cheeks burn. I was 19, and for several years I had worn my hair tousled with hair gel as the fashion went. I may not have been Jason Priestly, but the hairstyle felt comfortable. It fit. “Steve,” my pastor continued, “I’ve noticed that you favour a trendy hairstyle and designer glasses. The Lord wants you to know that he frowns on such trendiness. You don’t see me with spiked hair, do you?”

“No,” I whispered.

“Right. And that’s because God’s servants are outside of time and are not to be influenced by fashion trends,” Ferris* said. “See, God wants you to look more like me. I’m a mature man, and he wants you to model my behaviour and appearance. You obviously have a hard time doing this on your own, so God has told me to help you.” He smiled.

I flinched. “What help?”

“Steve, God has directed me to give you $500 for new clothes that look more like mine [here he suggested several brand names] and he also wants you to go to my barber on Main Street. Tell him that you want your hair cut just like Ferris, okay?” He grinned paternally. “We’ll make a pastor out of you yet!”

—

“Doctrine Over Person” means that a group leader puts his or her interpretation of scripture above the needs of the people in the group. While this may sound good at first—after all, God’s Word should be our highest priority, shouldn’t it? —in reality this practice is harmful because the leader’s interpretation is not the same as scripture. The result is a cloning of the leader’s personality and opinions.

Leaders who emphasize “Doctrine Over Person” usually have dominant personalities and rigidly interpret biblical commands. Thus, while their language sounds spiritual, in fact they merely enforce their own preferences about how to live life. The Pharisees were skilled at changing God’s commands into man-made rules (cf. Mark 7:7). Cult leaders also have this dubious talent.

How do they create a congregation of clones?

1.)    Fitting the Mold

Turn over a pack of Crayons or a pair of swimming goggles or your newest i-thingy. What does it say? Made in Taiwan, or China, or USA, right? These items are mass-produced in factories by machines tooled to very fine margins of error. The result is that every Crayon or goggle or i-thing looks exactly alike. And for textiles or electronics that’s good.

The problem is when leaders of unhealthy religious groups try to mass-produce people to look just like themselves. Leaders of such groups often have personality pathologies such as narcissism or obsessive-compulsive personality disorder (we’ll talk about these in a future post) which prevent them from seeing the harm they cause others when they try to fit them into their own mould.

For example, my former pastor used to say, “Imitate me as I imitate Christ,” a quote from the Apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians 11:1. So far so good. But my pastor interpreted this to mean that since he was enormously spiritual, every person in the congregation should dress the way he dressed, talk the way he talked, and enjoy the same things he enjoyed.

The result was that our entire congregation turned to cardboard. We affected certain ways of speaking, froze our faces into acceptable forms of expression during worship, and bought clothes with the same brand-names as everyone else in the church. You could pick us out of a crowd. We all had a family-resemblance, but instead of looking like Christ we just looked like our pastor. When Paul said, “Imitate me as I imitate Christ,” he meant to imitate his maturity and godly character, not his own personality or gifting.

God never designed people to look the same or act the same. Instead, he created a Body (Romans 12; 1 Cor 12 and 14; Eph 4) where each person represents a different part, with different gifts and talents. Not everyone is an eye, a hand, or a mouth. Even my identical twin brother and I possess different gifts and interests. He was a Marine infantry officer who mastered weapons and tactics. I’m lucky if I hit centre-mass on a paper target at 15 yards. My brother is a mouth, a brain, and a bicep; I’m more like a thalamus. We may look the same, but it would be a mistake to fit us into a common mould.

2.)    Redefining Your Emotions and Conscience

Leaders of unhealthy religious groups are experts at manufacturing emotions. For example, in some unhealthy groups people are told that if they don’t experience ecstatic utterances or swooning emotions they are less than spiritual. New members—especially those who are introverts—may feel little emotional ecstasy during worship times, but they fake a response in order to fit in with the crowd. Eventually, they may convince themselves that their manufactured emotions are real. The point of this example is not to criticize charismatic groups, but rather to point out the dangers of mandating a certain emotional response for each person.

In a similar way, a domineering leader may also redefine your conscience to fit his or her interpretation of life. A popular method of controlling a congregation is for the leader to redefine feelings of guilt. He or she does this by labelling certain normal activities as “wrong” or “fleshly,” thus creating guilt in the minds of followers. Such followers develop overly-active consciences and experience low-level false-guilt all the time.

The result of this is that group members feel guilty and ashamed for indulging in everyday pleasures which God designed for their enjoyment, and they lose sight of the wrong things the leader does. By redefining their emotions and consciences, the leader has thrown out a decoy level of living which distracts his or her followers from evaluating the leader’s own misbehaviour.

Stephen Martin describes the two sides to this sword:

“Reinterpreting of one’s conscience is a major theme of brainwashing or thought reform, not only creating guilt for normal enjoyments, but reinterpreting one’s conscience and feelings about legitimate concerns in regard to what the controller is doing and teaching, and in regard to happenings in the group.”

3.)    Redefining Your History

A third area of “Doctrine Over Person” is the reinterpretation of group members’ personal histories. Totalitarian leaders attempt to make a black-or-white canvas of a person’s life. Prior to joining the group, members are told, their lives were filled with sin and darkness. Upon joining the group, they have seen the light of life and are walking in the truth. Even if their life prior to joining the group wasn’t too bad–especially if they were already a Christian–they are called to focus on their most blatant sins and self-flagellate until they feel despondent over their previous way of life. Then they are told to think about how wonderful life in the group is and where would they be if God had not called them to follow the humble example of the group leader.

While it is easy for an outsider to see how simplistic this approach is—after all, most of us can recall happy times prior to joining our current church, and we can identify struggles in our current life as a Christian—members of unhealthy religious groups are unable to maintain such a nuanced perspective.

The Bible does talk about a clear demarcation from living life “dead in our sins and trespasses” to “entering the kingdom of light.” Yet the reason for this demarcation is the presence of the Holy Spirit in our life and not because we joined a particular church or followed a particular religious leader. The problem with unhealthy religious groups is that the emphasis is shifted from what Jesus has done to what the group can do for you. And that is idolatry.

4.)    The “Botox” Effect: Denial and Suppression

Earlier we said that unhealthy religious groups brainwash followers by redefining their emotions and consciences. But that’s not all. Cult leaders also cultivate emotion-denial and suppression in order to make their followers conform to certain standards of “acceptable” expression and behaviour. They say that to express anger, doubt, or depression shows a lack of faith. Sound familiar?

I call this the “Botox” effect. Do you know about Botox? It’s a toxin that plastic surgeons inject into a person’s facial muscles to paralyze them and thus smooth out wrinkles. In a similar way, leaders of unhealthy religious groups inject a constant dose of verbal “Botox” into their followers by saying that certain emotions are “wrinkly,” i.e., unacceptable. These “wrinkly” emotions often include anger, disappointment, sadness, frustration, or depression. The result is a congregation of smiling people with flat affect and paralyzed emotions. Indeed, people in these groups may seem almost too happy! And they are: they’re in denial.

The Bible knows nothing of suppressing or denying emotions. God himself is called a jealous God (Ex. 20:5) who expresses anger towards sin (like when Jesus made a whip of cords and turned over the money-changing tables in the temple, cf. Jn 2:13-17) and hypocrisy (cf. Matthew 23). The whole book of Psalms is an expression of the full gamut of healthy emotions, which sometimes include despair (Ps. 88), anger and doubt (Psalm 55), and sadness (Psalm 137). Suppression or denial of these emotions is a simplistic strategy of control which harms people from experiencing God’s answers to their true needs.

5.)    Bring in the Clones!

Finally, controlling leaders often try to make each follower forsake their own gifting and talents in order to become more like the leader. Instead of acknowledging God-given differences in personality and calling, such leaders impose their own standards and preferences on other people. The result is a clone-like environment where everyone becomes more and more like the leader in appearance, utterance, and thinking.

In my former church, our pastor decided that it was God’s will for every young man to aspire to full-time Christian ministry. It sounded reasonable at the time—what could be better than serving God full-time? But there was a two-fold problem: First, our pastor made an unbiblical distinction between serving God in secular ministry and serving him in sacred ministry. In reality, God wants all of our work to be sacred. And second, in order to do this, each young man was supposed to follow the exact same route to pastoral ministry as our pastor had: a history major and Greek minor in undergrad, a seminary education focusing on the biblical languages (preferably at his own alma mater), and eventually full-time ministry.

Problematic with this, of course, was that God had gifted each young man differently and had put different career goals in their minds. Unswayed by arguments to the contrary, our pastor decreed that any young man who chose anything other than full-time Christian ministry was out of God’s will. He tried to fit every person into a narrow mould which would make them look like him.

God loves diversity. He has created an infinite variety of people who help express his own multi-faceted personality and perfect range of gifts. Embrace your own giftedness and use your personality and talents to serve God wherever you are.

Only Satan makes clones.

*Not his real name.

Identifying Religious Brainwashing Loading the Language (Part 6 of 8)

For folks outside of cults it may seem unbelievable how cult members can submit to spiritual abuse. Can’t they see how manipulative and controlling the group leader is?

No, they can’t.

The reason they can’t see is because they are blinded by religious brainwashing. And while each cult member bears responsibility for his or her own soul, cult leaders bear responsibility for deceiving them.

How can a manipulative leader deceive sincere Christians in a manner that causes them to submit completely to his or her control? One of the primary ways is by “loading” religious-sounding words with twisted meaning.

“Loading the language” according to cult-expert Stephen Martin means to manipulate “words and phrases to produce ‘thought-terminating clichés’” which results in a “narrowing and constriction of thought processes.”

Here’s how cult leaders play the language game.

1.)    Over-Active Mental Filters

In order to isolate their followers from outside influences, leaders of unhealthy groups create buzzwords which shut the door on truth and outside input.

For example, such leaders define any negative feedback about their group as “persecution,” and they call the source of such feedback a “slanderer.” Instead of stopping to consider whether the criticism is true, group members are taught to treat negative comments about the group leader as a threat.

An analogy might help. I attended a Christian university in Indiana which installed strict filtering software on Internet search results. While the filters prevented exposure to much filth, they also sometimes blocked legitimate sites or helpful terms.

In a similar way, members of cults are trained to put up stiff filters against any suggestion that their group may be unhealthy. They call any negative feedback “slander.” In reality, slander is defined as something which is untrue. But to the group members, any criticism about their group is untrue. Thus, their minds function like the hyper-active filtering software in my college’s computers.

Mary Alice Chrnalogar, in her book Twisted Scriptures describes such an environment:

“What if the group labels those who give you that negative information as ‘the enemy,’ or tells you that these persons are persecutors? You can be persuaded to project hatred towards these people and to denounce outside influences. Under these conditions, it is nearly impossible for you to objectively evaluate the dissenting comments. You are on a merry-go-round, and you must get off in order to study the information away from the influence of the group.”

The only reason to call all outside criticism “slander” or “persecution” is in order for the group leader to more fully control his or her members. Healthy groups, on the other hand, are open to outside input, consider carefully charges against leaders, and wisely discern truth from error.

2.)    Thought Suppression

Once cult leaders have labelled outside influences “evil,” they can then suppress the thinking of their followers inside the group. They do this by loading certain words or phrases with a twisted meaning which causes their followers to shut down mentally. It is really a form of verbal hypnosis.

For example, cult leaders create verbal formulas to manipulate the minds of their followers. They use a form of mental algebra which works something like this: asking questions (a) = rebellion (b) = sin (c), therefore, asking questions (a) = sin (c). In this case, the leader has taken a biblical term, “sin,” and equated it with asking questions. But in reality “a” does not equal “c.” It is all just a verbal game the leader plays in order to control his or her followers.

Leaders of unhealthy groups also use what Dr. Lifton calls “thought-terminating clichés.” These are phrases which have been hijacked by the group leader, stripped of their true meaning, and clothed in a counterfeit meaning.

For example, the group leader may call hobbies “fleshly” pursuits, with “fleshly” meaning “sinful” or “of the Devil.” If a follower wants to play a tennis match on a Saturday, but the match conflicts with a group activity, the cult leader may say, “Sally, you’re just being fleshly here. The Apostle Paul said that his spirit and his flesh were in conflict. You know that God wants you to be spiritual and to crucify the desires of your flesh. Remember that Jesus said if we are to be his true disciples we must deny ourselves and take up our cross and follow him. Stop being fleshly.”

Do you see what the group leader has done? He or she has just equated playing tennis with a “fleshly” pursuit, and “fleshly” implies sinful rather than spiritual. Sally therefore feels that she has only one choice (though in reality she can also choose to think for herself): she must forsake the tennis match in order to take up her cross and follow Christ.

Leaders of unhealthy groups may also use what Dr. Lifton calls “all-encompassing jargon.” This occurs when a term which may technically describe one behaviour is universalized to describe almost any behaviour.

For example, in my former church, one of my pastor’s favourite terms was “inappropriate.” By this he meant that something was sinful. If children were running outside after church, he might pull them aside and say, “Now kids, you know that it is inappropriate to run on the Lord’s Day.” Or he might say, “That movie is inappropriate,” or “To wear sandals in church is inappropriate.” The term “inappropriate” was so broad that it was hard to define. Was running outside really a sin? We weren’t sure. We only knew that it was “inappropriate” and so we had to stop or else we would offend God.

Mary Chrnalogar says:

“Deeply programmed disciples are subject to a form of instant amnesia. A discipler who fears that questioning might show the cracks in his twisted Scriptures has only to say, ‘That is doubt.’ Click! The disciple’s mind shuts out the question because the disciple doesn’t want to commit a sin. That’s how it works—much as the stage hypnotist’s trigger-word puts his subject into a state of unconsciousness, the discipler has trigger words, too.”

In groups like this, leaders are constantly loading biblical terms with unbiblical meanings. But the group members respond like programmed computers to shut down their brains at the slightest mention of a trigger word.

3.)    Attitudinal Sins

Another way that cult leaders load the language of their group in order to control members is by focusing incessantly on sins of attitude rather than behaviour. This is subtle but catch it. While the Bible does talk about attitudinal sins such as pride and selfishness, cult leaders invest these words with a whole new range of meaning.

For example, a cult leader may convey the message that to be “committed” to Christ means to attend every single group activity, even if it leads to exhaustion. The Bible never says that commitment to Christ demands attendance at every group activity, but cult members come to believe that it does.

Or again, the group leader may equate asking questions with being “proud” and “rebellious.” Thus, if a follower comes to the group leader with honest (and probably accurate) doubts, the group leader says, “Todd, you’re just being proud and rebellious. The Bible says to obey your leaders and submit to their authority, not to question them.” Todd instantly feels guilty about his supposed “rebellion” (though his guilt is false guilt), and his mind shuts down in penitence.

Other words that cult leaders imbue with their own range of meaning are: insubordination, independence, uncooperative, selfish, troublemaker, gossip, slanderer, unsubmissive and immature. Do you see how many of these terms relate to aspects of authority and submission? That’s no accident. Group leaders try to eliminate any questions about their abuse of authority by squelching critical thinking and labelling question-askers as rebels.

Conclusion

Where does “loading the language” lead? It leads to enforced dependence on the group leader, a focus on uniformity rather than unity based on truth, and ultimately to controlled behaviour.

Dependence. Leaders of unhealthy groups love to create a climate of enforced dependence. Dr. Lifton calls this a regressive childlike state known as “abnormal dependency disorder.” Whereas healthy group leaders try to lead their followers to maturity in Christ (1 Pet 2:2-3), unhealthy group leaders foster infantilism and co-dependent relationships. This gives them a sense of power and self-esteem.

Uniformity. By loading the language, cult leaders emphasize outward uniformity instead of unity based on the truth of God. While Jesus prayed that all of his followers would be one (Jn 17:21), that unity is based on the truth of God as revealed in the Word of God (Jn 17:17). The author of Hebrews tells us that scripture “divides” like a two-edged sword (Heb 4:12-13). And the heart of God rejoices in diversity of culture and personality (cf. Rev 7:9ff; Rom 14-15; 1 Cor 8; Acts 17:24-28).

Controlled Behaviour. The ultimate goal of cult leaders is to control the behaviour of their followers. They use loaded language to brainwash their followers in order to keep them subservient, beaten down with fear, and lacking critical thinking skills.

In the old comic strip “Calvin and Hobbes,” cartoonist Bill Waterson created a precocious 6-year-old boy named Calvin and his stuffed tiger named Hobbes. Calvin and Hobbes often played a game called “Calvinball,” whose only rule was that there were no permanent rules. Thus, both players could shout out rule-changes at any time, and the one who thought more quickly could win the game by defining his own rules.

Cults are like that, except the only person allowed to change the rules is the group leader. When a group leader “loads the language” and redefines all of the terms, he or she wins the game of control every time.