Cultic Studies Review, Vol. 1, No. 2, 2002, Page 87
Watchtower in order to protect themselves would dash their hopes of everlasting life. They
were instructed to lie only to protect the Watchtower, not themselves (Buber, 1946). As
may be expected, though, Witnesses‘ lying tends to extend into other areas. Thomas
relates an experience that allegedly occurred when he offered a Witness one of his tracts
that critiqued Watchtower beliefs:
This JW did not know me personally, but he said that he knew the writer of
the tract personally. (He was lying!) Thinking that I was someone else, he
began defaming the writer stating that ―yours truly‖ had been booted out of
the Watchtower Society in the East for stealing funds from them. (I have
never been a JW.) He then sneeringly began denouncing me as an idiot,
claiming that I must be really stupid to allow this tract writer to dupe me into
handing out his pamphlets. As this JW was venting his spleen against the
tract writer ...,I showed him my driver‘s license which proved that I was the
tract writer in question. I demanded an apology from this lying JW. ...The
Watchtower gospel had so twisted this man‘s mind that he couldn‘t even blush
for shame, let alone apologize. This is an example of JW theocratic war
strategy—deliberately lying in the interest of their religion. This JW thought
that by lying about the author of the anti-JW tracts that he could discourage
Christians from giving them out. Certainly this JW knew that he was lying,
but it did not bother him! For had not the Watchtower taught him that it was
scriptural for JW‘s to deceive and lie in the interest of their religion? ...It is
well known that the policy of evil and unscrupulous men is that the end
justifies the means. Seemingly the JWs have adopted this policy. (Thomas,
1972, pp. 96-97)
Of course, it is difficult to determine if a person is consciously using Theocratic War Strategy
or just playing loose with the facts to escape an embarrassing situation. The situation
Thomas recounts may include a bit of both (Raines, 1998, p. 30).
The Ultimate Harm of Lying
The teaching of the Watchtower theocratic war strategy doctrine that it is appropriate to
withhold the truth from those who could use it to harm the Watchtower is intended to
further their interests (Bergman, 1994). Evidently, with only two exceptions that I know of,
they are the only religious group that directly teaches, as part of official doctrine, that it is
appropriate to lie, according to the court‘s definition. While this doctrine may be
advantageous in the short run, in the long run it will harm the Watchtower‘s interests far
more than help them.
Probably the major effect of the doctrine of theocratic war is the psychological harm it
causes Witnesses when they become aware of the Watchtower‘s record of deception
(Bergman, 1996). This was clear in the interviews of 92 Americans and 39 Italians
completed for the study cited earlier. Awareness of the Watchtower‘s lack of full honesty is
often disillusioning, resulting in members leaving the sect. Leaving is incredibly traumatic
for many people–especially those who are highly committed. As Duron states:
I was a third generation Jehovah‘s Witness before my departure from that
religion in 1975. I am married to a second generation former Witness. My
husband and I, with a combined total of nearly sixty years of exposure to
Witness beliefs and activities, have spent many hours, both separately and
together, searching for rationality in our lives. The focus of that search, aside
from trying to learn how to rebuild our lives after living through the intense
spiritual upheaval of rethinking all of our moral, religious, social, and personal
values and beliefs, was to deal rationally with ―who gets the kid?‖ We had
two children to think about (Duron, 1991, pp. 16-17).
Watchtower in order to protect themselves would dash their hopes of everlasting life. They
were instructed to lie only to protect the Watchtower, not themselves (Buber, 1946). As
may be expected, though, Witnesses‘ lying tends to extend into other areas. Thomas
relates an experience that allegedly occurred when he offered a Witness one of his tracts
that critiqued Watchtower beliefs:
This JW did not know me personally, but he said that he knew the writer of
the tract personally. (He was lying!) Thinking that I was someone else, he
began defaming the writer stating that ―yours truly‖ had been booted out of
the Watchtower Society in the East for stealing funds from them. (I have
never been a JW.) He then sneeringly began denouncing me as an idiot,
claiming that I must be really stupid to allow this tract writer to dupe me into
handing out his pamphlets. As this JW was venting his spleen against the
tract writer ...,I showed him my driver‘s license which proved that I was the
tract writer in question. I demanded an apology from this lying JW. ...The
Watchtower gospel had so twisted this man‘s mind that he couldn‘t even blush
for shame, let alone apologize. This is an example of JW theocratic war
strategy—deliberately lying in the interest of their religion. This JW thought
that by lying about the author of the anti-JW tracts that he could discourage
Christians from giving them out. Certainly this JW knew that he was lying,
but it did not bother him! For had not the Watchtower taught him that it was
scriptural for JW‘s to deceive and lie in the interest of their religion? ...It is
well known that the policy of evil and unscrupulous men is that the end
justifies the means. Seemingly the JWs have adopted this policy. (Thomas,
1972, pp. 96-97)
Of course, it is difficult to determine if a person is consciously using Theocratic War Strategy
or just playing loose with the facts to escape an embarrassing situation. The situation
Thomas recounts may include a bit of both (Raines, 1998, p. 30).
The Ultimate Harm of Lying
The teaching of the Watchtower theocratic war strategy doctrine that it is appropriate to
withhold the truth from those who could use it to harm the Watchtower is intended to
further their interests (Bergman, 1994). Evidently, with only two exceptions that I know of,
they are the only religious group that directly teaches, as part of official doctrine, that it is
appropriate to lie, according to the court‘s definition. While this doctrine may be
advantageous in the short run, in the long run it will harm the Watchtower‘s interests far
more than help them.
Probably the major effect of the doctrine of theocratic war is the psychological harm it
causes Witnesses when they become aware of the Watchtower‘s record of deception
(Bergman, 1996). This was clear in the interviews of 92 Americans and 39 Italians
completed for the study cited earlier. Awareness of the Watchtower‘s lack of full honesty is
often disillusioning, resulting in members leaving the sect. Leaving is incredibly traumatic
for many people–especially those who are highly committed. As Duron states:
I was a third generation Jehovah‘s Witness before my departure from that
religion in 1975. I am married to a second generation former Witness. My
husband and I, with a combined total of nearly sixty years of exposure to
Witness beliefs and activities, have spent many hours, both separately and
together, searching for rationality in our lives. The focus of that search, aside
from trying to learn how to rebuild our lives after living through the intense
spiritual upheaval of rethinking all of our moral, religious, social, and personal
values and beliefs, was to deal rationally with ―who gets the kid?‖ We had
two children to think about (Duron, 1991, pp. 16-17).
