Thought reform, education or re-education, commonly called “brainwashing”, consists of the application of various persuasion techniques, coercive or not, through which to change, to a greater or lesser degree, the beliefs, conduct, thoughts and behavior of an individual or society, with the purpose of exercising political, religious and any other redirections or controls over them.
In this installment we will analyze the techniques that the organization uses to reform the thinking of its followers, but to illustrate it we will begin by citing the following publication from Atalaya magazine:
“A wonderful gift from Jehovah”
THE WATCHTOWER of May 1, 1996 contained an in-depth study on Christian neutrality and how to balance the Christian responsibilities we have to Jehovah and “Caesar.” (Matthew 22:21) Many comments of gratitude have been received for the new information, among them the following letter, written by a Witness in Greece and addressed to the Governing Body of Jehovah’s Witnesses:
“I want to express my deepest gratitude to all of you, dear brothers, for the good spiritual care you give us. Having spent about nine years in prison Because of my Christian faith, I truly appreciate the wonderful reflections in The Watchtower of May 1, 1996.. (Isaiah 2:4) It was a wonderful gift from Jehovah. (James 1:17)
”As I read these articles, I remembered a comment from a previous issue (August 1, 1994, page 14): ‘It is obvious that being reasonable is an invaluable quality, as it enhances our love for Jehovah.’ Yes, brothers, I thank Jehovah for being part of this kind and loving organization, which clearly reflects his wisdom. (James 3:17)
”The clearer light of The Watchtower of May 1 has been welcomed here in Greece, especially by those who have spent several years in prison or are still imprisoned because of their faith. Thanks again. May Jehovah strengthen you with his spirit so that you may continue to provide us with valuable spiritual nourishment in these turbulent times.”[1]
In this publication, the Watchtower reproduces the letters of gratitude they have received as a result of the change in doctrine expressed in The Watchtower of May 1, 1996, in which they declared that it was no longer a sin to present substitute civil service. The people who write to thank him are precisely people who were, or had been, imprisoned. Faced with a publication like this, the following questions come to mind:
1) The Watchtower provides a “clearer light” so now they understand that what was once a sin is not now.
2) The people who write the thank you letters They don’t stop to reflect like that.”clearer light“The rest of the Christian denominations had already received it first before them.”, including the Catholic Church and the rest of the Protestants, who never considered it a sin.
3) It is curious that They do not express any anger, while some of them had been in prison for several years, some were still imprisoned (those who died in prison are not mentioned).
4) Simply “thank you” effusively, and they receive it as “a wonderful gift of Jehovah”, but at the same time they say that the organization is “kind and loving”.
5) Those who write the letter also do not ask themselves whether the faithful and discreet slave has been appointed to supply “spiritual food at the appropriate time”[2]Wasn’t that the appropriate time before they went to jail?
This way of reasoning is tremendously disturbing, not only because from its own perspective it is inexplicable like that “wonderful gift“I would receive it first”the great whore”, but because that is not the normal way to react for someone who has spent so much time in prison, for something they have been told is a sin, and now it turns out that it is not.
The same case may occur if there is a change regarding the issue of blood transfusions. Will they receive letters of gratitude for another “wonderful gift from Jehovah” on behalf of the parents and relatives of those who died while arriving “the clearest light”?.
But what clearly seems like an illogical way of reacting to us, finds a perfect explanation if we study the way in which the organization changes the way of thinking of its followers with an efficient and systematic method.
“Spiritual food”
In one of the previous installments we had commented how Jehovah’s Witnesses became completely dependent on their publications, which they consider “spiritual food” and “provision of Jehovah“, and as the study of the Watchtower was mandatory in their meetings. In these publications there is a singular characteristic present in most of their books: they number the paragraphs and at the end they ask questions at the foot of each chapter, in order to guide them to draw the conclusions they want. Since after studying each chapter, it is the person themselves who answers, that helps them believe that it is they who think that way. As time passes and they receive the same ideas over and over again in each of the different publications, they remain The method that in itself is not bad, pegagogically speaking, is combined with the exercise that the adept does when preaching, in which while trying to convince others, he reaffirms himself in said opinions. In this process they obtain the ability to show off an apparent erudition to people who do not have solid prior knowledge.
Another key factor is the immense amount of works and books that the organization provides for everything, so that they do not need to search for information in works that do not belong to them. In these works they tend to cite external sources profusely in order to give the impression that authorized opinions endorse their positions, but they do so in a selective and biased manner, hiding information from followers, or only selecting that which seems convenient to them. The purpose is that the adept is left with the impression that everything he is taught is solidly supported and he accepts it with docility.
Father Alfredo Raúl Fermín reviews one of many cases where they cite bibliographic sources selectively and truncated at their convenience. For example, trying to justify your belief that Jesus was crucified in a “stick” either “log“and not on a cross. The priest explains:
“In Let’s Reason (page 85, 1985 edition), great relief is given to the alleged proper value of the Greek terms present in the NT: staurós and xylon, which are translated throughout Christianity as “cross“At this point they cite a renowned Greek dictionary by Henry George Liddell and Robert Scott, from the Le Monier publishing house. But let’s see how the book Let’s Reason presents it: “What can we say about the instrument used to kill the son of God?…The Liddett Scott dictionary gives this definition: ‘Cut wood ready for use…piece of firewood, log, stick,…staff,…stick to which the criminals were attached’ (Le Monier, 1975)’”
The ellipses indicate that the source is cited only in some parts, and it is striking to do so in such a short quote. What happens is that in the dictionary itself after the word ‘malechores‘place’The Cross of the NT‘. That is, according to the dictionary that they cite as evidence that the word staurós should be understood as “log” and not “cross”, they cut out what refers to the fact that in the New Testament the word must be translated as “cross”.
On page 1183 of the same dictionary the second meaning of the word staurós is defined: “cross, also metal., NT: its shape was expressed by the Greek curettage T“. And for the verb stauró, in the first meaning it has “who carries the cross”; while in the second meaning it is “crucify, N.T.“A Jehovah’s Witness who does not go to the source will think that this dictionary supports his organization’s point of view.
When the publisher Le Monier wrote a letter[3] complaining to the Watchtower that way of quoting them, they judged it “very incorrect” and his way of acting was “serious for our scientific reputation“, they responded:
“Any author who refers to the definitions of a dictionary follows the constant and correct practice of citing one or more meanings that are consistent with the argument being discussed, without having the obligation to cite them all, even those that are contrary to the concept presented…”[4]
To this Le Monier responded firmly, describing this attitude as malicious, to which the organization had to add after the word “malechores”, “NT Cross”, which perplexed more than one Jehovah’s Witness.[5]
They apply the same device when talking about the early Church and the Church Fathers, to convey the impression that the first Christians shared their points of view. The followers would discover many things if they themselves began to read the fathers of the Church directly and not through the quotes provided by the organization.
“Custom” Bible
The organization has had its own translation of the Bible since 1961, New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures(abbreviated TNM), which is generally considered by Catholics and Protestants as a biased translation created in order to support their own doctrines.
Already in The Watchtower of March 1, 1963, page. 159 they had maintained that “One simply cannot properly and accurately translate the Bible unless one clearly understands its teachings.”, which was already an implicit recognition that they made the translation based on their own interpretation of the Bible, and this is what they recognize later in the same magazine:
“The way these two words have been translated in the New World Translation has given rise to the accusation that those of the New World Bible Translation Committee, They allowed their religious beliefs to influence them. This accusation is true., but they did not do it incorrectly or improperly”
It is common to see the organization cite scholars and experts in support of the quality of its translation.[6], but they tend to quote them again or selectively and out of context, as those who have gone to the cited sources have been able to verify. Addressing this topic is beyond the scope of this series, but if you want more information and are fluent in English, you can consult the article The New World Translation, What the Scholars Really Said[7]
Among the large number of texts that the TNM translates tendentiously and conveniently we could mention: Matthew 25:46; 27;52-53; John 1,1.18; 6.56; 7.29; 8.58; 14,13.14; Luke 22:19-20; 23.43; Acts 2:42; 20.7; Colossians 1:16-17; among many others.
In this way, the follower finds himself virtually surrounded by sources of information that favor the organization’s point of view: magazines, books, pamphlets, which at the same time cite a Bible adapted to their doctrines, while he is discouraged from consulting works that do not belong to the organization. This, combined with the guiding and often conclusive questions of their publications, manage to direct their thoughts towards the idea they wish to establish.
Thus, the organization keeps its followers “donating” money to obtain each new publication, while maintaining firm control over their way of thinking. Two objectives are achieved in one fell swoop.
Fixing sectarian ideas
Another important element of sectarian control lies in establishing certain ideas that nullify the individual’s capacity for criticism, making him think that if he does so he will become a “bad slave,” whom Jesus will “reject” and “punish more severely.” We have an example in the way they demonize those who left the organization after the disappointment of 1914:
“That bad slave
…Prior to 1914, numerous members of the slave class had high hopes that they would be reunited with the Bridegroom in heaven in that year, but their expectations were not fulfilled. As a result of this and other circumstances, many became discouraged, and a few became bitter.. Some of the latter began to verbally “beat” their former brothers and fraternized with “inveterate drunkards,” that is, with religious groups of Christendom (Isaiah 28:1-3; 32:6).
These former Christians came to assume the identity of the “bad slave,” and Jesus punished them “with the greatest severity”. How? He rejected them, and they lost their heavenly hope. However, they were not destroyed immediately. First they had to endure a period of weeping and gnashing of teeth in “the outer darkness,” which reigns outside the Christian congregation (Matthew 8:12). Since those early times, a few more anointed ones have shown a similar evil disposition and have become part of the “evil slave.”. Some of the “other sheep” class have followed them in their unfaithfulness (John 10:16). All these enemies of Christ end up in the same “spiritual darkness” outside.”[8]
In short, they establish the idea that someone who is disappointed by any of the organization’s changes in doctrine, and does not patiently accept it with gratitude and meekness, runs the risk of being equated with the evil slave and apostates, whom Jehovah is disgusted with:
“LTrue Christians feel the same way Jehovah feels toward apostates; They are not intrigued by apostate ideas. On the contrary, They are “disgusted” by those who have become enemies of God, but they let Jehovah take charge of executing vengeance”[9]
In this way they cultivate unconditional “loyalty” in their followers, no matter how many times the organization tells them first one thing and then another opposite, no matter that, as in the case of those who wrote the letter at the beginning of this installment, they have paid with their life or their freedom the cost of the changes in doctrine. The alternative is to become the “bad slave,” an “enemy of God” for whom he feels “disgust,” an “apostate” who will be destroyed at Armageddom.
An instructive example of this way of mentalizing followers is found in the following magazine The Watchtower from 1996:
“Let us now consider the question of loyalty to Jehovah’s visible organization. There is no doubt that we owe loyalty to it, including the “faithful and discreet slave” through whom the Christian congregation is spiritually nourished. (Matthew 24:45-47) Suppose something appears in Watch Tower Society publications that we do not understand or agree with at the time. What will we do? Take offense and leave the organization?This is how some acted when The Watchtower said many years ago that the new covenant would apply during the Millennium. Others were upset by what the magazine once said about neutrality. If those who stumbled over these matters had been loyal to the organization and their brothers, they would have expected Jehovah to clarify the matters, as he did at the appropriate time.. Loyalty, then, includes waiting patiently for the faithful and discreet slave to publish a better understanding of the facts.[10]
In this context, the effusive thanks to the organization so “kind and loving“who, pretending to be the voice of God, presents his own biblical interpretations as divine doctrine, and then tries to justify his blunders with the excuse that he has received a “new light“Receiving more light on a matter cannot make something that was previously bad now good, if that is the case, before they were not in light but in darkness, which frankly is the situation in which the organization very often finds itself. What guarantees that everything it teaches its followers until now will not become obsolete tomorrow when they receive another “wonderful gift from Jehovah”?
In this way, control over the follower is closed: a social circle based only on members of the organization; exclusive treatment with those expelled and apostates; continuous study of information that only favors your points of view; reading the Bible through publications; requirement to dedicate a minimum number of hours to proselytizing and distributing publications; I relegate everything to the background (studies, sports, family) in order to instrumentalize the follower so that he becomes a “seller” and multiplier.
Part 1 – Part 2 – Part 3 – Part 4 – Part 5 – Part 6 – Conclusions
Grades
- The Watchtower,November 1, 1996, p. 27
[2] An idea that is repeated in numerous publications; The Watchtower, January 15, 1988; August 15, 1993; December 1, 1995; January 1, 1999, May 1, 2000; Let us draw closer to Jehovah, year 2002, page. 67-76
[3] September 23, 1988
[4] A letter dated October 19, 1988
[5] For reasons of space I have not reproduced literally but rather summarized some paragraphs from Raúl Alfredo Fermín’s book, Jehovah’s Witnesses, History-Bible-Doctrine, Tripod Editions, Caracas 2010, p. 54-56
[6] In this regard, see for example Wikipedia, the article “New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures” evidently edited by them.
[7] Located in http://www.apologeticacatolica.org/Protestantismo/Sectas/SectasN11_1.htm
[8] The Watchtower, February 1, 1984, p. 10-15
[9] The Watchtower, October 1, 1993, p. 19
[10] The Watchtower, March 15, 1996, p. 15-20 ↩ - [1] The Watchtower,November 1, 1996, p. 27
An idea that is repeated in numerous publications; The Watchtower, January 15, 1988; August 15, 1993; December 1, 1995; January 1, 1999, May 1, 2000; Let us draw closer to Jehovah, year 2002, page. 67-76
[3] September 23, 1988
[4] A letter dated October 19, 1988
[5] For reasons of space I have not reproduced literally but rather summarized some paragraphs from Raúl Alfredo Fermín’s book, Jehovah’s Witnesses, History-Bible-Doctrine, Tripod Editions, Caracas 2010, p. 54-56
[6] In this regard, see for example Wikipedia, the article “New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures” evidently edited by them.
[7] Located in http://www.apologeticacatolica.org/Protestantismo/Sectas/SectasN11_1.htm
[8] The Watchtower, February 1, 1984, p. 10-15
[9] The Watchtower, October 1, 1993, p. 19
[10] The Watchtower, March 15, 1996, p. 15-20 ↩ - [1] The Watchtower,November 1, 1996, p. 27
[2] An idea that is repeated in numerous publications; The Watchtower, January 15, 1988; August 15, 1993; December 1, 1995; January 1, 1999, May 1, 2000; Let us draw closer to Jehovah, year 2002, page. 67-76
September 23, 1988
[4] A letter dated October 19, 1988
[5] For reasons of space I have not reproduced literally but rather summarized some paragraphs from Raúl Alfredo Fermín’s book, Jehovah’s Witnesses, History-Bible-Doctrine, Tripod Editions, Caracas 2010, p. 54-56
[6] In this regard, see for example Wikipedia, the article “New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures” evidently edited by them.
[7] Located in http://www.apologeticacatolica.org/Protestantismo/Sectas/SectasN11_1.htm
[8] The Watchtower, February 1, 1984, p. 10-15
[9] The Watchtower, October 1, 1993, p. 19
[10] The Watchtower, March 15, 1996, p. 15-20 ↩ - [1] The Watchtower,November 1, 1996, p. 27
[2] An idea that is repeated in numerous publications; The Watchtower, January 15, 1988; August 15, 1993; December 1, 1995; January 1, 1999, May 1, 2000; Let us draw closer to Jehovah, year 2002, page. 67-76
[3] September 23, 1988
A letter dated October 19, 1988
[5] For reasons of space I have not reproduced literally but rather summarized some paragraphs from Raúl Alfredo Fermín’s book, Jehovah’s Witnesses, History-Bible-Doctrine, Tripod Editions, Caracas 2010, p. 54-56
[6] In this regard, see for example Wikipedia, the article “New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures” evidently edited by them.
[7] Located in http://www.apologeticacatolica.org/Protestantismo/Sectas/SectasN11_1.htm
[8] The Watchtower, February 1, 1984, p. 10-15
[9] The Watchtower, October 1, 1993, p. 19
[10] The Watchtower, March 15, 1996, p. 15-20 ↩ - [1] The Watchtower,November 1, 1996, p. 27
[2] An idea that is repeated in numerous publications; The Watchtower, January 15, 1988; August 15, 1993; December 1, 1995; January 1, 1999, May 1, 2000; Let us draw closer to Jehovah, year 2002, page. 67-76
[3] September 23, 1988
[4] A letter dated October 19, 1988
For reasons of space I have not reproduced literally but rather summarized some paragraphs from Raúl Alfredo Fermín’s book, Jehovah’s Witnesses, History-Bible-Doctrine, Tripod Editions, Caracas 2010, p. 54-56
[6] In this regard, see for example Wikipedia, the article “New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures” evidently edited by them.
[7] Located in http://www.apologeticacatolica.org/Protestantismo/Sectas/SectasN11_1.htm
[8] The Watchtower, February 1, 1984, p. 10-15
[9] The Watchtower, October 1, 1993, p. 19
[10] The Watchtower, March 15, 1996, p. 15-20 ↩ - [1] The Watchtower,November 1, 1996, p. 27
[2] An idea that is repeated in numerous publications; The Watchtower, January 15, 1988; August 15, 1993; December 1, 1995; January 1, 1999, May 1, 2000; Let us draw closer to Jehovah, year 2002, page. 67-76
[3] September 23, 1988
[4] A letter dated October 19, 1988
[5] For reasons of space I have not reproduced literally but rather summarized some paragraphs from Raúl Alfredo Fermín’s book, Jehovah’s Witnesses, History-Bible-Doctrine, Tripod Editions, Caracas 2010, p. 54-56
In this regard, see for example Wikipedia, the article “New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures” evidently edited by them.
[7] Located in http://www.apologeticacatolica.org/Protestantismo/Sectas/SectasN11_1.htm
[8] The Watchtower, February 1, 1984, p. 10-15
[9] The Watchtower, October 1, 1993, p. 19
[10] The Watchtower, March 15, 1996, p. 15-20 ↩ - [1] The Watchtower,November 1, 1996, p. 27
[2] An idea that is repeated in numerous publications; The Watchtower, January 15, 1988; August 15, 1993; December 1, 1995; January 1, 1999, May 1, 2000; Let us draw closer to Jehovah, year 2002, page. 67-76
[3] September 23, 1988
[4] A letter dated October 19, 1988
[5] For reasons of space I have not reproduced literally but rather summarized some paragraphs from Raúl Alfredo Fermín’s book, Jehovah’s Witnesses, History-Bible-Doctrine, Tripod Editions, Caracas 2010, p. 54-56
[6] In this regard, see for example Wikipedia, the article “New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures” evidently edited by them.
Located in http://www.apologeticacatolica.org/Protestantismo/Sectas/SectasN11_1.htm
[8] The Watchtower, February 1, 1984, p. 10-15
[9] The Watchtower, October 1, 1993, p. 19
[10] The Watchtower, March 15, 1996, p. 15-20 ↩ - [1] The Watchtower,November 1, 1996, p. 27
[2] An idea that is repeated in numerous publications; The Watchtower, January 15, 1988; August 15, 1993; December 1, 1995; January 1, 1999, May 1, 2000; Let us draw closer to Jehovah, year 2002, page. 67-76
[3] September 23, 1988
[4] A letter dated October 19, 1988
[5] For reasons of space I have not reproduced literally but rather summarized some paragraphs from Raúl Alfredo Fermín’s book, Jehovah’s Witnesses, History-Bible-Doctrine, Tripod Editions, Caracas 2010, p. 54-56
[6] In this regard, see for example Wikipedia, the article “New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures” evidently edited by them.
[7] Located in http://www.apologeticacatolica.org/Protestantismo/Sectas/SectasN11_1.htm
The Watchtower, February 1, 1984, p. 10-15
[9] The Watchtower, October 1, 1993, p. 19
[10] The Watchtower, March 15, 1996, p. 15-20 ↩ - [1] The Watchtower,November 1, 1996, p. 27
[2] An idea that is repeated in numerous publications; The Watchtower, January 15, 1988; August 15, 1993; December 1, 1995; January 1, 1999, May 1, 2000; Let us draw closer to Jehovah, year 2002, page. 67-76
[3] September 23, 1988
[4] A letter dated October 19, 1988
[5] For reasons of space I have not reproduced literally but rather summarized some paragraphs from Raúl Alfredo Fermín’s book, Jehovah’s Witnesses, History-Bible-Doctrine, Tripod Editions, Caracas 2010, p. 54-56
[6] In this regard, see for example Wikipedia, the article “New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures” evidently edited by them.
[7] Located in http://www.apologeticacatolica.org/Protestantismo/Sectas/SectasN11_1.htm
[8] The Watchtower, February 1, 1984, p. 10-15
The Watchtower, October 1, 1993, p. 19
[10] The Watchtower, March 15, 1996, p. 15-20 ↩ - [1] The Watchtower,November 1, 1996, p. 27
[2] An idea that is repeated in numerous publications; The Watchtower, January 15, 1988; August 15, 1993; December 1, 1995; January 1, 1999, May 1, 2000; Let us draw closer to Jehovah, year 2002, page. 67-76
[3] September 23, 1988
[4] A letter dated October 19, 1988
[5] For reasons of space I have not reproduced literally but rather summarized some paragraphs from Raúl Alfredo Fermín’s book, Jehovah’s Witnesses, History-Bible-Doctrine, Tripod Editions, Caracas 2010, p. 54-56
[6] In this regard, see for example Wikipedia, the article “New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures” evidently edited by them.
[7] Located in http://www.apologeticacatolica.org/Protestantismo/Sectas/SectasN11_1.htm
[8] The Watchtower, February 1, 1984, p. 10-15
[9] The Watchtower, October 1, 1993, p. 19
The Watchtower, March 15, 1996, p. 15-20 ↩
