UNITED STATES
freeminds.org
An Analysis of the Theocratic Warfare Doctrine of the Jehovah’s Witnesses
Jerry Bergman , Ph.D.
Northwest State College
Archbold , Ohio
Reprinted from:
Cultic Studies Review:
An Internet Journal of Research, News, and Opinion
2002, Vol. 1, No. 2
www.culticstudiesreview.org
AFF
P.O. Box 2265
Bonita Springs , FL 34133
239-514-3081
aff@affcultinfoserve.com
Abstract
This review of the problem of religious justified lying in court focuses on the Jehovah’s Witnesses and their theocratic war doctrine. The history of the development of this doctrine and the problems of lying in society are reviewed. Also discussed are examples of the use of this doctrine in court and a survey of active and former Witnesses designed to determine the awareness level of this doctrine among the average Witness. It is concluded that the longer someone is a Witness, and the higher the attained rank in the Watchtower, the more likely the person is to understand and to use the doctrine.
Introduction
Honesty is a central Western value, and so important that fully 95% of Americans agree with the statement, “a primary goal of schools is to teach honesty and the importance of telling the truth” (Johnson and Immerwhr, 1994, p. 24). Honesty is also critical for the court process to function properly, and one of the most common impediments to determining truth is lying by court witnesses. In Judge Schwelb’s (1989, p. 3) words, “if witnesses lie successfully, the blindfold over the eyes of Justice will not serve its intended benign purpose.” Judge Schwelb stated he has encountered “many hundreds of instances of perjury or deception” in his thirty years as a lawyer (1989, p.3). He found that lying is especially common in domestic cases and if the deception is not exposed, liars can profit from their fabrications.
Cases involving other motivations for lying are more complex, such as when lying defined as a violation of the oath to tell “the whole truth and nothing but the truth” occurs because of deeply held religious convictions. Even lying that is exposed requires evaluating a variety of issues, such as whether so-called white lies, stretching the truth, or exaggerations constitute perjury (Stewart, 1986, p. 84). Lying also normally includes employing words “to obscure communication” so as to “manipulate” others for one’s own advantage (Wolk and Henley 1970 pp. 90-94, 232). The whole truth and nothing but the truth requirement in court was historically designed to avoid the problem of a court witness, for example, claiming that he honestly “didn’t steal” from his employer when in his mind he meant he “didn’t steal” from him yesterday , but to listeners he implied that he never stole because the yesterday remains unsaid. The whole truth is that he has stolen from his employer in the past (Bok, 1978).
Note: This is an Abuse Tracker excerpt. Click the title to view the full text of the original article. If the original article is no longer available, see our News Archive.