Caution

You are about to enter the realm of — Deception — Deceit — Cunning — Guile — Sophistry — & Dishonesty.

It is found that there are a number of common traits and similarities among those who put forth private doctrines and unorthodox theology as truth. It seems they all take from the same play-book. While their methods are similar, their skills and rhetoric vary in detail of emphasis. They are all forced to resort to the same basic tactics. The following is a summary of observable ploys of sophistry used to deceive. If some of these topics seem to overlap it is because the subsequent points build on the prior headings.

To begin let us deal with truths

I.  Truth is consistent. It does not waver. What is true in one instance will be true in all instances of like circumstances. It is universal. While something true in the past may not be true today, it nevertheless still remains a truth as to the time in which it was given.

Let us consider the stance of the Jehovah Witnesses on doctrine:

“Their publications teach that doctrinal changes and refinements result from a process of progressive revelation, in which God gradually reveals his will and purpose, ^{132, 133 ,134, 135} and that such enlightenment or ‘new light’¹³⁶ results from the application of reason and study, ¹³⁷ the guidance of the holy spirit, and direction from Jesus Christ and angels.” Source Wikipedia: Jehovah’s Witnesses Beliefs.

The J. W.’s have thoroughly rejected the idea of truth being consistent as seen by their teaching of doctrine changing and becoming refined.

• 132 “Focus on the Goodness of Jehovah’s Organization”. The Watchtower: 22. 15 July 2006.
• 133 “Impart God’s Progressive Revelation to Mankind”, The Watchtower, March 1, 1965, pp. 158–159 134 Penton 1997, pp. 165–171
• 135 “Flashes of Light—Great and Small”, The Watchtower, May 15, 1995, page 15.
• 136 The Path of the Righteous Does Keep Getting Brighter”, The Watchtower, December 1, 1981, pp. 26-31.
• 137 Penton 1997, p. 165

1. The Word of God, our Bibles, hold the final word of faith, practice and doctrine. It is The Authority over all spiritual and religious matters. It is not to be added to nor to be taken away from. There is no substitute or augmentation for the apostolic inspired writings of the first century. No post apostolic writings are on par with Holy Scripture. This would preclude the writings of Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon, and the veneration given to the writings of the early Catholic “Church Fathers.”
2. Personal testimonies are not evidence of truth and cannot supplant the written Word. People can be mistaken, misled, and deceived by their experiences. And some have outright lied about their experiences. The only time personal testimonies have any validity is when they agree and are in harmony with the Scriptures: truth, but not when they support some previously unknown or fringe theology, or stand in opposition and contradiction to the scriptures.
3. Be skeptical of unfamiliar words and phrases not found in the Bible. Men very often coin new phrases and employ terms not seen in the Word of God. Frequently men will assign new definitions and meanings to words. This is done as a smoke screen to mislead, to confuse and not to clarify. It very often only amounts to double-talk. An example of this is when Calvinists say that “all” does not mean “all,” but something else. (John 12:32)
4. Beware of usage of obscure scriptures. Usually they are applied to support a belief which those scriptures do not teach and beliefs which cannot be substantiated in any other scriptures. Because they are unfamiliar people can be easily misled. As an example, “baptism for the dead.”
5. Do not accept any teachings or assertions without corroborating appropriate scriptures. If any teaching or claim cannot be substantiated by the written Word of God, reject it immediately. Insist on proof. For example, the doctrine of hell is grossly distorted by both the Mormons and the Jehovah Witnesses.

• Mormons teach that hell is a pleasant place without any suffering, a “Spirit Paradise,” and there is a second kind of hell that is largely a metaphorical term at best. —The Huffington Post: “Do Mormons believe in Hell?”
• J. W.’s teach that hell is not a place of torment but is just annihilation of the human soul/spirit. *—

*Life after death. Main article: Jehovah Witnesses and salvation: Wikipedia. Jehovah’s Witnesses believe death is a state of non-existence with no consciousness. “There is no Hell of fiery torment; Hades and Sheol are understood to refer to the condition of death, termed the common grave.”

II.  Consider the credentials of the persons claiming to be teachers. What are their backgrounds, what are their beliefs, and what they are prejudiced against. The Jehovah Witnesses sect was founded in the late 1870s by Charles Taze Russell. He claimed to be a Greek scholar to support his doctrines from the original language of the Bible. However, under oath he could not so much as to recite the Greek alphabet.*

*“. . . during the [court] proceedings on March 17, 1913, Russell had repeatedly lied under oath by affirming that he was ordained, but denying the same when cross-examined, by affirming that he knew the Greek language, but when shown by Counselor Staunton an extract from the New Testament in Greek by Westcott & Hort, he was unable to recognize it. . . ” Wikipedia, Charles Taze Russell; “Qualifications.”

III.  Another trait of false prophets is their secretiveness. False teachers have the habit of dodging questions or just ignoring them. They are not open but keep things hidden. As an example simply do a web search on “Pay Attention to Yourselves and to All the Flock. Jehovah’s Witnesses.” This is considered a secret book for their elders only. The policy of some radical leaders is to advise followers not to put to paper their beliefs as it would give opposing views censure of their doctrines.

IV.   A requirement for theologians, or at least those who claim to be, is a sound mind able to think and reason logically. To reason with sound premises and not unfounded suppositions is essential for all teachers. Arguments which are illogical most often expose the fallacies in the conclusions which are reached. As an example consider the arguments and conclusions drawn by those who hold the doctrine that there is no hell: conclusion—Jesus died in vain for no purpose.

V.   For every teaching it is necessary to follow it to its logical conclusion. Then compare that conclusion to the teachings of the Bible and see if it holds true. Is it in harmony with the Word of God, is it reasonable to the Word and the reality of life’s experience. For a time a thing known as Prayer Cloths were the rage for healing. None were ever known to cure any illness in fact of life. False prophets to this day are still selling magical “water.”

VI.   Do not accept any arguments made from silence in the Bible. Example: Rev 3:5, “ He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life. . .” It is a mistake to assert from this scripture that Jesus will bolt out names from the book of life. It is a grave error to build arguments on what is not said—silence. This is the positive argument.  Furthermore, it is just as wrong to make negative arguments on what is not said. Such as, “Well, Jesus did not say we couldn’t go to pornographic web sites.”

VII.   Half truths, ignoring context, syntax, grammar, etc. requires a careful examination of what is used as proof of error. As an example this statement was given to prove that the gifts of the spirit was for all people in all ages.

Assertion: “Acts 2:17, ‘In the last day. . .I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh.’ ‘All flesh’ means, men women, young people—all cultures, all languages, all people—whether lowborn of highborn, well educated or ignorant.”

If the context of this verse is checked, it is speaking of a particular time and also of a particular group of people. It is a half-truth to say “All people.” This phenomenon only came upon those people in the church and moreover not all of the people in the church at that time. Therefore any argument based on this statement is fails.

¹⁶ But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel;  ¹⁷ And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:  ¹⁸ And on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy: (Acts 2:16-18 KJV)

This point is more of a pet peeve than a test of legitimacy. It is the very bad practice of giving quotes or citing experts and then never giving the citations or the source of the quote.

               Notes from Robinson’s Ecclesiastical Researches

Before proceeding it would be prudent to give heed to Robinson’s warning of six cautions to the students of history.  “Historians will write in two venues, that of the evidence of documented records and that of editorial comments which reflect their own conclusions.  The reader needs to be aware of this and delineate where one ends and the other begins.  The facts, if they be facts, should be received but the opinions ought to be challenged for their veracity.  Some conclusions are very reasonable and plausible; others are mere demonstrations of prejudice and bias.”  The following cautions can help to explain confusion and the causes of error and misrepresentation.

#1   Caution in Regard to Words.

CHRISTIAN.  The word Christian, which properly signifies a professor of the religion of Christ, is so used in ecclesiastical history as to convey a gross fallacy, and entirely to destroy the truth of history.  In the writing of the Catholics and a number of Protestants  there exists a fallacy in the term Christian and Christianity, which, if it passes unobserved, goes to establish a falsehood.  It was the opinion of these writers that those who deny what is essential to their beliefs are not Christians, but pagans [or heretics].  They represent Christians as those who have been instructed in their faith with no requirement of a personal faith in Christ or moral decency.  Charlemagne compelled whole nations to receive Christianity [by submission to baptism], which in truth was popery.

CATHOLIC.   Catholic is another term that darkens history, and as it is generally understood today, establishes falsehood.  The term is found in the second century, but it was not until the fourth century that it began to take on the usage with which we are familiar.  Catholic is general or universal and was first used to express that the faith of Christ was universal, but not with the idea of a single, one universal church.

BAPTISM.  Baptism is another word to be used with caution.  It stands in one society of “Christians” for dipping, in another for pouring, in a third for sprinkling, in a fourth for the influence of the spirit, and in a fifth a whole series of rituals which includes exorcism, crossing, the application of salt, spittle, sponsorings, and ceremonies.  Some design their practice of baptism on scripture only; others accept both tradition and scripture, and some on only the traditional writings of their ancient church fathers.  A number of Christians asserted that because indispensable requirements of baptism were missing the act was no baptism at all.

ANABAPTISTS.  In the opinion of those whose baptisms are condemned they make the charge of re-baptism, anabaptism.   But the “re-baptizers” refute the term insisting that there is no re-baptizing but only one true baptism is administered.

INFANT, BABE, CHILD.   These are terms which have been too often misunderstood and applied.  In the ancient texts of the second and fifth centuries, proof of the practice of infant baptism are quoted.  Some say that infant baptism was first performed in the second century, others maintain it first occurred in the fifth.  Both present authentic documents of those times to support their assertions.  The confusion lies in the usage of the terms infant, babe, and child.  These terms were, and still are, commonly applied to those under the care of others, and not by necessity meaning new-born without ability of reason or choice.   The term infant has an English definition of “a young person considered a minor.”  Also the word infantry is from the French, “youth, a foot soldier.”

#2   Caution in Regard to Contradictions.

Contradictions may be accounted for in two ways.  First is that of the possibility of known falsehoods.  Second is that the contrary assertions may both contain a truth, and reconciliation between them is found in these truths.  Some say that the Donatists re-baptized because the essence of the profession of Christianity was first missing, while others say it was because of the immorality of the Catholic Church and had lost the right to the ordinances of baptism and the Lord’s Supper.  The truth is — both reasons are factual.  There are certain contradictions concerning the Waldenses — that some remained in the Catholic Church and others maintained they were the only Church of Christ (Armitage pg.307).   But if it be understood that two groups of Waldenses were spoken of, the confusion is resolved.

#3   Caution in regard to Epithets, and False Characterizations  

Epithets are descriptive words added to a name, usually meant to be insulting or abusive.   Those who opposed the authority of the bishops of the Rome church were characterized as being sacrilegious and forsaking God.  The Anabaptists [and Waldenses] denied the marriage sacrament was necessary for salvation and were accused of gross immorality for refusing marriage in general, that their societies were churches of fornication and immorality.

#4   Caution in Regard to Rhetoric.

Rhetoric is the art of persuasive speech using elaborate words which stir the emotions but offer little evidence of the truth.  This form of argument was employed extensively by the Catholic bishops when condemning heretics without supporting rational and reasonable evidence.  Mere eloquence fails if it is not supported by fact.  The charges of gross sin were made against those Christians who opposed the men and pope of the Catholic Church which were built on elaborate language and emotion.  Their proof was supposition, innuendos, and fragments of scriptures, with no substance of truth composed of inaccuracies.

#5   Caution in Regard to Attestation.

Testimonials are always to be judged with caution.  Sincere witnesses may be ill-informed, prejudiced, or partial.  There are some testimonies absolutely impossible, others improbable, some manifestly false, and others though true, but not to the point.  The Britain historian, Bede, is just such an example when he wrote of the miracles by the catholic clergy in the early church history of Brittan.

#6   Caution in Regard to Spurious Writings.

Articles of forgery should not be forgotten.  Spurious writing and manufactured frauds are other problems requiring caution.  These appear at times as valid sources of historical evidence, but the better historians have either identified them or raise the flag of skepticism.

Nearly all of the above observations were written during the recent political campaigns. Nearly all, if not all, of these ploys were used with the utmost vigor of misrepresentations and smearing.

Return Home

Previous Page