Glossary of Terms, Part 3: Noetic Effect of Sin, Mystical Manipulation, Doctrine over Person, Sacred Science

This is the third and final installment in our series covering terminology used to discuss high-control groups.

Noetic Effect of Sin 

The noetic effects of sin refer to how the Fall damaged human thinking and understanding, even for believers. Sin distorts our ability to clearly see and apply truth. This effect is often overlooked, especially among Christian academics and intellectuals. Intelligent Christians can make logically sound arguments and then seriously misapply them, while sincerely believing that their misuse is still faithful obedience. Many cults gradually become more extreme over time. What starts as reasonable admonitions to self-discipline slowly hardens into rigid, controlling, authoritarian rule. Often entire theological movements which begin with genuine zeal and orthodoxy can, over time, eventually drift into declining moral and spiritual health. Sin doesn’t just affect beliefs. Instead, it clouds and warps our reasoning and how we handle truth, often in ways we don’t easily notice.

During summer camp of 2016, the head elder was informed of a brain-eating amoeba present in the water at the Whitewater Rafting Center. I and at least two other parents were personally involved in sharing the information of the facts and the risks to the elder. If infected with this pathogen, the mortality rate is 98-100%, according to the CDC, with no effective medical treatment. Just earlier that week, a teen died from an infection contracted at that very whitewater center, after having gone underwater just one time. Riser chose to expose the children to the infected water without the parents’ informed consent.

Explanations were offered in an email after returning from the trip. Of the 60 family units who attended camp and went to the rafting center, the parents of only 11 families were emailed. The explanations given include:

“This amoeba is actually fairly common in warmer bodies of open water and so…it is not surprising that the water tested positive for this organism.”

“Infections caused by the amoeba are rare: fewer than 10 cases have been reported annually…”

“We were not aware of this issue as we began our activities at the center…” (Actually, that is not true. He had been informed prior to beginning activities at the rafting center, early enough that avoiding the risk was feasible. Some parents who were there were informed soon enough to keep their own children out of the water, and the person who informed those parents of the risk had told Riser before any other parents. This person passed the information to others after telling Riser, because it was clear he was not taking the situation seriously.)

“Unless someone fell into the water during the whitewater rafting, they are not at risk from this type of amoeba infection.”

“If a teen or adult did fall into the water, the chances or [sic] the amoeba actually entering through the nose are extremely small.”

These may seem like logical arguments, but they do not accurately reflect the activities of teenagers on a rafting trip, and they do not justify endangering children without parental knowledge or consent.

In a similar way, justifying locking captured children in constructed “cages” for up to several hours, spraying them with water, using a leaf blower on them, and subjecting them to intense interrogation without full parental knowledge and consent is an example of rationalization of abusive actions that are not excusable. When a young girl told a now-elder that she wasn’t allowed to be taken to the jail, he told her not to tell her parents. The explanations that it gives children “a glimpse into the reality many believers around the world face for their faith,” and “the cost of following Christ and the persecution many endure,” and to “be able to defend their faith” and “It’s in the form of a really fun game” do not justify this type of abuse. This is an “end justifies the means” mentality, especially when many of the children are in middle school and many are not professing believers. These activities are justified by the fun and adventurous aspects of the game, without regard to the irresponsibility of leadership and vulnerability of the children. For further detail on these events, see the previous post, “Misleading Claims, Falsehoods, and Harms.”

Mystical Manipulation 

The group or leader manipulates events or experiences to make them look spontaneous, but they are actually carefully planned or manipulated behind the scenes. These events are used to demonstrate that the leader has divine authority, special spiritual giftings, or some exceptional talent. They could also indicate that the group itself is uniquely chosen, enlightened, or favored by God. This creates awe and convinces members the leader and/or the group is set apart from ordinary humanity.

Common tactics include reinterpreting everyday events, historical facts, Scripture, personal stories, or group experiences to fit the leader’s narrative, such as twisting a random occurrence into a sign from God or as evidence of God’s particular blessing on the church, or as confirmation of the group’s special status. Use of this tactic builds intense loyalty and emotional dependence, and makes the leader/group seem uniquely legitimate and powerful. It also discourages doubt. “How can you question, when God keeps blessing us and showing signs of His love for us?”

Doctrine over Person 

Members’ personal experiences are subordinated to the group’s specific ideology. Members must deny or reinterpret any contrary experiences to fit the group ideology.

(Paraphrase) “That spiritual experience you had simply did not happen.”

Dismissing any personal experience of God’s work in the world that does not align with the specific doctrinal convictions of the leadership.

(Paraphrase) “The Holy Spirit doesn’t work that way.”

The Holy Spirit does not communicate through emotions, so that strong feeling that you needed to pray for a believer, who you later found out was going through a difficult trial, must have been from the devil.

(Paraphrase) “You can’t pray like that. That’s the wrong way to pray. You need to pray the way the leaders taught you to.”

Sacred Science 

The group’s core beliefs, teachings, or ideology are treated as the absolute, final Truth. This goes beyond the truth presented in Scripture to include all the teaching and doctrine from the congregation’s leadership as the absolute, authoritative interpretation for everything in life. It can include relationships, behavior, decision-making, careers, society, etc. This “truth,” as presented by the church leadership, is beyond questioning. Debate, doubt, and criticism are not allowed. Questioning is seen as wrong, disloyal, sinful, or even dangerous. Teaching is presented as infallible and often is claimed to have “solid hermeneutics,” spiritual insight, strong theological backing, or righteous moral authority, even if none of these claims are actually open to real testing or evidence.

Truth does not really exist outside the local church congregation. Any ideas from the outside world, including science, psychology, teachings from other denominations, statements from experts, family advice, news media, secular history, or personal experiences that diverge from the teachings and ideologies of the leadership, are automatically considered to be suspect. The cultural pressure within the group is to view such ideas with suspicion, as they are almost surely false, deceptive, Satanic, biased, or incomplete. The leader is a specially gifted teacher with the exceptional wisdom to serve as messenger for this ultimate Truth. He speaks for God, for the believers’ highest good. Therefore, the leader is also above criticism. Criticizing the leader is equal to attacking the sacred Truth itself. He is above reproach.

This cultivates intense loyalty to the leader and his particular interpretation of doctrine. Doubting feels like betraying biblical truth for worldly lies. Habitually dismissing all outside information and perspectives causes members to eventually stop listening to or trusting anything that is not from within the group or approved by the leaders. The thought of questioning what is being taught, and even private doubts, can feel spiritually threatening. All of this creates a closed mental system where the group’s ideology is the only lens allowed for viewing the world. This tactic shuts down critical thinking, makes the group seem uniquely enlightened or chosen, and protects the leader from accountability. It often pairs with other criteria such as Loading the Language or Doctrine Over Person to keep members mentally locked in.

Bible Study classes are not discussion-based but lecture-oriented.

Unbelivers can’t possibly have real insight.

There are only three biblically-sound churches in the greater Knoxville area.

You might not be a Believer if…

Maybe you should be baptized again now that you are at GCC, just in case you didn’t really come to Christ properly the first time.

(Not a paraphrase) “Are you questioning me??”