How do organizations with a history of making “end of the world” second coming of Christ predictions, all of which have failed, continue to hold on to their followers? Why do such organizations often grow and flourish? Why do intelligent people get caught up, fervently and passionately, in believing such things?
Had you been a follower of Family Radio’s Harold Camping and his “end of the world” predictions, what would you have been thinking after “May 21st” passed with no change? What would you have thought after September-October of 1975 came and went and the battle of Armageddon didn’t happen as fervently predicted by Jehovah’s Witnesses for years? Would you continue to follow such organizations, even though in your mind you know something is seriously flawed in their theology?
Perhaps no other event in the history of a religious group provides as much potential for excitement and disappointment as predicting the end of the world. A prophecy can generate enormous enthusiasm among a groups members as they begin preparations for the paradise to come. In fact such excitement can become infectious, drawing many new members into the fold to await Armageddon.
However, one can also imagine few disappointments as great as the passing of a prophecy unfulfilled. At that point a believer must face the fact that all of the investments and sacrifices made in loyal support of the group may have been for naught.
One of religions greatest strengths is its otherworldliness – the ability for a groups leaders to preach so called truths that cannot be readily disconfirmed. Therein lies prophecy’s potential for excitement and disappointment. A fulfilled prophecy makes real what one had to take on faith. A failed prophecy, on the other hand, demonstrates that ones’s faith was mistaken, misplaced.
While we may be rightly concerned about the impact on the people who follow religious organizations that exist for predicting the second coming of Christ, I am not so sure the followers are suffering all that much. What does it take to be a true believer, a loyal follower of Camping or a Jehovah’s Witness when all they’ve predicted has failed to happen?
Five conditions must be present, if someone is to sustain a fervent belief [and support of leaders] after a failure or disconfirmation of an intricately developed prophecy.
1. A belief must be held with deep conviction and it must have some relevance to action, that is, to what the believer does or how he behaves.
2. The person holding the belief must have committed himself to it; that is, for the sake of his belief, he must have taken some important action that is difficult to undo. In general, the more important such actions are, and the more difficult they are to undo, the greater is the individual's commitment to the belief.
3. The belief must be sufficiently specific and sufficiently concerned with the real world so that events may unequivocally refute the belief.
4. Such undeniable disconfirmatory evidence must occur and must be recognized by the individual holding the belief.
5. The individual believer must have social support. It is unlikely that one isolated believer could withstand the kind of disconfirming evidence that has been specified. If, however, the believer is a member of a group of convinced persons who can support one another, the belief may be maintained and the believers may attempt to proselytize or persuade nonmembers that the belief is correct.
The psychological theory that helps explain human behavior and response to religious organizations that make frequent and repetitive predictions that fail, is know as cognitive dissonance.
Cognitive dissonance is an uncomfortable feeling caused by holding conflicting ideas simultaneously. The theory of cognitive dissonance proposes that people have a motivational drive to reduce dissonance. Dissonance is defined as a lack of agreement; an inconsistency between the beliefs one holds or between one's actions and one's beliefs. It’s human nature to want to reduce and remove internal [mental] conflicts within our value structures. We do this by changing our attitudes, our beliefs, and trying to harmonize those changes with our decisions, choices and actions.
Dissonance can also be reduced by justifying, blaming, and denying. In the recent case of Harold Camping’s failed May 21st prediction, he himself used a blend of all three by providing a new date to his prediction, clarifying what the first date really was, changing a few of the basics, and continuing on to a new date... October 21st. His followers for the most part, are lining up right behind the new pitch. His followers cannot comfortably exist day-to-day without somehow fixing their mental dissonance, so adapting to the new prediction, clarified prediction and new date seems a reasonable way to achieve mental balance and peace.
However, experience or reality can clash with expectations, hopes and dreams. When people are experiencing cognitive dissonance because of a failed expectation, they will often feel shock, surprise, dread, guilt, anger, and usually embarrassment, especially among family and close friends. People are unwilling to think of their choices as not correct, despite substantial evidence to the contrary. This bias gives dissonance theory its predictive power, shedding light on otherwise puzzling irrational and sometimes destructive behavior.
Smoking is often presented as a classic example of cognitive dissonance because it is almost universally known that cigarettes can cause lung cancer, yet virtually everyone wants to live a long and healthy life. The desire to live a long life is dissonant with the activity of doing something that will most likely shorten one's life. The tension produced by these contradictory ideas can be reduced by quitting smoking, denying the evidence of lung cancer, or justifying one's smoking with a variety of reasons. For example, smokers could rationalize their behavior by concluding that only a few smokers become ill, that it only happens to very heavy smokers, or that if smoking does not kill them, something else will.
Once a person makes a life-changing decision that impacts everything, such as choices made in the context of religion, it is very hard for that person to discard their belief systems. Even in the face of failed prophetic predictions, people will cling to the alterations, modifications, new light and revelation, and special knowledge of the groups leaders as a way of defending their inner self. Dissonance is a threat to the self-concept. The thought, "I am increasing my risk of lung cancer" is dissonant with the self-related belief, "I am a smart, reasonable person who makes good decisions."
The most famous case in the early study of cognitive dissonance was described by in the book When Prophecy Fails. The authors infiltrated a religious cult group that was expecting the imminent end of the world on a certain date. When that prediction failed, the movement did not disintegrate, but instead grew substantially larger. How could that have happened? The true believers, sharing cult beliefs with others, gained acceptance and thus reduced their own dissonance. The more people who embraced the cult’s beliefs, the more inner peace was gained by the founding followers who could self-justify and rationalize that “what we believe must be right because many others are joining us.”
Why do Jehovah’s Witnesses continue to believe the heresies taught to them? Because the organization continues to grow. Why will Harold Camping and the Family Radio Network continue to flourish... for the same reason. Their respective followers will find ways in their own minds to justify their choices and decisions thereby reducing the mental anguish associated with their decisions (dissonance). They will cling to an organization, to the “special knowledge of men,” to dates and predictions, but give little heed to what the Bible clearly teaches.
So what happens when prophecy fails? When you look at the cultic groups throughout history that have formed around leaders who dogmatically proclaimed that The End would come in their own generation, and that they were God’s Mouthpiece to warn the world, you will find a common thread. The group’s leader proclaims that his prophecy didn’t really fail at all. He will adapt and fine-tune the next version of prediction. And he will retain a significant proportion of supporters and probably grow. Why? Because no one wants to admit they have wasted years of their life supporting a failure. Or a charlatan. Or a false prophet.
As we all know, it is often easier to make excuses than it is to change behavior. Dissonance theory leads to the conclusion that humans are frequently rationalizing but not always rational beings, especially in matter of religion... where so much is at stake.
