I have just finished reading "The True Believer: Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements" by Eric Hoffer. The book was published in 1951, during the Cold War, yet the theories and principles, that Hoffer proposes to explain the phenomena of mass movements, are as relevant today as they were then. (There are several threads on this forum that discuss aspects of Hoffer's statements and theories.)
This book is available as a free downloadable pdf here: http://evelynbrooks.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/The_True_Believer_-_Eric_Hoffer.pdf
In "True Believer", Hoffer examines the nature of the type of individual that is attracted to mass movements, and he concludes that it is the frustrated individual that is the prime target for conversion to a mass movement, whether that movement be political, sociological, or religious in nature. Hoffer identifies this frustration as the primary individual motivator - frustration with the self and a desire to eliminate or reduce the 'self' - that allows a mass movement to supply the answers for their lack of control over self and environment.
I highly recommend this book to be added to a person's reading list. This book gives a person a template to understand the phenomena of mass movements (religion/cults), why people are attracted to them and why it is so difficult to reach people who are trapped within the confines of an organization.
There are many excellent quotes in Hoffer's book, but the one I want to highlight is one about doctrine. The WT doctrine consumes people - both in and out of the cult. The hours and time invested into de-tangling the obscure and confusing doctrine of the WT is a necessary exercise for most in order to de-program cult thinking, but, ultimately...it is futile to expect to truly understand WT doctrine. The objective of doctrine is not that it is valid...the objective is to obscure the truth in order for it to become credible (or be confusing enough to take up inordinate amounts of time of those who want to un-ravel it). Once a person understands doctrine, it not longer requires belief. And belief in the unknown - in the unknowable future and the unknowable past - is vital in order for a mass movement to take place.
The WT's doctrine is deliberately obscure - they cannot afford to have their followers truly understand it.
The effectiveness of a doctrine does not come from its meaning but from its certitude. No doctrine however profound and sublime will be effective unless it is presented as the embodiment of the one and only truth. It must be the one word from which all things are and all things speak. Crude absurdities, trivial nonsense and sublime truths are equally potent in readying people for self-sacrifice if they are accepted as the sole, eternal truth.
It is obvious, therefore, that in order to be effective a doctrine must not be understood, but has rather to be believed in. We can be absolutely certain only about things we do not understand. A doctrine that is understood is shorn of its strength. Once we understand a thing, it is as if it had originated in us. And, clearly, those who are asked to renounce the self and sacrifice it cannot see eternal certitude in anything which originates in that self. The fact that they understand a thing fully impairs its validity and certitude in their eyes.
The devout are always urged to seek the absolute truth with their hearts and not their minds. “It is the heart which is conscious of God, not the reason.” Rudolph Hess, when swearing in the entire Nazi party in 1934, exhorted his hearers: “Do not seek Adolph Hitler with your brains; all of you will find him with the strength of your hearts.” When a movement begins to rationalize its doctrine and make it intelligible, it is a sign that its dynamic span is over; that it is primarily interested in stability. For, as will be shown later (Section 106), the stability of a regime requires the allegiance of the intellectuals, and it is to win them rather than to foster self-sacrifice in the masses that a doctrine is made intelligible.
If a doctrine is not unintelligible, it has to be vague; and if neither unintelligible nor vague, it has to be unverifiable. One has to get to heaven or the distant future to determine the truth of an effective doctrine. When some part of a doctrine is relatively simple, there is a tendency among the faithful to complicate and obscure it. Simple words are made pregnant with meaning and made to look like symbols in a secret message. There is thus an illiterate air about the most literate true believer. He seems to use words as if he were ignorant of their true meaning. Hence, too, his taste for quibbling, hair-splitting and scholastic tortuousness.