Australian cult: Anyone recognize this?
Posted by:
cultmalleus
()
Date: February 14, 2007 04:49PM
Is dave going senile or what???? Now he thinks the whole world reads his forums! And still he persists with the LIE that he "discerned" Apostate was Tony.
From their forum:
Oh, dave you're so clever. In your self deception.
Anyone remember the limited edition tract with Harry Butler and the different animals? A whole system of how to put down people, to classify them as "snakes" or "vipers" or "pigs". Should I send a copy to the Quakers?
From their forum:
Quote
But virtually the whole world knows that Apostate started out as Tony and that he handed it over to Craig about the start of February, at which point Craig started practically boasting that it was him, and that it proved it had been him all along (even though Tony made many statements as Apostate that could only be attributable to him and not to Craig).
As I get older, I have more and more difficulty remembering names and faces. I recognise my weaknesses. But because I have spent my whole life working with words, it is fairly easy for me to recognise a person's writing style
Oh, dave you're so clever. In your self deception.
Anyone remember the limited edition tract with Harry Butler and the different animals? A whole system of how to put down people, to classify them as "snakes" or "vipers" or "pigs". Should I send a copy to the Quakers?
Australian cult: Anyone recognize this?
Posted by:
apostate
()
Date: February 14, 2007 04:54PM
Quote
cultmalleus
Is dave going senile or what???? Now he thinks the whole world reads his forums! And still he persists with the LIE that he "discerned" Apostate was Tony.
From their forum:Quote
But virtually the whole world knows that Apostate started out as Tony and that he handed it over to Craig about the start of February, at which point Craig started practically boasting that it was him, and that it proved it had been him all along (even though Tony made many statements as Apostate that could only be attributable to him and not to Craig).
As I get older, I have more and more difficulty remembering names and faces. I recognise my weaknesses. But because I have spent my whole life working with words, it is fairly easy for me to recognise a person's writing style
Oh, dave you're so clever. In your self deception.
Anyone remember the limited edition tract with Harry Butler and the different animals? A whole system of how to put down people, to classify them as "snakes" or "vipers" or "pigs". Should I send a copy to the Quakers?
I did not realise I was so famous :roll: :lol: :lol:
That explains those letters of support I received from Goosebay, Cananda. :wink:
Australian cult: Anyone recognize this?
Posted by:
Josh
()
Date: February 15, 2007 03:32AM
I've been waiting for my last post to showup on this board for about a day now. Looks like it must have gotten lost in the ether somewhere.
The jist of it was I thanked you guys for standing up for me when I was called a troll and I gave the reason I have a favorable opinion of the Jesus Christians. The short winded version is I like them because they've been nice to me.
I guess that the way I ask my questions does make me sound naive. When I am trying to understand another persons point of view I don't want to assume anything on my own so I ask questions about things I really should be able to deduce from the answer given. I don't want to do that because in doing so I can insert some of my own ideas into your mouth. I'm not doing it because I'm trying to undermine you.
Sorry apostate that I haven't yet commented on your view that people who like the group favor a top down aproach and people who don't like the group favor a more bottom up aproach. Understand that I am not sure exactly what I am allowed to share of my own take on your position on this board. I didn't think I was doing things wrong before and received a warning so I am leery of doing things that seem ok to me for me to say now. I'll say as much as, I have read your analysis and I have given it thought.
I did notice that your list of complaints all had to do with Dave. If the group didn't have Dave in it would you guys think it would have been a group you could have remained a part of? I'm asking the people who are still more in line with their theology I guess. I wouldn't expect apostate to join in proslytising for a religion he doesn't beleive in. Do you guys think a group with the Jesus Christians theology, but with a different leader/leadership structure would be a good thing?
The jist of it was I thanked you guys for standing up for me when I was called a troll and I gave the reason I have a favorable opinion of the Jesus Christians. The short winded version is I like them because they've been nice to me.
I guess that the way I ask my questions does make me sound naive. When I am trying to understand another persons point of view I don't want to assume anything on my own so I ask questions about things I really should be able to deduce from the answer given. I don't want to do that because in doing so I can insert some of my own ideas into your mouth. I'm not doing it because I'm trying to undermine you.
Sorry apostate that I haven't yet commented on your view that people who like the group favor a top down aproach and people who don't like the group favor a more bottom up aproach. Understand that I am not sure exactly what I am allowed to share of my own take on your position on this board. I didn't think I was doing things wrong before and received a warning so I am leery of doing things that seem ok to me for me to say now. I'll say as much as, I have read your analysis and I have given it thought.
I did notice that your list of complaints all had to do with Dave. If the group didn't have Dave in it would you guys think it would have been a group you could have remained a part of? I'm asking the people who are still more in line with their theology I guess. I wouldn't expect apostate to join in proslytising for a religion he doesn't beleive in. Do you guys think a group with the Jesus Christians theology, but with a different leader/leadership structure would be a good thing?
Australian cult: Anyone recognize this?
Posted by:
matilda
()
Date: February 15, 2007 03:58AM
Congratulations Apostate!
Your style is quite unique, legible, fathomable and often entertaining. Todays post , for example, was really funny. Dave has a point about style.
For example, you rarely, if ever, include drivelly, inane or cliche ridden phrases like
' I am damned if I do and I'm damned if I dont'
'You cant have it both ways guys' or
' You see, April, when you say blah blah blah, what you really mean is blah blah blah'
' There are no locks on the door'
' When they mention Hitler..,we know..'
' ...........we eat babies'
Apostate, this man makes his living writing books!!
:shock: :confused:
Your style is quite unique, legible, fathomable and often entertaining. Todays post , for example, was really funny. Dave has a point about style.
For example, you rarely, if ever, include drivelly, inane or cliche ridden phrases like
' I am damned if I do and I'm damned if I dont'
'You cant have it both ways guys' or
' You see, April, when you say blah blah blah, what you really mean is blah blah blah'
' There are no locks on the door'
' When they mention Hitler..,we know..'
' ...........we eat babies'
Apostate, this man makes his living writing books!!
:shock: :confused:
Australian cult: Anyone recognize this?
Posted by:
matilda
()
Date: February 15, 2007 04:24AM
Quote
Josh
I did notice that your list of complaints all had to do with Dave. If the group didn't have Dave in it would you guys think it would have been a group you could have remained a part of? I'm asking the people who are still more in line with their theology I guess. I wouldn't expect apostate to join in proslytising for a religion he doesn't beleive in. Do you guys think a group with the Jesus Christians theology, but with a different leader/leadership structure would be a good thing?
Josh,
If the group removed Dave, removed his writings his teachings and his influence, replacing them with the Bible. a more democratic structure or style and showed repect for others, then it would deserve some consideration.
Josh, are you thinking of joining the group or are you already a member?
Australian cult: Anyone recognize this?
Posted by:
apostate
()
Date: February 15, 2007 05:26AM
Quote
JoshQuote
I've been waiting for my last post to showup on this board for about a day now. Looks like it must have gotten lost in the ether somewhere.
The jist of it was I thanked you guys for standing up for me when I was called a troll and I gave the reason I have a favorable opinion of the Jesus Christians. The short winded version is I like them because they've been nice to me.
I can appreciate what you say Josh. My experience is that as long as you do not enter into a state of disagreement with Dave/JC's things will continue to be at peace between you both. It is unfortunate that David McKay is unable to tolerate people who express a different opinion to his own, which is a bit detrimental to his own goals of world evangelism. David seems to think that a group representing his particular religious affilitation having the "mind of Christ" means they all think the same, when I would think it really means individuals who are motivated by things like empathy, respect, inclusiveness, and compassion. In that sense a "mind of Christ" becomes determined by actions rather than thought patterns, which is where Dave has taken his group.Quote
I guess that the way I ask my questions does make me sound naive. When I am trying to understand another persons point of view I don't want to assume anything on my own so I ask questions about things I really should be able to deduce from the answer given. I don't want to do that because in doing so I can insert some of my own ideas into your mouth. I'm not doing it because I'm trying to undermine you.
I respect what you say here Josh. I for one would love to continue conversing with you. As you have discovered this forum consists of many individuals with different takes on things, some diametrically opposed, but that is what a forum is meant to be. Rick, whom I have never personally met, is one of the moderators of this forum. Some of us agree with his assessment of you and some of us do not, and that is fine because that is what it means to have free debate.
Please understand that you are in a forum where there are people who are saying that they experienced abusive treatment at the hands of this group. If you disagree with their reality, which you are entitled to do, at least respect that it is the testimony of witnesses and people subjected to the abuse. I understand it will be difficult for you to accept this reality, being so different to your own experience with the group. But you are not a member, so what you are seeing is by and large the groups presentation. Take some time to read over the thread. I know there are a lot of pages, but it will help you get a better understanding of where we are coming from.Quote
Sorry apostate that I haven't yet commented on your view that people who like the group favor a top down aproach and people who don't like the group favor a more bottom up aproach. Understand that I am not sure exactly what I am allowed to share of my own take on your position on this board. I didn't think I was doing things wrong before and received a warning so I am leery of doing things that seem ok to me for me to say now. I'll say as much as, I have read your analysis and I have given it thought.
The rules of this board state that it is not the place for discussions of religion which focus on determining the beliefs of another, or for proseltyzing.Quote
I did notice that your list of complaints all had to do with Dave. If the group didn't have Dave in it would you guys think it would have been a group you could have remained a part of? I'm asking the people who are still more in line with their theology I guess. I wouldn't expect apostate to join in proslytising for a religion he doesn't beleive in. Do you guys think a group with the Jesus Christians theology, but with a different leader/leadership structure would be a good thing?
For myself, I think the group would need to experience a major overhaul before I could even consider working with them again. I have, since being booted out of the group, done supportive things of individuals in the group, and at one stage found myself engaged in a similar project... causing our paths to cross again. Unfortunately the project I was similarly engaged in ended up being a bun fight with Dave due to actions he was engaged in which ran contrary to the ideology and intent of the project at that time.
If Dave did not choose to kick me out years ago, but instead accepted the critism at that time I may have continued in the group... but given the nature of the disgareement a separation between me and him was inevitable. My concern today is that the group is becoming increasingly more judgemental, taking the law into its own hands. I speak of the whipping incidents.
I hope you stick around Josh, as your questions will help others to express themselves in a forum which is safe for them to do so.
Australian cult: Anyone recognize this?
Posted by:
muppet
()
Date: February 15, 2007 06:16AM
Quote
cultmalleus
Is dave going senile or what???? Now he thinks the whole world reads his forums! And still he persists with the LIE that he "discerned" Apostate was Tony.
From their forum:Quote
But virtually the whole world knows that Apostate started out as Tony and that he handed it over to Craig about the start of February, at which point Craig started practically boasting that it was him, and that it proved it had been him all along (even though Tony made many statements as Apostate that could only be attributable to him and not to Craig).
As I get older, I have more and more difficulty remembering names and faces. I recognise my weaknesses. But because I have spent my whole life working with words, it is fairly easy for me to recognise a person's writing style
Oh, dave you're so clever. In your self deception.
Anyone remember the limited edition tract with Harry Butler and the different animals? A whole system of how to put down people, to classify them as "snakes" or "vipers" or "pigs". Should I send a copy to the Quakers?
Cultmalleus,
Could you scan it and post it here?
Australian cult: Anyone recognize this?
Posted by:
Josh
()
Date: February 16, 2007 03:16AM
Malcom, you're view on what "iron scepter" means makes sense. Thanks for explaining your thinking behind that. So would you be willing to join a group with the same theology as the JCs but run more in the mold of your vision of the future kingdom with all of the members taking on the roll of the "chattle"? (I'm not trying to start a new group by the way. I read that back and it sounded like I might be recruiting. This is only hypothetical.)
So is it some of the things you don't like about Dave coming through in his articles that you don't like or the interpretation of the Bible behind those articles that you don't like? The reason I ask is because I'd think if you got rid of Dave and everything he's ever written and only gave the remaining Jesus Christians a bible, they'd probably end up writing religious material that sounded alot the same as what you just got rid of. The reason I think that is because they all are pretty uniform on how they interpret the bible.
I guess my question was is it just Dave (and his books and articles) that you guys have a problem with or do you have a problem with the way the member of the Jesus Christians understand the bible? (Apart from the leadership stuff I mean. I know you guys don't like how they interpret that stuff. What I mean is forsaking all your stuff, not working for money, not praying in public, etc.)
Also matilda are you an ex-member? Sorry I have a hard time keeping track of this. I think apostate, Malcom, Xenophone, and cultmalleus are all ex-members. Is there anyone else?
I am not a member of the Jesus Christians as I said in my first post in an effort to avoid this line of questioning. I hope I can follow God wherever he leads me, but I'm not in any kind of member initiation process or anything like that with the Jesus Christians. I talk to them on their internet forum, just like I am trying to talk to people on this forum.
In my post that failed to show up on this message board I mentioned how I have disagreed with the JCs in general and Dave in particular over on their message board. I was allowed to post my disenting opinion on their forum, my points were listened to and not brushed aside, and when all was said and done I think everyone involved, even Dave, learned from the discussion that resulted. I'm not denying that fights have come up between you guys and Dave (in real life I mean, the stuff you're refering to about why things didn't work out) I'm just saying so far on the forum I haven't had that experience although I have openly disagreed with them.
Yes, in a free debate you'd expect to hear a variety of opinions. I have no problem with that or even with people calling me names. Understand though that this particular debate (whether or not I'm a "troll") may result in me being less free to debate here than others and so I must be very careful to make sure I don't debate too freely.
I saw the one about not proseltyzing but I didn't see the one about not trying to determine the beliefs of others. (Sort of worried since I've definitley have done that.) Where'd you see that?
Quote
matilda
If the group removed Dave, removed his writings his teachings and his influence, replacing them with the Bible. a more democratic structure or style and showed repect for others, then it would deserve some consideration.
So is it some of the things you don't like about Dave coming through in his articles that you don't like or the interpretation of the Bible behind those articles that you don't like? The reason I ask is because I'd think if you got rid of Dave and everything he's ever written and only gave the remaining Jesus Christians a bible, they'd probably end up writing religious material that sounded alot the same as what you just got rid of. The reason I think that is because they all are pretty uniform on how they interpret the bible.
I guess my question was is it just Dave (and his books and articles) that you guys have a problem with or do you have a problem with the way the member of the Jesus Christians understand the bible? (Apart from the leadership stuff I mean. I know you guys don't like how they interpret that stuff. What I mean is forsaking all your stuff, not working for money, not praying in public, etc.)
Also matilda are you an ex-member? Sorry I have a hard time keeping track of this. I think apostate, Malcom, Xenophone, and cultmalleus are all ex-members. Is there anyone else?
Quote
matilda
Josh, are you thinking of joining the group or are you already a member?
I am not a member of the Jesus Christians as I said in my first post in an effort to avoid this line of questioning. I hope I can follow God wherever he leads me, but I'm not in any kind of member initiation process or anything like that with the Jesus Christians. I talk to them on their internet forum, just like I am trying to talk to people on this forum.
Quote
apostate
My experience is that as long as you do not enter into a state of disagreement with Dave/JC's things will continue to be at peace between you both
In my post that failed to show up on this message board I mentioned how I have disagreed with the JCs in general and Dave in particular over on their message board. I was allowed to post my disenting opinion on their forum, my points were listened to and not brushed aside, and when all was said and done I think everyone involved, even Dave, learned from the discussion that resulted. I'm not denying that fights have come up between you guys and Dave (in real life I mean, the stuff you're refering to about why things didn't work out) I'm just saying so far on the forum I haven't had that experience although I have openly disagreed with them.
Quote
apostate
this forum consists of many individuals with different takes on things, some diametrically opposed, but that is what a forum is meant to be. Rick, whom I have never personally met, is one of the moderators of this forum. Some of us agree with his assessment of you and some of us do not, and that is fine because that is what it means to have free debate.
Yes, in a free debate you'd expect to hear a variety of opinions. I have no problem with that or even with people calling me names. Understand though that this particular debate (whether or not I'm a "troll") may result in me being less free to debate here than others and so I must be very careful to make sure I don't debate too freely.
Quote
apostate
The rules of this board state that it is not the place for discussions of religion which focus on determining the beliefs of another, or for proseltyzing.
I saw the one about not proseltyzing but I didn't see the one about not trying to determine the beliefs of others. (Sort of worried since I've definitley have done that.) Where'd you see that?
Not being Christian (sorry if I'm assuming wrong, I think this is true) would you get majorly involved with any organization whose main going was to convert people to Christianity?Quote
apostate
For myself, I think the group would need to experience a major overhaul before I could even consider working with them again.
Australian cult: Anyone recognize this?
Posted by:
rrmoderator
()
Date: February 16, 2007 04:08AM
Josh said,
Isn't that uniformity a demonstration of how much Dave McKay influences the members of the group to see and interpret the bible exactly as he does?
Quote
I'd think if you got rid of Dave and everything he's ever written and only gave the remaining Jesus Christians a bible, they'd probably end up writing religious material that sounded alot the same as what you just got rid of. The reason I think that is because they all are pretty uniform on how they interpret the bible.
Isn't that uniformity a demonstration of how much Dave McKay influences the members of the group to see and interpret the bible exactly as he does?
Australian cult: Anyone recognize this?
Posted by:
Josh
()
Date: February 16, 2007 05:38AM
Quote
Josh
I'd think if you got rid of Dave and everything he's ever written and only gave the remaining Jesus Christians a bible, they'd probably end up writing religious material that sounded alot the same as what you just got rid of. The reason I think that is because they all are pretty uniform on how they interpret the bible.
Quote
rrmoderator
Isn't that uniformity a demonstration of how much Dave McKay influences the members of the group to see and interpret the bible exactly as he does?
I would guess it's because people tend to join groups they agree with and not join groups they disagree with. The main focus of the Jesus Christians is their theology so I'd expect the people who'd join would all have a similar theology while they may vary in their political views, hobbies they enjoy etc.
The more specific the focus of a group the more uniformity you could expect among group members in reguard to that area of focus. It's the reason you'd find everyone interested in birds if you went to the audubon society, but very little uniformity when it comes to taste in food for example.
I think the Jesus Christians probably attract more uniformity than they inforce. Think about it. The Jesus Christians are seen by alot of people as a cult, If you join you're family is likely to get pissed at you, you'll have to quit your job, and you'll have to sell all your stuff. Who is going to sign up for something like that unless they are already pretty convinced of the theology before they joined?
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.