Josh, there're several ex-members you forgot to mention in your last post, myself for one. We are planning a summit-get-together for later in the year to brainstorm on how to shut Dave up, probably an impossible task since he's super human and spends all his time going on and on, day and night, in his unique, defensive, slanderous mode, (doesn't leave him any time to do much constractive work for humanity).

WE would like to close him down forever, dismantle his present "team" of poor, misled followers and have them all come over to our side. There's spiritual and physical freedom where we are, honesty, love, even sex :oops: and the laughter of children. It's the children who are our future. Dave and his virgin-army nonsense doesn't have a long-term future.

I'm only posting once in a while, since I'm very busy with non-Dave realated matters and my dogs--huskies--of course.

Josh:

A more obvious explanation for everyone agreeing with McKay on various doctrines and his idiosyncratic interpretation of scripture is that he wants it way.

Those that disagree with McKay eventually either leave and/or are made to feel unwelcome and thus forced out.

McKay essentially controls the environment, much like other leaders in groups called cults, in a way that is deliberately done to produce uniformity.

Essentially he is attempting to clone his version of what a Christian should be and he is the prototype.

See [www.culteducation.com]

This paper explains that the "key factors that distinguish coercive persuasion from other training and socialization schemes are:

The reliance on intense interpersonal and psychological attack to destabilize an individual's sense of self to promote compliance

The use of an organized peer group

Applying interpersonal pressure to promote conformity

The manipulation of the totality of the person's social environment to stabilize behavior once modified."

If you read the entire paper you will better understand what former members are referring to here when they talk about "cult-like" coercive techniques.

IMO--the McKay group mirrors a classic cult profile.

See [www.culteducation.com]

Cults can be identified essentially by three characteristics:

"a charismatic leader who increasingly becomes an object of worship as the general principles that may have originally sustained the group lose their power;

a process I call coercive persuasion or thought reform;

economic, sexual, and other exploitation of group members by the leader and the ruling coterie."

Again, the paper goes into far greater detail with precise descriptions at length.

If you study this material it will help you to better understand a group like "Jesus Christians.

Quote
rrmoderator
Josh:

A more obvious explanation for everyone agreeing with McKay on various doctrines and his idiosyncratic interpretation of scripture is that he wants it way.

Those that disagree with McKay eventually either leave and/or are made to feel unwelcome and thus forced out.

McKay essentially controls the environment, much like other leaders in groups called cults, in a way that is deliberately done to produce uniformity.

Essentially he is attempting to clone his version of what a Christian should be and he is the prototype.

See [www.culteducation.com]

This paper explains that the "key factors that distinguish coercive persuasion from other training and socialization schemes are:

The reliance on intense interpersonal and psychological attack to destabilize an individual's sense of self to promote compliance

The use of an organized peer group

Applying interpersonal pressure to promote conformity

The manipulation of the totality of the person's social environment to stabilize behavior once modified."

If you read the entire paper you will better understand what former members are referring to here when they talk about "cult-like" coercive techniques.

IMO--the McKay group mirrors a classic cult profile.

See [www.culteducation.com]

Cults can be identified essentially by three characteristics:

"a charismatic leader who increasingly becomes an object of worship as the general principles that may have originally sustained the group lose their power;

a process I call coercive persuasion or thought reform;

economic, sexual, and other exploitation of group members by the leader and the ruling coterie."

Again, the paper goes into far greater detail with precise descriptions at length.

If you study this material it will help you to better understand a group like "Jesus Christians.

Does that mean that my answer to your question isn't going to be posted? It is very frustrating for me to take the time to write out a response to a question you asked me only to have it thrown away.

Of course this is your forum and so you have the right to choose what will and will not appear on it, but just so I won't have to guess if I didn't submit my post correctly if you are going to discard my post could you please put a note on the forum saying that you did that? That way I will know to stop watching for my post to show up and the other guys will know that I'm not just ignoring you?

apostate wrote:
For myself, I think the group would need to experience a major overhaul before I could even consider working with them again.

Josh wrote
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?

I would have issue with ANY group who main goal was to travel the globe in order to convert people to their slant of reality. Whether it was Christian means little to me. The sheer fact that a group of ANY description can see it is as being their goal in life to convert all others is a recipe for trouble. Doing so will lead to the formation of fundamentalist extremist groups who can use their zeal self righteously because of a belief that they are right and all others are wrong. This is the platform from which the JC's operate. It is the platform from which they justify taking the law into their own hands.

Quote
matilda
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:

Thanks Matilda.

I'll take that pat on the back :D

Josh, Dave says this of you:

[i:3a553e0a60]He has very cleverly coaxed the others into admitting that even if I were taken totally out of the picture, they would still continue to attack the rest of you because of what we BELIEVE.[/i:3a553e0a60]
SOURCE:[welikejesus.com]

I do not know about you, but if he had this about me when I am simply asking questions of people I would have to question his motivations as such comments would be attributing a hidden agenda to me. Josh, do you believe we are ATTACKING the JC's because of what they believe? My responses to you have been general and can be applied to ANY group or religion. Do you agree with Dave's assessment that you have "cleverly coaxed" us somewhere in this discussion? Is that what you are doing? I would be disappointing if this was the case. So what say you?

Regarding my previous comments [i:3a553e0a60]"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:3a553e0a60] I was wrong :oops:

This is what it actually says, [i:3a553e0a60]"The purpose of this forum is not to promote a specific religious or political viewpoint and/or to proselytize."[/i:3a553e0a60] so sorry about that Josh.

You are perfectly free to determine my beliefs, so feel free to determine away.

i am still waiting on responses to my previous posts. Cultmalleus was happy enough to respond, and I appreciate that.

It's good that apostate is happy for people to ask him about his beliefs.[...] Malcom claims to agree with our beliefs, but he just wants Dave (and Roland) out of the picture. I guess he has no problem with the small autonomous teams that are operating in different countries.

[b:82d8a2e52c][ModeratorWarning--flaming will be edited out--last warning before banning] [/b:82d8a2e52c]

Quote

He has very cleverly coaxed the others into admitting that even if I were taken totally out of the picture, they would still continue to attack the rest of you because of what we BELIEVE.

The group would simply fall apart without Dave anyway.

I suppose what you believe is influenced by what you do and when you choose to do different things your beliefs change. I never had much drive to "evangalise" even while in the group and leaving the group made me believe even less in it. However, my interest in global justice and helping others is stronger than ever and I can pursue these goals more effectively now, as I don't have to pander to Dave's personality, insecurities and restrictions. Of course, some good things were done, but largely in an amateurish way with a refusal to learn from people with more experience or knowledge and often without concern for cultural sensitivities.

Having children has of course introduced a completely new dimension to life. I always knew the group was not a good place to raise kids, even when I was more enthused about being in the group.

One of the major beliefs that get people into Dave's group is the "end of the world is nigh" type ideas. He has persisted in this ideology since he was a young adult. He cannot see that it is a destructive ideology that cannot build things for the future or the long term because "apocalypse is just around the corner". Dave thrives on crisis and change.

Unfortunately the "apocalypse is just around the corner" belief is as old as time, from the Zoroastrians to the Essenes, from Pseudo Methodius to the Millerites, from the Adventists to the Jehovah witnesses.

[en.wikipedia.org]
[en.wikipedia.org]

Anyone remember Kohoutek?
Anyone remember "The fall of America"?

The apocalyptic ideology is a useless curse upon humanity, it has robbed Dave of what he might have become and through it he is robbing his followers of what they might become.

Dave and LaHaye will eventually be less remembered than Pseudo Methodius.

Quote
cultmalleus

Quote

He has very cleverly coaxed the others into admitting that even if I were taken totally out of the picture, they would still continue to attack the rest of you because of what we BELIEVE.

The group would simply fall apart without Dave anyway.

I suppose what you believe is influenced by what you do and when you choose to do different things your beliefs change. I never had much drive to "evangalise" even while in the group and leaving the group made me believe even less in it. However, my interest in global justice and helping others is stronger than ever and I can pursue these goals more effectively now, as I don't have to pander to Dave's personality, insecurities and restrictions. Of course, some good things were done, but largely in an amateurish way with a refusal to learn from people with more experience or knowledge and often without concern for cultural sensitivities.

Having children has of course introduced a completely new dimension to life. I always knew the group was not a good place to raise kids, even when I was more enthused about being in the group.

One of the major beliefs that get people into Dave's group is the "end of the world is nigh" type ideas. He has persisted in this ideology since he was a young adult. He cannot see that it is a destructive ideology that cannot build things for the future or the long term because "apocalypse is just around the corner". Dave thrives on crisis and change.

Unfortunately the "apocalypse is just around the corner" belief is as old as time, from the Zoroastrians to the Essenes, from Pseudo Methodius to the Millerites, from the Adventists to the Jehovah witnesses.

[en.wikipedia.org]
[en.wikipedia.org]

Anyone remember Kohoutek?
Anyone remember "The fall of America"?

The apocalyptic ideology is a useless curse upon humanity, it has robbed Dave of what he might have become and through it he is robbing his followers of what they might become.

Dave and LaHaye will eventually be less remembered than Pseudo Methodius.

I totally agree with what you have said Cultmalleus. Like you I am MORE interested in helping hurting people and less interested in seeking to convert others to a divisive ideology which promotes separation between people.

You are absolutely correct that the community is not a place to raise children. I feel for an parent who tries to raise children in that group, as parents are not allowed to raise children as they would like... being forced instead to conform to David's whim. I recall a time once when we had a mother with a child who was suffering from multiple sclerosis and as result the only independance this child could experience as far as transporting himself around was in a battery powered wheel chair. This child, who I think was about 12 or 13, wanted to get away from some direction Dave was saying so started to motor off. Dave unhooked the battery so the child could not get away. The child's mother naturally went ballistic as what Dave had done was to totally disenpower that child in what I consider an absolute cruel way. Needless to say the mother and child did not stick around. Dave saw no wrong in that, and to this day still does not. The mother angrily said to Dave that he had in effect taken away the child's legs. There are other tales of similar type actions done to others.

I unfortunately was a witness to that and said nothing, like the rest of the sycophants at that time. As a result I bear some guilt for what Dave did to that boy. Since leaving the community, there is NO WAY I would ever let that happen again, as I am now more liable to take the other person's well being into consideration before doing anything. It is scary to look back on stuff like that within the group and realise that took part in their world view. Having been there I know how they view outsiders that have not forsaken all. They do this called "relating" where they basically just agree with practically everything a potential says, as a means of making them think they are not so bad or controlling. This is something Josh would be completely unaware of as he is not in the group, and as such cannot see what we are talking about when we criticise the group.

The tract Cultmalleous mentioned which compared outsiders to animals IS how they categorise people. You are either a sheep or a lamb, if you are on the inside. If you are on the outside you are a pig, dog, snake, viper, goat, etc.

Quote
Dogmother
Josh, there're several ex-members you forgot to mention in your last post, myself for one. We are planning a summit-get-together for later in the year to brainstorm on how to shut Dave up, probably an impossible task since he's super human and spends all his time going on and on, day and night, in his unique, defensive, slanderous mode, (doesn't leave him any time to do much constractive work for humanity).

WE would like to close him down forever, dismantle his present "team" of poor, misled followers and have them all come over to our side. There's spiritual and physical freedom where we are, honesty, love, even sex :oops: and the laughter of children. It's the children who are our future. Dave and his virgin-army nonsense doesn't have a long-term future.

I'm only posting once in a while, since I'm very busy with non-Dave realated matters and my dogs--huskies--of course.

Count me in Dogmother.