Re: "Jesus Christians," "Australian cult," Dave McKay
Posted by:
private eyes
()
Date: February 05, 2008 11:13PM
Blackhat, Thank you for having the courage to return, despite the efforts of Dave to silence you.
If Quakers have concerns about Dave, they have every right to raise those concerns and not be bullied.
You raise a very important issue regarding the whipping of the Kenyan Volunteer, that Apostate has written about.
No doubt you will also be aware whipping breeches the, Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948), the International Convention of Civil and Political Rights (1966), and the United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (1984).
SOURCE: [www.stop-stoning.org].
Hope Dave doesn't find this post too harmful. It's probably less harmful than Dave giving someone a whipping!
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/05/2008 11:22PM by private eyes.
If Quakers have concerns about Dave, they have every right to raise those concerns and not be bullied.
You raise a very important issue regarding the whipping of the Kenyan Volunteer, that Apostate has written about.
No doubt you will also be aware whipping breeches the, Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948), the International Convention of Civil and Political Rights (1966), and the United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (1984).
SOURCE: [www.stop-stoning.org].
Hope Dave doesn't find this post too harmful. It's probably less harmful than Dave giving someone a whipping!
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/05/2008 11:22PM by private eyes.
Re: "Jesus Christians," "Australian cult," Dave McKay
Posted by:
muppet
()
Date: February 06, 2008 04:02AM
Quote
zeuszor
DM and his people could sue me and take all of my assets. They could take everything I own, down to the clothes on my back, and leave me penniless. They could call me all the names that they could come up with and malign my character, they might even send goons to come beat me up. David might try any means to silence his critics, and I am prepared for whatever he may come up with. He could try to kidnap me, whip me, cut off my hands, torture me, burn me at the stake, whatever. But, as long as I have access to the bare minimum in terms of the tools needed to expose them, as long as I have access to a computer and an Internet connection, I will not, will never back down, and will continue to work to pursue, expose, and somehow eventually stop him. He is just that evil in my eyes.
This my position is mandated in Ephesians 5:11. "Have nothing to do with the fruitless deeds of darkness, but rather expose them." DM is inherently evil at the very core of his being and my conscience will not let me just stand by from the sidelines. I see this as my "reasonable service" and am willing to "offer myself up as a living sacrifice" in order to stop him, and I will not stop my pursuit until DM is out of business. Such is the depth of my contempt for that demon.
I do not want to hurt you or anybody else David, but will not rest until you are stopped somehow. All I need is a computer and an Internet connection I will continue to be a thorn in your side.
You do not scare me David.
DM is a mere human being. Flesh and blood. Perhaps it would be more accurate for me to express that I believe DM to have a purely demoniac nature.
How fine a point can I put on what I am trying to say?
I do not see him as merely doing evil deeds, I see him as intrinsically evil. A pure narcissistic psychopath. Un-redeemable and just plain bad. Unfixable, un-treatable. He is simply a bad person in my sight.
I won't quote a bunch of Scripture verses in order to substantiate my position, because there would be no end to that back-and-forth Bible quoting.
Suffice it to say that I feel it my duty to work to stop him.
Zeuszor,
When you are quoting a bunch of Scripture in order to substantiate your position, please quote the scriptures relating to the Cross where no one is un -redeemable, not even Dave!
You are portraying him as a 'demon,' 'intrinsically evil' and 'inherently evil at the very core of his being' and then tell us heroically that you are not scared!
Amazingly you are not scared and will not stop until you defeat the 'un redeemable'.
You plan to do all this with a computer and an internet connection!! Please.
There is nothing to be gained from the generation of fear or ridicule. Dave is flesh and blood like everyone else. He is a man, a mere man.
He is not a 'demon' nor an 'anointed apostle'.
He is not ' intrinsically evil' nor ' intrinsically good'.
The way he chooses to live his life has caused tremendous pain and sorrow to others, to himself and his own family. IMO he has lost a lot and gained nothing.
He is redeemable whether through self adjustment, conversion, judgement, karma, natural laws or whatever.
Please stop the histrionics and if you are a theist, try pray for him and maybe try to reason with him. When you demonise him you do him a ('reasonable) service'.
Contrary to his boring prouncements, I say again that I am not Dogmother, not Bruce, not Liesel and not her husband.
Re: "Jesus Christians," "Australian cult," Dave McKay
Posted by:
muppet
()
Date: February 06, 2008 04:26AM
Quote
apostate
Some thoughts on violence, force and control.
It was interesting to see Dave finally realising that when he felt gossiped against by Quakers that this could be compared with physical violence. Dave seems to have had some trouble working through that association, so lets look at some of the issues of violence, force and control as taught/practised in the JC's which might help Dave better acknowledge the blind spots in his thinking.
Dave argued that sex crimes like pedophilia cannot be explained as evil due to "force" as most pedophiles try to seduce their victims, and got himself into an indefensible position when arguing against the point that such an act takes advantage of the vulnerabilities of children and their reduced ability to understand or resist those who force themselves on to them.
Dave argues that he has a right to influence minors and young adults to turn them against their parents on the basis that if he succeeds then it proves the parents have failed in their efforts to influence them.
Dave denied children certain rights and liberties, and subjected parents to a grievance if he felt parents were not enforcing his strict disciplines
Dave teaches that whipping is a preferred punitive action to incarceration because if properly administered can administer a brief period of pain without causing long term physical damage. (Seems the US military has adopted a similar line of reasoning in obtaining information from terrorism suspects!)
Dave argues that vigilante action to kill someone who represents an immediate mortal danger to others is the responsible thing to do.
Dave physically ejected and kicked a visitor with mental health issues, while shouting abuse in retaliation against the way he embarrassed Dave in front of his parents.
Dave detained and physically restrained a non member against her will and the objections of her husband and forced her to face a group telling her she is in rebellion to God and going to hell.
A teenage minor was physically "spanked" by various community members to bring her into line.
The grievance system routinely sends people (including women) out with nothing to live rough, fast and pray for several days as a means of bringing them into submission.
Dave speaks privately to people about his concerns for others (including spouses) and enlists their support in bringing them in line and in backing up a "grievance" taken against them.
Dave plays games with marriage relationships, on one occasion requiring a husband to send his wife away, and when he failed to do that, accepted the wife and expelled the husband.
On at least two occasions Dave employed a technique which involves falling over and pretending that he has been assaulted by the person he is physically expelling to convince the community witnesses of that person's aggression.
Dave makes up stories about the people he is expelling, reversing the truth of what happened, and creating imaginary evils he believed they intended to do. .
Literature has been printed and publicly distributed to further that insult.
Some of these lies being so instituted that they are included in the public quizzes on their forum.
Members are warned not to speak to those who have been expelled.
Dave uses relationships and past histories of illegal activity within the community to keep family members and ex-members from opposing him publicly, even using a threat against an uninvolved party as the lever to make others withdraw their accusations.
Dave threatens to sue critics.
Dave looks for ways to retaliate against those he cannot control.
He makes disparaging comments about their mental condition and integrity, backdating his concerns to when they were trusted leaders in his community.
He retaliated against a church that expelled him by plastering a poster condemning it to the front door and in another instance covered a church that excommunicated him with graffitti.
Dave left a recording device hidden in a hollowed out Bible to record the details of an elders meeting which was discussing withdrawing an invitation to preach, and when that was enacted he retaliated against the minister who had defended him for so long by confronting him publicly and telling him his own son would turn against him (he had been visiting with his father's consent).
Dave is doing his best to hound down specific critics and publicly embarass the Quakers as he anticipates the end of the road with them.
And he complains about the way he has been treated!
Hello Apostate,
I will try to say this quietly but I too have been reading your posts. I recognise some behavoral trends here that have been mentioned before but also some new information for this forum in your post.
You say'A teenage minor was physically "spanked" by various community members to bring her into line.'
What was she 'spanked' with? Berg used paddles. Was she brought 'into line'?
You say 'Dave physically ejected and kicked a visitor with mental health issues, while shouting abuse in retaliation against the way he embarrassed Dave in front of his parents.' This is an assualt. What was the reaction of the group and the parent?
I imagine Dave is quite proud of the 'grafitti' incident in the church and with his attempt to play' Martin Luther'.
Re: "Jesus Christians," "Australian cult," Dave McKay
Posted by:
zeuszor
()
Date: February 06, 2008 04:42AM
Fair enough, muppet.
I am believer in Almighty God, yes. If you don't, that's OK with me. I am not trying to shove anything down your throat. You do what you feel like you have to do, and I'll do what I feel like I have to do.
There is little point in quoting a bunch of Scriptures in an effort to substantiate my position (besides, I have posted plenty of Scriptures for that reason in the past). There would be no end to that back-and-forth Bible thumping.
The above are my opinions, I have presented them as such, and I stand by them.
I'm no theologian, and won't venture into some coming up with elaborate exegesis, but I know that my Bible says this much:
Rom 9:14 ¶What shall we say then? [Is there] unrighteousness with God? God forbid.
Rom 9:15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.
Rom 9:16 So then [it is] not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.
Rom 9:17 For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.
Rom 9:18 Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will [have mercy], and whom he will he hardeneth.
Rom 9:19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?
Rom 9:20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed [it], Why hast thou made me thus?
Rom 9:21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?
Rom 9:22 [What] if God, willing to shew [his] wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:
Rom 9:23 And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,
Rom 9:24 Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?
Even Paul got so disgusted with this one fellow that he prayed that he be taken into Satan's hands:
1Cr 5:5 To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.
I don't know why God lets people like DM exist. But the Bible says that God lets evil exist. If there weren't evil things and evil people in the world, we could not recognize goodness and that which is right. The potter has power over the clay and DM is one terrible "vessel of wrath," that's all I know.
Isa 45:7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these [things].
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/06/2008 04:42AM by zeuszor.
I am believer in Almighty God, yes. If you don't, that's OK with me. I am not trying to shove anything down your throat. You do what you feel like you have to do, and I'll do what I feel like I have to do.
There is little point in quoting a bunch of Scriptures in an effort to substantiate my position (besides, I have posted plenty of Scriptures for that reason in the past). There would be no end to that back-and-forth Bible thumping.
The above are my opinions, I have presented them as such, and I stand by them.
I'm no theologian, and won't venture into some coming up with elaborate exegesis, but I know that my Bible says this much:
Rom 9:14 ¶What shall we say then? [Is there] unrighteousness with God? God forbid.
Rom 9:15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.
Rom 9:16 So then [it is] not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.
Rom 9:17 For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.
Rom 9:18 Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will [have mercy], and whom he will he hardeneth.
Rom 9:19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?
Rom 9:20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed [it], Why hast thou made me thus?
Rom 9:21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?
Rom 9:22 [What] if God, willing to shew [his] wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:
Rom 9:23 And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,
Rom 9:24 Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?
Even Paul got so disgusted with this one fellow that he prayed that he be taken into Satan's hands:
1Cr 5:5 To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.
I don't know why God lets people like DM exist. But the Bible says that God lets evil exist. If there weren't evil things and evil people in the world, we could not recognize goodness and that which is right. The potter has power over the clay and DM is one terrible "vessel of wrath," that's all I know.
Isa 45:7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these [things].
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/06/2008 04:42AM by zeuszor.
Re: "Jesus Christians," "Australian cult," Dave McKay
Posted by:
apostate
()
Date: February 06, 2008 05:00AM
Zueszor, are you aware that you pretty much posted an email you sent to me privately along with your response to my rejection of you calling Dave a demon? I concur again with muppet and ask for you to tone it down. Your outburst will be all that Dave focuses on. You, in your zeal to challenge David, have become his shield. Bible verses mean nothing to him. He has trained his followers to simply view people who use them as "churchies" (to a JC this is a very derogatory term) Your comments "I don't want to hurt you..." will be used to say the opposite by him because it comes across in such an angry manner.
Onto a different topic:
Casey writes: [welikejesus.com]
"Quaker faith and practice involves seeing that of God in others. If JC's beliefs are incompatible with that, then it sounds like the Quakers have officially stated that the whole of the JC's are either not able, or unwilling to see that of God in others."
Exactly!
Dave says in an interview to Australia Story that his daughter who lives by faith with her husband and three children, serving others for free, left his community for a life of self indulgence. The whole community individually told her to stop sending family newsletters and birthday greetings. Dave explained in a letter that he views them as "enemies posing as friends" to explain why he will no longer visit them.
This is just one example of how Dave is unwilling to see that of God in others.
Perhaps you could reverse this profile Casey, by posting some comments that indicate YOU can see that of God in outsiders like Sheri.
Onto a different topic:
Casey writes: [welikejesus.com]
"Quaker faith and practice involves seeing that of God in others. If JC's beliefs are incompatible with that, then it sounds like the Quakers have officially stated that the whole of the JC's are either not able, or unwilling to see that of God in others."
Exactly!
Dave says in an interview to Australia Story that his daughter who lives by faith with her husband and three children, serving others for free, left his community for a life of self indulgence. The whole community individually told her to stop sending family newsletters and birthday greetings. Dave explained in a letter that he views them as "enemies posing as friends" to explain why he will no longer visit them.
This is just one example of how Dave is unwilling to see that of God in others.
Perhaps you could reverse this profile Casey, by posting some comments that indicate YOU can see that of God in outsiders like Sheri.
Re: "Jesus Christians," "Australian cult," Dave McKay
Posted by:
zeuszor
()
Date: February 06, 2008 05:25AM
Quit trying to control me and trying to dictate what I can and cannot say.
I'm not going to split hairs over semantics and choose my words super-extra-carefully for fear that DM will interpret whatever I say as some kind of attack.
We all know how masterful he is with the word-jugglery.
Anything one says DM will twist about and try to use against that person somehow anyway.
Damned if you do, damned if you don't. I'd rather be faulted for saying exactly what I want to say, and not for cowtowing to DM's need for domination, humiliation of others, and total control.
I am going to say what I mean and will not play his games. I am not afraid of him; are you?
He's the one with a lot of other people's pain and suffering to answer for, not me.
In closing, lest you think me another mindless "Bible thumper" or "churchie" (if you know me at all, you know that I am hardly a "churchie") let me post a quote from a "Good Hindu" (italics added by myself):
The church that has the best chance of survival in this damned world is that of atheism under the convenient guise of theism. The churches have always proved the staunchest upholders of the grossest form of worldliness from which even the worst of non-ecclesiastical criminals are found to recoil.
It is not from any deliberate opposition to the ordained clergy that these observations are made. The original purpose of the established churches of the world may not always be objectionable. But no stable religious arrangement for instructing the masses has yet been successful. The Supreme Lord, in pursuance of the teachings of the scriptures enjoins all absence of conventionalism for the teachers of the eternal religion. It does not follow that the mechanical adoption of the unconventional life by any person will make him a fit teacher of religion. Regulation is necessary for controlling the inherent worldliness of conditional souls.
But no mechanical regulation has any value, even for such a purpose. The bona-fide teacher of religion is neither any product of nor the favourer of, any mechanical system. In his hands no system has likewise, the chance of degenerating into a lifeless arrangement. The mere pursuit of fixed doctrines and fixed liturgies cannot hold a person to the true spirit of doctrine or liturgy.
The idea of an organised church in an intelligible form, indeed, marks the close of the living spiritual movement. The great ecclesiastical establishments are the dikes and the dams to retain the current that cannot be held by any such contrivances. They, indeed, indicate a desire on the part of the masses to exploit a spiritual movement for their own purpose. They also unmistakably indicate the end of the absolute and unconventional guidance of the bona-fide spiritual teacher. The people of this world understand preventive systems, they have no idea at all of the unprevented positive eternal life. Neither can there be any earthy contrivance for the permanent preservation of the life eternal on this mundane plane on the popular scale.
Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura
Edited 6 time(s). Last edit at 02/06/2008 05:38AM by zeuszor.
I'm not going to split hairs over semantics and choose my words super-extra-carefully for fear that DM will interpret whatever I say as some kind of attack.
We all know how masterful he is with the word-jugglery.
Anything one says DM will twist about and try to use against that person somehow anyway.
Damned if you do, damned if you don't. I'd rather be faulted for saying exactly what I want to say, and not for cowtowing to DM's need for domination, humiliation of others, and total control.
I am going to say what I mean and will not play his games. I am not afraid of him; are you?
He's the one with a lot of other people's pain and suffering to answer for, not me.
In closing, lest you think me another mindless "Bible thumper" or "churchie" (if you know me at all, you know that I am hardly a "churchie") let me post a quote from a "Good Hindu" (italics added by myself):
The church that has the best chance of survival in this damned world is that of atheism under the convenient guise of theism. The churches have always proved the staunchest upholders of the grossest form of worldliness from which even the worst of non-ecclesiastical criminals are found to recoil.
It is not from any deliberate opposition to the ordained clergy that these observations are made. The original purpose of the established churches of the world may not always be objectionable. But no stable religious arrangement for instructing the masses has yet been successful. The Supreme Lord, in pursuance of the teachings of the scriptures enjoins all absence of conventionalism for the teachers of the eternal religion. It does not follow that the mechanical adoption of the unconventional life by any person will make him a fit teacher of religion. Regulation is necessary for controlling the inherent worldliness of conditional souls.
But no mechanical regulation has any value, even for such a purpose. The bona-fide teacher of religion is neither any product of nor the favourer of, any mechanical system. In his hands no system has likewise, the chance of degenerating into a lifeless arrangement. The mere pursuit of fixed doctrines and fixed liturgies cannot hold a person to the true spirit of doctrine or liturgy.
The idea of an organised church in an intelligible form, indeed, marks the close of the living spiritual movement. The great ecclesiastical establishments are the dikes and the dams to retain the current that cannot be held by any such contrivances. They, indeed, indicate a desire on the part of the masses to exploit a spiritual movement for their own purpose. They also unmistakably indicate the end of the absolute and unconventional guidance of the bona-fide spiritual teacher. The people of this world understand preventive systems, they have no idea at all of the unprevented positive eternal life. Neither can there be any earthy contrivance for the permanent preservation of the life eternal on this mundane plane on the popular scale.
Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura
Edited 6 time(s). Last edit at 02/06/2008 05:38AM by zeuszor.
Re: "Jesus Christians," "Australian cult," Dave McKay
Posted by:
apostate
()
Date: February 06, 2008 10:57AM
Just saw this post from Casey. [welikejesus.com]
Thanks for all that great sharing, Kirstie and Bettina. It's great to hear that you are both feeling so inspired and it reminds me about what it means to be "getting back to your first love".
I think sometimes people get this idea that they can see something dangerous which we cannot see and so they feel a need to "help" us even if we are not responsive to that "help". Sometimes that can be true, as none of us has perfect understanding, but when it comes to sincerely trying to follow God, the best thing we can do is to follow our conscience. It sounds like you've got a fairly good idea of what's ahead of you, so just keep doing the best you can to do what you feel God wants you to do.
God bless you for your sincerity.
Putting this together with the one that seemed to be getting close to recognising the Quaker's point of view, I wonder if Casey is in a state of flux at the moment. He reminds me of Ross, who will let slip little comments that suggest dissatisfaction, but then has difficulty owning those comments and then tries hard to prove his loyalty. Even his eye poking avatar seems to express this doublethink. No wonder Casey thinks "Life is Pain".
Thanks for all that great sharing, Kirstie and Bettina. It's great to hear that you are both feeling so inspired and it reminds me about what it means to be "getting back to your first love".
I think sometimes people get this idea that they can see something dangerous which we cannot see and so they feel a need to "help" us even if we are not responsive to that "help". Sometimes that can be true, as none of us has perfect understanding, but when it comes to sincerely trying to follow God, the best thing we can do is to follow our conscience. It sounds like you've got a fairly good idea of what's ahead of you, so just keep doing the best you can to do what you feel God wants you to do.
God bless you for your sincerity.
Putting this together with the one that seemed to be getting close to recognising the Quaker's point of view, I wonder if Casey is in a state of flux at the moment. He reminds me of Ross, who will let slip little comments that suggest dissatisfaction, but then has difficulty owning those comments and then tries hard to prove his loyalty. Even his eye poking avatar seems to express this doublethink. No wonder Casey thinks "Life is Pain".
Re: "Jesus Christians," "Australian cult," Dave McKay
Posted by:
apostate
()
Date: February 06, 2008 10:59AM
Dave writes: [welikejesus.com]
"I think there is strong support for protecting some people from hearing things that are going to make it harder for them to move ahead spiritually. Paul says, for example, to mark those who cause division, and to have nothing to do with them."
If Dave sees it as his job to "protect" people from even hearing certain things, I don't know why he is acting like some awful injustice has occurred when the Quakers resist his demands to use their conduit to speak against them and protect their members from interminable contention and strife. He should admire their management strategy, because it is only a shadow compared to the methods Dave employs.
While Dave is quoting Paul to support exerting punitive authority over individuals he might like to also refer to the one Zeuszor has latched on to. "Hand this man over to Satan for his body to be destroyed, so that his spirit may be saved" (1Cor 5:5). Such teachings were used to justify burning witches and stoning heretics, and allow everyone who fixates on the evil they see in others to perpetrate evil themselves. I oppose all who use such verses as a licence to play God in exerting force/control over others.
"It is usually our pride that makes us want to prove that we can handle whatever the opposition may throw at us, and it's usually the newest members who have the greatest problem with pride."
Casey commented in a recent post on the "first love" he sees in the enthusiasm of a potential disciple, while Dave sees pride to be broken.
It is a common tool of authoritative leaders to impose the "smash your pride" demand on new members. Once Dave has broken you in to doing what you are told, he will then convince you to believe that is what you want and get you imitating the doublespeak you see around you where everyone talks about following their conscience (which just means getting intuitive to what Dave wants). If you doubt this try following a leading from a dream or 'still small voice' that does not comply with Dave's plans and watch the control tactics come in to play. No wonder older disciples get jaded!
"But, having said that, it hardly seems possible to keep people from hearing opposing points of view anyway these days."
No matter how hard Dave tries.
"And so Alf's concept of "forewarned is forearmed" applies. Certainly the Bible includes some warnings about false teachers, which seems to imply that the people reading those warnings are going to have to face the phonies and deal with them personally."
Of course! Jesus wasn't constructing an organisation to control what people hear. His invisible Kingdom of Heaven is like the wind which comes and goes as it 'listeth', not contained by the limited powers of reason and control which Dave possesses.
"As for the critics who say that we are a cult because we try to keep members from hearing too much negative stuff, our efforts to shelter members from opposing points of view are really insignificant compared to the efforts that our critics go to, to shelter the whole world from hearing what we have to say."
Lets see Dave gossips about and demonises ex-members and critics and shelters them from family, controlling the conditions of contact with loved ones, making sure that even friendly ex-JCers do not send birthday greetings... etc, etc.
What do we do? We try to engage with dialogue on their forum until we are banned and continue expressing our point of view of here. How does that compare?
"Sometimes even the critics themselves are scared to read what we have said on a topic, for fear that they will be won over by it."
That's a laugh! My resolve is slipping while I read this now!
"So overall, I think that our members (even some of the brand news ones) have far more strength to face opposing points of view than do our critics and the people they are trying to shelter and control."
Don't know who you see us as sheltering and controlling, but you can sic your brand new members on to me any day. I am starting to miss Ross. Perhaps he could show them all how its done.
"I think there is strong support for protecting some people from hearing things that are going to make it harder for them to move ahead spiritually. Paul says, for example, to mark those who cause division, and to have nothing to do with them."
If Dave sees it as his job to "protect" people from even hearing certain things, I don't know why he is acting like some awful injustice has occurred when the Quakers resist his demands to use their conduit to speak against them and protect their members from interminable contention and strife. He should admire their management strategy, because it is only a shadow compared to the methods Dave employs.
While Dave is quoting Paul to support exerting punitive authority over individuals he might like to also refer to the one Zeuszor has latched on to. "Hand this man over to Satan for his body to be destroyed, so that his spirit may be saved" (1Cor 5:5). Such teachings were used to justify burning witches and stoning heretics, and allow everyone who fixates on the evil they see in others to perpetrate evil themselves. I oppose all who use such verses as a licence to play God in exerting force/control over others.
"It is usually our pride that makes us want to prove that we can handle whatever the opposition may throw at us, and it's usually the newest members who have the greatest problem with pride."
Casey commented in a recent post on the "first love" he sees in the enthusiasm of a potential disciple, while Dave sees pride to be broken.
It is a common tool of authoritative leaders to impose the "smash your pride" demand on new members. Once Dave has broken you in to doing what you are told, he will then convince you to believe that is what you want and get you imitating the doublespeak you see around you where everyone talks about following their conscience (which just means getting intuitive to what Dave wants). If you doubt this try following a leading from a dream or 'still small voice' that does not comply with Dave's plans and watch the control tactics come in to play. No wonder older disciples get jaded!
"But, having said that, it hardly seems possible to keep people from hearing opposing points of view anyway these days."
No matter how hard Dave tries.
"And so Alf's concept of "forewarned is forearmed" applies. Certainly the Bible includes some warnings about false teachers, which seems to imply that the people reading those warnings are going to have to face the phonies and deal with them personally."
Of course! Jesus wasn't constructing an organisation to control what people hear. His invisible Kingdom of Heaven is like the wind which comes and goes as it 'listeth', not contained by the limited powers of reason and control which Dave possesses.
"As for the critics who say that we are a cult because we try to keep members from hearing too much negative stuff, our efforts to shelter members from opposing points of view are really insignificant compared to the efforts that our critics go to, to shelter the whole world from hearing what we have to say."
Lets see Dave gossips about and demonises ex-members and critics and shelters them from family, controlling the conditions of contact with loved ones, making sure that even friendly ex-JCers do not send birthday greetings... etc, etc.
What do we do? We try to engage with dialogue on their forum until we are banned and continue expressing our point of view of here. How does that compare?
"Sometimes even the critics themselves are scared to read what we have said on a topic, for fear that they will be won over by it."
That's a laugh! My resolve is slipping while I read this now!
"So overall, I think that our members (even some of the brand news ones) have far more strength to face opposing points of view than do our critics and the people they are trying to shelter and control."
Don't know who you see us as sheltering and controlling, but you can sic your brand new members on to me any day. I am starting to miss Ross. Perhaps he could show them all how its done.
Re: "Jesus Christians," "Australian cult," Dave McKay
Posted by:
zeuszor
()
Date: February 06, 2008 11:35AM
The Apostate said:
While Dave is quoting Paul to support exerting punitive authority over individuals he might like to also refer to the one Zeuszor has latched on to. "Hand this man over to Satan for his body to be destroyed, so that his spirit may be saved" (1Cor 5:5). Such teachings were used to justify burning witches and stoning heretics, and allow everyone who fixates on the evil they see in others to perpetrate evil themselves. I oppose all who use such verses as a licence to play God in exerting force/control over others.
I could not agree more, sir. I oppose such persons also, and am not trying to play God here.
We both agree that DM must be stopped, do we not?
You have your way of going about things, and I have mine.
There is room for everybody here and we need not bicker.
A wise man once taught me these things:
1Jo 2:8 Again, a new commandment I write unto you, which thing is true in him and in you: because the darkness is past, and the true light now shineth.
1Jo 2:9 He that saith he is in the light, and hateth his brother, is in darkness even until now.
1Jo 2:10 He that loveth his brother abideth in the light, and there is none occasion of stumbling in him.
1Jo 2:11 But he that hateth his brother is in darkness, and walketh in darkness, and knoweth not whither he goeth, because that darkness hath blinded his eyes.
1Jo 2:12 ¶ I write unto you, little children, because your sins are forgiven you for his name's sake.
1Jo 2:13 I write unto you, fathers, because ye have known him [that is] from the beginning. I write unto you, young men, because ye have overcome the wicked one. I write unto you, little children, because ye have known the Father.
1Jo 2:14 I have written unto you, fathers, because ye have known him [that is] from the beginning. I have written unto you, young men, because ye are strong, and the word of God abideth in you, and ye have overcome the wicked one.
"I also view the growth from “little children” to “fathers” as being a support for spiritual growth, and that as “little children” do not understand all that “fathers” say; and they should not be expected to… people do not always understand what others say, but that does not necessarily make them wrong. I also see that by simply being part of the human race we are all “brothers” and “sisters” regardless of belief systems. Disrespecting other’s beliefs is a form of hatred and exalting of self over others. People who do this are walking in the “Darkness” of their minds… blind and insensitive to the thoughts and opinions of others."
I am coming from onew point of view, and you from another. Neither of us is perfect. Can we work together here with mutual respect? More later.
The Dude Abides!
While Dave is quoting Paul to support exerting punitive authority over individuals he might like to also refer to the one Zeuszor has latched on to. "Hand this man over to Satan for his body to be destroyed, so that his spirit may be saved" (1Cor 5:5). Such teachings were used to justify burning witches and stoning heretics, and allow everyone who fixates on the evil they see in others to perpetrate evil themselves. I oppose all who use such verses as a licence to play God in exerting force/control over others.
I could not agree more, sir. I oppose such persons also, and am not trying to play God here.
We both agree that DM must be stopped, do we not?
You have your way of going about things, and I have mine.
There is room for everybody here and we need not bicker.
A wise man once taught me these things:
1Jo 2:8 Again, a new commandment I write unto you, which thing is true in him and in you: because the darkness is past, and the true light now shineth.
1Jo 2:9 He that saith he is in the light, and hateth his brother, is in darkness even until now.
1Jo 2:10 He that loveth his brother abideth in the light, and there is none occasion of stumbling in him.
1Jo 2:11 But he that hateth his brother is in darkness, and walketh in darkness, and knoweth not whither he goeth, because that darkness hath blinded his eyes.
1Jo 2:12 ¶ I write unto you, little children, because your sins are forgiven you for his name's sake.
1Jo 2:13 I write unto you, fathers, because ye have known him [that is] from the beginning. I write unto you, young men, because ye have overcome the wicked one. I write unto you, little children, because ye have known the Father.
1Jo 2:14 I have written unto you, fathers, because ye have known him [that is] from the beginning. I have written unto you, young men, because ye are strong, and the word of God abideth in you, and ye have overcome the wicked one.
"I also view the growth from “little children” to “fathers” as being a support for spiritual growth, and that as “little children” do not understand all that “fathers” say; and they should not be expected to… people do not always understand what others say, but that does not necessarily make them wrong. I also see that by simply being part of the human race we are all “brothers” and “sisters” regardless of belief systems. Disrespecting other’s beliefs is a form of hatred and exalting of self over others. People who do this are walking in the “Darkness” of their minds… blind and insensitive to the thoughts and opinions of others."
I am coming from onew point of view, and you from another. Neither of us is perfect. Can we work together here with mutual respect? More later.
The Dude Abides!
Re: "Jesus Christians," "Australian cult," Dave McKay
Posted by:
Malcolm Wesley WREST
()
Date: February 06, 2008 11:42AM
Oh...I see that I have been decisively proved WRONG.....Casey is indeed the erudite intellectual, as witnessed by the acumen in the observation Apostate has already noted:
"Quaker faith and practice involves seeing that of God in others. If JC's beliefs are incompatible with that, then it sounds like the Quakers have officially stated that the whole of the JC's are either not able, or unwilling to see that of God in others."
YES Casey, exactly, precisely, indubitably.....
....David McKay (and the other "leaders" in the JC's) make a living looking for (or maliciously inventing) that of SATAN in others, in order to be able to psychologically manipulate the vulnerable into signing away all that they own, and in fact losing their very lives, to servitude in the JesusChristians Inc.
You and your organization( really , morally, little better than organized crime these days), are completely INCOMPATIBLE with Quaker ideology (....while I can of course, understand what an ideal "sheep-skin" professed membership in the Quakers would make for you in your predacious rapine, hence the "attraction"....)....
You would be incapable of seeing God in Jesus Christ himself, given that "inasmuch as you have done unto the least of these, so have you done unto me" (Matthew 25)....
"Quaker faith and practice involves seeing that of God in others. If JC's beliefs are incompatible with that, then it sounds like the Quakers have officially stated that the whole of the JC's are either not able, or unwilling to see that of God in others."
YES Casey, exactly, precisely, indubitably.....
....David McKay (and the other "leaders" in the JC's) make a living looking for (or maliciously inventing) that of SATAN in others, in order to be able to psychologically manipulate the vulnerable into signing away all that they own, and in fact losing their very lives, to servitude in the JesusChristians Inc.
You and your organization( really , morally, little better than organized crime these days), are completely INCOMPATIBLE with Quaker ideology (....while I can of course, understand what an ideal "sheep-skin" professed membership in the Quakers would make for you in your predacious rapine, hence the "attraction"....)....
You would be incapable of seeing God in Jesus Christ himself, given that "inasmuch as you have done unto the least of these, so have you done unto me" (Matthew 25)....
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.