Current Page: 16 of 803
Australian cult: Anyone recognize this?
Posted by: muppet ()
Date: September 17, 2006 07:26AM

DM is particularly concerned that professional 'cult-busters' can impact negatively on their recruitment. He claimed that they have a fairly high record of success in 'brainwashing people against groups if they are able to get the person before they have had deep personal involvement in the group'.

This is one reason for the JC's ruthless recruitment strategies. The object is to get the recruit IN quickly before they have time to assess and question the beliefs and practises of the group with anyone else. Once the recruit is brought in, they are taught that they have already been brainwashed by their families and by society since birth and encouraged to be suspicious of them. Slick. Anyone who is convinced they have been brainwashed becomes very keen to alter that. Decisions made by the group are then slickly presented to the recruit alongside a less attractive option (eg choosing eternal damnation or choosing to die an unbeleiver ). Reminders that no one who puts his / her hand to the plough should look back are added. Questions are sidelined as evidence that the recruit does not have faith. Fear is the only alternative presented by the group who claim that society lives in fear (and not by faith) In this setting when a new recruit 'decides' to stay after the trial week, they are unaware that they have been the victime of coercive persuasion. The group are constantly reminded of how evil 'cultbusters' are and one by one are inducted to recruit in the same way, on the basis that we will all try to justify our own behaviour. Therefore the recruit who attempts to recruit others becomes doubly convinced that thry are doing the right thing. DM's letters on cognitive dissonance explain this. DM constantly reminds members that everything they do is their own decision ( lie) and that 'there are no locks on the doors' (but the only alternative option presented is going to hell ) . Door locks are not necessary when a mind has been chained.
Ex members are very brave people.

Options: ReplyQuote
Australian cult: Anyone recognize this?
Posted by: zeuszor ()
Date: September 17, 2006 07:34AM

"Oh, and the other thing, about being skinny. Casey and James (who were
both in Dallas about that time, I think) are both VERY skinny. It's just
them, the way they were put together, I guess. Overall, the community is
pretty average (maybe even a bit above average as more of us move into middle age!) Casey, by the way, is the fastest runner in the community, so his thinness does not hamper him when it comes to fitness!"

This is a quote from the one and only email you have sent me, Dave. They were not just skinny. Some people are skinny, I acknowledge that fact. But these people were obviously malnourished and emaciated when I met them. Sue looked like an anorexic. And they ALL stank. It wasn't just a few odd people that forgot to take a shower that day. I remember giving James a hug and realizing that he smelled like garbage. This is a big part of the reason I fled: something was obviously wrong with those people. They were obviously under some kind of heavy mind control, plain as the nose on my face. And they all seemed so angry at and contemptuous of anybody outside of their little. Don;t be so condescending, Dave. You seriously underestimate my intelligence.

Options: ReplyQuote
Australian cult: Anyone recognize this?
Posted by: zeuszor ()
Date: September 17, 2006 07:42AM

Hi Brian,

It's Dave here. I'm not sure if you are aware of it or not, but Fran
actually WROTE the study you requested. (Yeah, I don't write all of
them!)

I've pasted "No More Mr. Nice Guy" below, but it would be a HUGE task to
send you ALL of the restricted stuff; it's like about 400 articles! But
give me some specific names the next time you write, and we should be able to send you more.

I was thinking today about your comment about the guys smelling in Dallas. It's something Cherry and I have nagged about for years, without much success. In their defence, however, there were a lot of them living
together in close quarters at the time. But we have several members who
have some serious problems with foot odors, and if they don't put their
shoes outside at night, it can stink up the whole place. I am confident
that it isn't because they were unwashed, as they usually bathe reasonably regularly.

Oh, and the other thing, about being skinny. Casey and James (who were
both in Dallas about that time, I think) are both VERY skinny. It's just
them, the way they were put together, I guess. Overall, the community is
pretty average (maybe even a bit above average as more of us move into middle age!) Casey, by the way, is the fastest runner in the community, so his thinness does not hamper him when it comes to fitness!

Well, here's the article. Hope we can have some positive communication.

Love and peace,

Dave


By the way, i meant to type that they seemed really angry at anyone outside of their little bubble. Mistyped. OOps.

Options: ReplyQuote
Australian cult: Anyone recognize this?
Posted by: zeuszor ()
Date: September 17, 2006 07:43AM

"Hope we can have some positive communication."

Well, let's have it.

Options: ReplyQuote
Australian cult: Anyone recognize this?
Posted by: apostate ()
Date: September 17, 2006 11:21AM

Quote
muppet
DM is particularly concerned that professional 'cult-busters' can impact negatively on their recruitment. He claimed that they have a fairly high record of success in 'brainwashing people against groups if they are able to get the person before they have had deep personal involvement in the group'.

This is one reason for the JC's ruthless recruitment strategies. The object is to get the recruit IN quickly before they have time to assess and question the beliefs and practises of the group with anyone else. Once the recruit is brought in, they are taught that they have already been brainwashed by their families and by society since birth and encouraged to be suspicious of them. Slick. Anyone who is convinced they have been brainwashed becomes very keen to alter that. Decisions made by the group are then slickly presented to the recruit alongside a less attractive option (eg choosing eternal damnation or choosing to die an unbeleiver ). Reminders that no one who puts his / her hand to the plough should look back are added. Questions are sidelined as evidence that the recruit does not have faith. Fear is the only alternative presented by the group who claim that society lives in fear (and not by faith) In this setting when a new recruit 'decides' to stay after the trial week, they are unaware that they have been the victime of coercive persuasion. The group are constantly reminded of how evil 'cultbusters' are and one by one are inducted to recruit in the same way, on the basis that we will all try to justify our own behaviour. Therefore the recruit who attempts to recruit others becomes doubly convinced that thry are doing the right thing. DM's letters on cognitive dissonance explain this. DM constantly reminds members that everything they do is their own decision ( lie) and that 'there are no locks on the doors' (but the only alternative option presented is going to hell ) . Door locks are not necessary when a mind has been chained.
Ex members are very brave people.

Thanks for your understanding and postive feedback Muppet. What you say is true. I can recall the mental angush I went through within the group as I struggled with some of their stuff, and then afterwards when I was discarded as "dead wood", to coin their phraseology. I can recall the struggles my mind went through as I came to accept reality. Such things can be literally physically painful.

It is true that there are no locks on the door of his community, but imagine the scenario of a member who is threatened with expulsion in a developing country where he or she gets to take nothing with them. There is no duty of care in these incidents. People are left to fend for themselves. Dave at these times will work to break up marraiges if one members has "backslidden" into rebellion. He will do this by offering accomodation and support to the one he sees as continuing to be faithful to him. Children become community property with parents being expected to conform with community guidleines on how they should be raised and disciplined.

Anyway, I am going of track a little. I mainly wanted to say thanks for the encouraging words and the support. It is good to be able to air some of this stuff.

Options: ReplyQuote
Australian cult: Anyone recognize this?
Posted by: apostate ()
Date: September 17, 2006 01:28PM

If dave won't give it to you Zeuszor, I will post a copy of it here for you. this one talks about his thought policing of cult members in his group


Keeping the 144K Vision

(18 September, 2002)

I've been thinking for some time about the 144K vision, and the need to do something to help people who are struggling with it.

What I have arrived at, however, is that we do not really need to have more written on the subject, but we do probably need to do more sharing about it with one another. The reason I say that is because I think what happens when people start to lose the vision is just that the devil has gotten in and clouded our thinking about how simple the vision really is. He makes us think that the 144K vision is something that it is not... that it is, in fact, a bit unreasonable.

I think that most of you are smart enough and informed enough that if you just sat down yourselves and tried to write something on the topic, or if you started to share with one another about exactly what the 144K vision is, you would find your percentages picking up almost automatically.

In other words, it isn't so much a matter of our commitment to the vision that is fading as it is our understanding of the vision that is fading.

One problem is that we just talk each week in terms of "What is your 144K percentage?" It is almost like asking, "How horny are you?" And, without thinking things through clearly, people pull a figure out of the air. I have mentioned how some people can pick a very high figure without recognising their limitations; but they can also pick a very low figure without recognising how easy it is to maintain a higher percentage.

If we allow ourselves to get into the system mindset, which is that everyone is more or less entitled to a lifetime of sexual activity with one or more sexual partners, then the idea of a lifetime without sexual activity sounds like an almost impossible sacrifice.

On the other hand, the true 144K vision does not eliminate all sexual activity (i.e. It does not eliminate masturbation.) but it does take a very long, hard, cold look at exactly what sexual activity with a partner involves. Obviously, someone who is masturbating could easily think that it would be great to have the real thing. If that was the only concern, then the answer would, of course, be "yes". If you can find a sexual partner, then do so. It's more fun.

But from the Christian perspective, even if we did have the "real thing", it would involve some overwhelming sacrifices and disciplines that do not often enter our heads when we are just thinking about all of the "cuddlies" that we are missing. That is the deceptive power of the cuddlies. That is the real Jezebel spirit.

Maybe we need to do an article on the "pricklies" (no pun intended!) or something like that, which reminds us of all the discomforts that come with a married commitment. There is the lack of freedom because you are tied to someone else ("for better or for worse") for the rest of your life. There is the pain that comes when the other person does not live up to your expectations. There is the heartbreak that comes if the other person backslides (in which case you lose your freedom to ever consider marriage again). And, of course, there are the restrictions on your usefulness for God, possibly even meaning disqualification from the Virgin Army (although we are not certain that we know what that means).

Of course, knowing that marriage is not forbidden should actually make it easier to maintain the 144K vision too. (Think how much harder it must be for a divorcee, for whom remarriage IS forbidden!) At least while you remain single, your options stay open. Once you are married, there is no turning back.

It does seem to me like any sincere Christian, with any understanding of what the Bible (and what Jesus in particular) says about the advisability of remaining single, who then says that they are totally indifferent to whether they stay married or single (i.e. that they have a 50% burden for the 144K vision) or who is actively seeking to get married (i.e. that they have a burden below 50% for the 144K vision) must not have really thought the issues through. It's almost like saying that I am indifferent to using drugs, or that I am actively looking for opportunities to use drugs. I know that the drugs are not immoral in themselves; but why on earth should I be indifferent to something that I know is not going to be good for me?

An ex-member left the community when his wife left. But while in the community, he never registered himself as having anything more than a 50% burden for the 144K vision. Because he never braced himself for being single, he failed when she failed.

Likewise, I wonder about marrieds who choose to ignore the scripture about it being time for those who are married to be as though they were not. (I Corinthians 7:29) We may not all come to the same conclusion about how to apply that passage, but to ignore it altogether seems strange for anyone who is sincere.

A similar problem happens with regard to Bible prophecy in general. We are almost certainly wrong in some of our expectations with regard to how it is all going to be fulfilled. But the answer is not to ignore Bible prophecy altogether, as so many have done. And yet almost everyone who backslides from the group does so by first allowing doubts to creep in with regard to our thinking about Bible prophecy and the 144K vision. Before long, they are completely turned off to anything that has to do with Bible prophecy and the 144K vision.

Their thinking is that, because we do not know everything about those two subjects, then we are entitled to ignore them altogether. Wrong!

There is room for opinions with regard to some of the details, but there is not room for tossing either issue (celibacy or Bible prophecy) out. Yet it is so easy to start thinking that way when we let the devil come in and cloud the issues. It is one of the easiest areas of deception that he has, where he lures you into a more "respectable" approach to marriage and the second coming, and then leads you, step by step, away from any discipline at all that you find irritating or inconvenient.

I have ended up writing an article here, but I hope that people will not just read it and forget it. I hope that it will spark discussion and thought amongst yourselves about what the 144K vision really is... not discussion about anything new or complicated or bizarre, but discussion about how simple the vision is, i.e. that, of the two choices, married or single, the preferred option is to remain single.

Options: ReplyQuote
Australian cult: Anyone recognize this?
Posted by: apostate ()
Date: September 17, 2006 01:34PM

And another... This one criticses the concept of tolerating other points of view!


The Virgin Army, part 3

(August, 1998)

I should address some problems relating to the 144K vision. I am particularly concerned that people may think we need to tolerate other points of view within our own fellowship which do not support the 144K vision; or that celibacy is not necessarily the preferred option, and the ideal toward which we should all be aiming.

If people start thinking this way, then it is quite likely that such people would only stay with the community until such time as they are able to find a wife anyway, and then they would leave... not because we would kick them out, but because they simply would not feel comfortable within the community, even though it may be more comfortable for them to stick around at the moment.

We have seen it happen too many times in the past to think otherwise. Just take a careful look through the ranks of all those couples who have left us and tell me how many husbands are really wearing the pants in those families. You cannot be free to follow the Lamb withersoever he goes if you are busy trying to follow your wife withersoever she goes. As soon as such men have the power that comes with having a "disciple" of their own (i.e. a wife), they shoot through. The only couples who have stayed on in our fellowship are ones who are not baulking at the 144K vision even though it puts us married people down as being second-class Christians.

We should be clear about what the standard is, and also be clear about our opposition to anyone teaching otherwise, whether publicly or privately. Celibacy is the ideal.

Marriage is an option; but it is an inferior option. If anyone doesn't like it, they can leave now. I am serious about this. I am prepared to go right down to the last two people remaining in the community with this issue in order to keep only those people around who are 100% red-hot sold out warriors for God. My goodness, we have taught from our earliest days that we must "forsake all", right down to the point of laying down our lives for Christ and for each other; and yet every time it starts to get even close to costing us something far less than this, people seem to think that we have gone off some deep end and they panic or leave.

As one ex-member put it, he felt that, despite what people say, each person in the community has what he had, which he called a secret "contract". His contract definitely did not involve laying down his life for anyone. In fact, for him, it did not even include anything so hard as distributing tracts in the Sydney CBD. For others, their secret contracts did not include being criticised publicly, or staying single, or cutting their hair, or standing up to their wives, or disciplining their kids. When you look at it, we are only kidding ourselves that we are ready to lay down our lives for God and for one another if we let these little things stop us. These people did not even come CLOSE to the commitment that Jesus requires of his followers, and we are better off without them.

So where is the line being drawn on your secret contract at the moment? The 144K vision is that even if we are not 100% ourselves, we are going to teach it and strive toward it until the day that we die. I hope that at least some of us have that as our contract, both secretly and publicly.

Now for the subject of marriage. Lest people think that I am forbidding marriage here, let me explain. For starters, you will always have your free will. Just as you can leave the community at any time, so you can also get married at any time. I don't think I have ever said that we would kick a person out for getting married. After all, I am married myself. But we will still insist that the marriage must be second to the work of the kingdom, and there will be times, as your commanding officers, that we will require you to do things which will force you away from the selfish comforts of your marriage relationship. If the marriage relationship stops you from being able to perform your duties as a soldier, you will not be kicked out for being married; but you may be kicked out for not being able to perform your duties.

Much the same can be said for having children. We do not forbid it, but we will make demands that will jeopardise your sovereignty over your children, and it will take a very strong commitment to the 144K vision for people to submit to those demands. If you do submit, I believe that you will be much happier for it. And if your partner and/or children submit to those demands, then they too will be much happier for it.

This 144K vision is an important one, and it is definitely not optional. If people are to be a part of an auxiliary of some sort, it will only be on the terms that the auxiliary totally supports the aims of the army, and not that the auxiliary represents some sort of an opposing army. It must be the aim of the auxiliary to recruit people for the army, rather than recruiting people for the auxiliary.

Someone saw a vision of a very big ring on a pointing finger. I think the size of the ring indicates our need to emphasise our marriage to Jesus very clearly... to draw people's attention to it... to harp on it until people accept it or get out. A very large stone on an engagement ring is intended to draw people's attention to the fact that the person wearing it is engaged. And we want the biggest stone possible on our engagement ring to Christ. The fact that the ring was on the pointing finger is because this vision is what will point us to Christ, to heaven, and to the Virgin Army.

As I said before, we won't stop someone from getting married. But Paul warned about the distractions of a young widow who might join the community to look for a husband (I Timothy 5:11-14), and he suggested that such people should go ahead and get married if that's what they want, and then go live on their own. I think this could have relevance with regard to single men who are looking for wives as well as for single women. Paul saw this as a distraction to everyone else in the army. At least for now, the singles need to declare their intentions. How far are you single guys prepared to go in making it clear that you want to be married to Christ?

We have made allowances for married couples to stay on in the community; but the success rate is very low. And the reason is the Jezebel spirit. The wives are not evil in themselves, nor are the children. But the Jezebel spirit uses them both to tear us away from being totally sold out to God. God is a jealous God, and he will not have that.

Jezebel, go to hell! And let's follow the Lamb wherever he goes!

Options: ReplyQuote
Australian cult: Anyone recognize this?
Posted by: zeuszor ()
Date: September 19, 2006 10:25PM

There is another Jonestown in the making out in Long Beach, CA. Please help spread the word about this. We could help prevent a huge tragedy a la Heaven's Gate. I am serious here I have contacted law enforcement in Long Beach, yes. Read for yourself:

JESUS CHRISTIANS NEWSLETTER #81, LATE AUGUST 2006

SPECIAL REPORT

We are planning to do something in the next monthor so which could turn out to be as controversial as anything we
have ever done before.
We felt that we should share it with our
supporters first, as it is
not easy to explain our reasons for doing this in
a few words.
As most readers know, Reinhard was brutally
attacked by Joe's family
and left lying unconscious in a pool of blood
several months ago. We
will not re-state the many serious injuries that
he received as a
result. Joe's mother, Sheila Simpson, held a
loaded gun, and Joe's
brother, Joshua, physically restrained Joe to keep
him coming to
Reinhard's aid, while Joe's father, Jared Johnson,
and his
stepbrother, John Onyejiako repeatedly kicked
Reinhard in the head and
body after he had lost consciousness.

We have been debating amongst ourselves (as we
have done before on
some lesser sins/crimes against ourselves) what
should be the proper
Christian response to such injustices. We feel
that Reinhard himself
nobly fulfilled the law of Christ, in turning the
other cheek for as
long as he was conscious. However, we feel that
the church in
particular and the Western world in general has
totally abused the
concept of grace, and that they have, in doing so,
despised the true
meaning of the cross of Christ.
> >
> > In order to bring a little appreciation back into
> what it really means
> > to forgive sins, and hopefully to make people
> think through these
> > issues more deeply, we plan, in the next month or
> so, to hold a
> > trial in Long Beach, California, where the
> attack took place. It is
> > almost certain that the family will be found
> guilty of a serious
> > assault, if not attempted murder.
> >
> > We will, if they are found guilty, pass sentence
> on them, and we
> > expect that the sentence will be a form of
> corporal punishment (e.g.
> > 25 lashes with a whip).
> >
> > We will not carry out this sentence on members of
> Joe's family unless
> > they sign papers saying that they agree to it, and
> that they are sorry
> > for committing such a crime. They will be given
> an opportunity to
> > defend their actions if they wish.
> >
> > However, we have discussed it amongst ourselves,
> and several of our
> > members, including Joe himself, have said that
> they are willing to
> > take the punishment for his family.
> >
> > The whippings will, most likely, be administered
> without delay, in
> > order not to prolong the process. When they have
> been completed, we
> > will consider the matter finished (apart from
> settlement of the huge
> > medical, dental, and optical bills that Reinhard
> has incurred as a
> > result of his injuries).
> >
> > We expect that people will argue that there is
> something wrong with a
> > teaching about forgiveness that also exacts a
> penalty. It flies in
> > the face of church teachings that Jesus has
> purchased a licence for
> > you to sin all you like without any
> accountability. However, we do
> > not see anything in the teachings of Jesus which
> says that we have
> > such freedom. Even his forgiveness is only given
> to those who show by
> > their lives true repentance.
> >
> > Jesus instructed his disciples to take up their
> crosses and to follow
> > him...
> > whatever that means. Even the death of Jesus
> himself baffles people
> > who cannot understand why the couldn't-care-less
> God of the churches
> > could not have just absolved everyone who says
> Lord, Lord
> > without letting his
> > innocent Son suffer.
> >
> > Our answer is that God was actually ratifying the
> need for punishment
> > in order to maintain law and order in society.
> The punishment Jesus
> > received was extreme, but it was because God
> wanted to make a very
> > serious point... a point which seems to have been
> lost on today's
> > world. A couple of minutes of pain (during the
> whippings that we have
> > planned) represent a small price to pay in
> contrast to the years of
> > wasted life that result from prolonged
> imprisonment.
> >
> > Even if we take the punishment ourselves (which
> seems most likely, as
> > no member of Joe's family has made any effort to
> accept responsibility
> > for their actions), all that we will be doing is
> accepting a token
> > punishment on their behalf--kind of a mini-cross,
> like the ones Jesus
> > instructed his followers to take up in imitation
> of him.
> >
> > We ourselves have been heavily challenged by this
> new concept of
> > justice and mercy. We have been debating the
> exact meaning of the
> > cross, the role of law in a supposedly Christian
> society, the issue of
> > pain and the morality of inflicting it on others
> or on ourselves, the
> > wasted lives through imprisonment, and even the
> future implications
> > for our plan in a world where people have become
> polarised between
> > those who scream for revenge and those who shirk
> from having anything
> > to do with punishment... least of all corporal
> punishment.
> >
> > We will try to keep the location of the trial and
> the administration
> > of the sentence secret, with attendance by
> invitation only, in order
> > to minimise unruly elements. We have a serious
> message to communicate
> > and hope to do so with minimal disruption.
> >
> > We invite people to visit our website <jesuschristians.com> and to
> > click on the button on the homepage marked THE CROSS (or
> go to
> >
>
[cust.idl.net.au])
> > to read
> > more of our thoughts on this subject. We welcome
> your thoughts as
> > well, and fully expect that it will take some time
> for most people to
> > see the good that can be accomplished through such
> a flogging.
> > But we trust that our
> > best friends will not be too quick to judge, and
> that they will listen
> > sympathetically to what we are saying.
> >


It is plain that they are planning on some vigilante activity, or at worst another mass suicide. Long Beach citizens, be on alert!

Options: ReplyQuote
Australian cult: Anyone recognize this?
Posted by: matilda ()
Date: September 24, 2006 12:21AM

Flogging is not part of any Christian teaching we are familiar with. Dave's current writings about Christian Government and leadership are way off the mark. His secret trial and plans for flogging, provide an insight into his mode of governing and leading.

Perhaps he intends to lead by example and take a flogging for the articles stolen from Deakin?

Options: ReplyQuote
Australian cult: Anyone recognize this?
Posted by: rrmoderator ()
Date: October 03, 2006 12:15AM

Here are a few questions for Dave.

1. Dave has mentioned members of "Jesus Christians" working and being paid for their time outside of the group. But does this include Dave? How often has Dave worked a regular job the last few years?

2. Dave says marriage is not really the preferable thing to do and that being single is somehow the better way to be. OK. So why isn't Dave single and why doesn't he seperate from Cherry?

3. Why wasn't Dave the first "JC" to give up a kidney?

4. Is there any group of Christians other than the "Jesus Christians" that Dave would consider biblically and spiritually the equal of JCs in practice and beliefs? If so what is the name and location of that group?

These are important questions to clarify what is really going on. That is, is the JC group just about Dave and his ego or a real effort to serve God?

The answers to these four questions would help to understand all this much better?

Let's see if Dave will answer.

Options: ReplyQuote
Current Page: 16 of 803


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
This forum powered by Phorum.