"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."


Hmmm...well, not exactly.....



You are a cult because you deliberately restrict individual members of the JC's from their rights of Freedom to Association, Movement and Speech...

You are a psychologically (and increasingly physically?) abusive "leader" who swindles individuals out of their possessions, livelyhoods (and in my opinion their very souls!)

You deliberately and maliciously misrepresent, those who fail to fulfill your psychopathic narcissism (by faithfully "acknowledging" your self-delusional fantasies)


(As a number of non-Christians frequent this site, I will not labour the point, that you blaspheme the spirit of God with your apostate prostitution of the intent of the scriptures.....however certainly with mandatory literature quotas, fraudulently accessed government welfare and having your underlings live out of refuse....you have long and truly, ceased to "live by faith" if you ever did.....)


".....patently false accusations that your critics somehow unfairly restrict access to information about you"....no that's not exactly why I would call the JC's a cult....

(....err..., so please just see the above.....)

Zueszor, I prefer that you not refer to me as "The Apostate". My username is simply "apostate". I feel by putting the word "The" in front of my username you are negatively labelling me. You can choose to say I am playing word semantics here. I do not care. That is how I feel about what you are doing. If we are all about equality here then at least use my username correctly.


You asked:
We both agree that DM must be stopped, do we not?


NO, I do not agree that David MUST BE stopped. I would be happy for him to modify his behavior, apologise for the way he has treated people, and to treat people respectfully. If he can do these things then he can say and teach whatever he wants.

I tend to actually agree with Dave that you represent a credible threat to a person's safety. I can see you getting out of control. You actions are the actions of a loose canon. Your use of words expose the degree of angry zeal present within you. You may think you are following your "conscience" when you have to speak, but the fruit of what occurs as a result causes me to think it is an obsessive mind seeking peace and will not find it until you say something. I think your obsession with exposing him is interfering with your ability to see clearly the damage your approach is doing. In all respect I think it best for you to go else where until you can get your head in a better space. Please do not email me, call me, or think you represent me in any way, shape, or fashion. To me your currents actions and modus operandi represent something I oppose.

Zueszor, I prefer that you not refer to me as "The Apostate". My username is simply "apostate". I feel by putting the word "The" in front of my username you are negatively labelling me. You can choose to say I am playing word semantics here. I do not care. That is how I feel about what you are doing. If we are all about equality here then at least use my username correctly.

I beg your pardon, apostate. I meant nothing by the "The" prefix.

I would be happy for him to modify his behavior, apologise for the way he has treated people, and to treat people respectfully. If he can do these things then he can say and teach whatever he wants.

Pigs will grow wings and fly first. You will be waiting for a long, long time for that to happen. Do you actually believe that you can reason with him?


Please do not email me, call me, or think you represent me in any way, shape, or fashion. To me your currents actions and modus operandi represent something I oppose.

I never said that I represent anybody other than myself.

With equal respect, I think that you are being way too nice over the matter and are giving DM way too much credit.

You seem to be coming from an equally angry point of view in your own way and come off like a bitter, atheistic anti-religious zealot. You hate it when I start to quote the Bible, don't you?

You have been telling me to shut up for months and I have been refusing to for months.

This is called the Cult Education Forum, not the "Ex-Jesus Christian Recovery Forum" nor the "Atheistic Anti-Religious Zealot Forum."

There is room for us both.

If you do not like what I have to say, then go start your own private Yahoo! group or something. Those are private forums and that is what they are for.

Nobody wants anybody to get hurt here, least of all me.

You have your way of doing things, and I have mine.

If putting principles before personalities means I come across as a angry, Bible hating, bitter, atheistic, anti-religious zealot who is way too nice to DM... so be it.


Something to think on:

If anyone says, "I am living in the light," but hates a brother or sister, that person is still living in darkness.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 02/06/2008 09:04PM by apostate.

OK. You should, however, realize that I do not think of DM as a "brother" in a Christian sense, or in any sense for that matter.

I think of him as a vessel of wrath, a wolf among the lambs, an agent of The Enemy, and therefore worthy of being vigorously opposed.


Psa 97:10 Ye that love the LORD, hate evil: he preserveth the souls of his saints; he delivereth them out of the hand of the wicked.

You know, I have thought it over a bit and want to say something else:

I ask myself, if you saw DM laying in the road, robbed, bloody, and beaten like the man in Luke 10 (the Good Samaritan story) would you not try and find him some medical help? Or would you revel in seeing him suffering and broken?

I ask myself, could you see yourself washing DM's and his Cherry's feet?

I ask myself, could you see yourself making any real substantial personal sacrifice at all for the sake of DM's salvation, if there is any chance that he can be redeemed?

Of course I'd try and get him to a hospital. Of course I would humble myself to wash his feet. Any of the JCs' feet for that matter. I'd even put myself in grave physical danger in order to protect any of the JCs.

If any of the JCs were starving, I would bring them some food, if they were thirsting, I would being them some water, if they were tired and homeless, I would let him crash on my couch. I would not take pleasure in anybody's physical pain or suffering.

If I were to not give the love to DM, show the grace that Jesus has shown to me then I would be a hypocrite and not worthy of being able to call myself a disciple of His.

But, I ask myself, do I "hate" DM?

I hate what he does to people, to families, and how he does it.

I hate that he targets kids, sometimes minors.

I hate that he seems to take pleasure in other people's suffering.

I believe his character to be absolutely venal and morally repugnant.

I believe, generally, that he is one of the "bad guys".

I believe that he is a total sociopath and must be stopped from doing these things any more.

I believe that he is a "vessel of wrath" and why God allows people like him to exist I do not know.

But is he still a beloved child of God that His Son grieves for day after day? Is he redeemable? I do not know, nor am I qualified to venture a guess.

I am not much better than he, am capable of being just as nasty, and am just as much of a rascal in my own way.

But the thing is, I am capable of experiencing guilt and empathy (to a fault) and have this overriding sense of moral obligation to others, while DM seems to be completely devoid of any such empathy.

He does what he does to children and families and that I find to be utterly contemptible.

Apostate, I mean not to offend or alienate you. I humbly ask for your forgiveness for anything and everything I may have said or done to cause you any offense, and ask that you reconsider your position about maintaining a relationship via email and/or the occasional phone call. I'd hate to lose a friend over any of this. I am doing what my conscience compels me to do here.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/07/2008 03:32AM by zeuszor.

Firstly, this is a free forum that is well moderated.

Secondly, it's OK to disagree, to be vulnerable, to be confused and angry. After all, this is not the JCs forum.

Thirdly, because we don't have heavy-handed moderation on this forum, there are going to be times when we struggle at being honest and enthusiastic with being too clever and too ambitious.

Finally, we all have a right to 'pull each other in'. Of course, that may mean going back and forth until a resolution has been found. But it's a necessary dialogue, sometimes.

Just a few 'two cent' thoughts...

Kimono writes: [welikejesus.com]


"A woman has said that she cannot trust the Jesus Christians. I don't know who this woman is, but if someone is your friend and you don't trust them, what would be the most appropriate course of action, particularly for people who profess to hold beliefs about the importance of integrity, peace, and community? And what about if the person is someone you have not even met? Is it even really RIGHT to say that about someone?"


If you don't know this woman, Kim, why do expect she owes you her trust. Do you trust her? Is it right for you to assume the world should view you as their friend when your community is so distrustful of everyone else. Dave teaches that leaders should not trust followers, so presumably, Dave does not trust you. Is that right?

Ask Dave and he can explain why he is proud about the fact that he does not trust himself to any man.


"Perhaps people should try looking to the light side, rather than the dark side, and it can be seen that we can be trusted in many ways.

We can be trusted to speak out in our own defence (!)
We can be trusted to speak up in the defence of others who are not receiving a fair go.
We can be trusted to speak honestly about how we are feeling, including what we are going through spiritually, and how certain situations affect us.
We can be trusted to do all that we can to try and find some way of reconciling with people who don't like us.
We can be trusted to not protecting people who seem to be doing the wrong thing.
We can be trusted to say the hard things, that are often left unsaid.

I think that is just a start. I think people are LOOKING for the negative, and not seeing that there is a flip-side to so many of their negative feelings."


Even mass murderers can think good of themselves and feel misunderstood. If you want others to see the light in you Kimono, why not demonstrate your ability to see the same righteousness in others that you tell others to see in yourself.

Perhaps you should try attributing some of those "in-group" virtues to the "out-group" vices that you so trustworthily condemn others for.


"What is it that this woman doesn't trust about me? I would like to hear what she does know about me, and what it is that she can't trust about me. , based on her own personal experiences of me. That little amount of respect would go a long way in helping me trust that these people really do have our best intentions at heart."


If one should approach everyone with trust until they have a personal experience to prove otherwise, perhaps you should talk to Dave who advocates that disciples be sheltered from hearing what others have to say, and that those expressing dangerous views be "marked" i.e. gossiped about, such that people are indoctrinated against people they have never met. Dave seems to think that those who want to make their own judgements rather than believe what they are told, are proud.

What do you think of Boyd and Sheri, Kim? Do you see the best in their lifestyle. Does anyone in the community which was their family for most of their life take an interest in the fact that they are currently on a faith journey exposed to the elements in the middle of the torrential rain and floods? Would you rudely return a birthday greeting if they sent one to you? What would be YOUR justification? What is it that you don't trust about them?

"A woman has said that she cannot trust the Jesus Christians. I don't know who this woman is, but if someone is your friend and you don't trust them, what would be the most appropriate course of action, particularly for people who profess to hold beliefs about the importance of integrity, peace, and community? And what about if the person is someone you have not even met? Is it even really RIGHT to say that about someone?"

Kimono


Dear Kimono,

We have NEVER met but I for one, don't trust you! The reasons for this are that you have placed all your possessions in the hand of a man I know among other things, to have literally thrown his own children out onto the streets out of the concern that they "challenged" his authoritarian rule.... (this being one example among many I could provide of his "character"....!)

(here I define authoritarian, as (1) the lack of "universality" of law within the JesusChristians....David can do as he wishes despite what restrictions may be placed upon you and the others, (2)the lack of "transparency"...most JesusChristians have no knowledge of, access to or control over the funds and physical resources that the JC's may hold and (3) the lack of "independence" of the arms of government in the JC's.....the "court" system (grievance procedures!) are readily swayed by David to produce the results he seeks)

You work unpaid, full-time, without any legal protection, to blindly further the aims and opportunities of this man, who these days has utterly lost the pretence of any scriptural "justification" for the hatred he deliberately sows among his converts and their erstwhile family (after he has taken them for all he can get financially!)...

So...ummm yes!... I don't trust you and possibly the woman who you write of doesn't trust you for similar reasons......if (as usual!) you or the other JC's fail to address the reasons for my distrust, I, and perhaps a lot of other people, will only continue to distrust you......


I have a little insight into "Eastern" cultural mores, and while it may not be approved of, to openly express an unsubstantiated feeling of distrust about someone you may know briefly socially......it is certainly approved to, to express opinions about individuals within wider organizations who publicly seek to win converts for the purposes of financial gain and expansion of the empire.....Did you ever openly express distrust about any members of "Aum Shinri Kyo"?.....if so..tsk tsk tsk!!

Dear Kimono,

Apostate has already enquired, but I would also be interested to hear what lies you have taken to heart in order to justify not "trusting" Boyd and Sheri?

I can understand why David doesn't "trust" them....Boyd and Sheri actually lead lives of complete faith in God, in genuine accord with the scripture, completely FREE of the person of David Mckay....hence David covertly trembles at the thought that contact with them could bring his whole "house of cards" down....as current JC's came to realize how irrelevant (or actually hostile) that David is to God's purpose in their lives...

I mean, the man's a God-forsaken prat....but I can understand why he doesn't "trust" Boyd or Sheri.....

.....But, then....well why don't you "trust" Boyd and Sheri, Kimono?

WHATEVER David tells you, you are eager to "lap up" because otherwise you'd be forced to bring your own life into some perspective, and take a serious look at what you are now doing? Accepting the "official line" is far easier and less personally costly than venturing an opinion which would lead to "loss of face" in the JesusChristians (....and we all understand, hour after sleepless hour of "self-correction" for your "bourgeois revisionism" before the Peoples Court of Grievance Procedures)....

David told you they were "enemies" posing as friends, didn't he......(whereas I'm simply an "enemy" posing as an enemy!!).....why don't you leave the JC's for a couple of days and go up and meet Boyd and Sheri directly, yourself......( I mean it would be hard to trust someone, who treated Davids' every word with the veracity of a "God" they then (officially and publicly) denied that he wasn't, wouldn't it......and you want to be considered worthy of the trust of others, don't you Kimono????...so just go and do it!!)

I think that if you undertake such an exercise, you may indeed find that dear old, David is none other than an enemy of God posing as a friend of truth......