Dave talking about the "greatest" thing he has "ever" done [cust.idl.net.au]

We discovered how indifferent the church world is to the message of the cross when we conducted the mock trial in Long Beach a couple of years ago. It was a little painful, what we went through, but it was really NOTHING by comparison to what Jesus went through. And yet, because it was someone right here and now getting a few lashes from a rubber whip, suddenly the world was shocked. Those shock waves spread around the world.

Nevertheless, we still feel that this one scandalous event was one of the greatest things we have ever done, in terms of getting the message out that God has given us to tell.

We have to be willing to move on with each new revelation. It's always risky, and there is always room for us to slip off the rails; but it's far better than the lukewarm state of those who choose respectability and the freedom from change that goes with it.

Josh, Grace, anyone who is able, would you like to discuss the benefits of a Jesus Christian whipping the boy in Kenya?

I personally cannot see how something as abhorrent as publicly whipping someone can possibly be considered a "Christian" act, or that it in any way lines up with Quaker beliefs or practices.

Please take the time Josh, Grace, anyone, to explain to us how it is so if you happen to agree with it.

Listen to the delusional language Dave is using:

the world was shocked. Those shock waves spread around the world

The truth of the matter is that the world was NOT shocked. The sad incident of Dave baring his buttocks, shocking as it must be to see if one was to see such a thing, did not rate a mention on any reputable news broadcast. I do not recall walking into my local supermarket to hear the buzz of conversation about what Dave had just done, nor anywhere else for that matter. My neighbours did not raise the subject with me. In fact the only way I knew anything about it at all was because I know Dave, and know people who receive his newsletter.

So what comes next Dave? Public self immolation? I know you tried the threat of that once before. Going to do it again?

Next he says:

always room for us to slip off the rails; but it's far better than the lukewarm

Please explain how "slipping off the rails" is better Dave, or anyone who agrees with him?

I think you have already slipped off the rails. As soon as your group began to justify whipping people it was set in cement.

Blacksheep wrote:

As for the "he-who-sucks", I suppose that is a direct jab at me and my education....


No, utterly not, and I apologize Blacksheep for leaving enough "room" that the remark could be so construed...

"He-who-sucks" absolutely refers to "the gentleman" who, to give but a few examples here, deliberately sought to (unsuccessfully) engineer the separation of his sons from their "unbelieving wives" (that the son's servitude not be thereby threatened), who with malice aforeathought manipulated the estrangement of Ross from Vicki ( a young woman and her children who were "lovingly" thrown out on the streets, with nothing not so long ago) and who malicioulsy (Are you ready Kim?) lies and slanders and gossips about those he needs to fabricate reasons "justifying" their personal inadequacy in order to better manipulate them, including among this dishonesty, the championing the falsehood of the "lesser service" of those who are married among the JC's (to forestall dealing with "rebellious couples"....(you of course will be ultimately blamed for Fran eventually opting out Kim)...) in behaviour readily identified in scripture at the deceitful practise of a cult! .....there you have some snapshots of the hermaneneutics of convenience....from he whose whoredom of the scriptures in order to gainfully deceive others, truly "sucks"!!


Was Vicki really as "bad" as David has now lied to you Kim? Or are you simply to gutless to stand up for someone (read "anyone") who you would have once assured of your steadfast "Christian love"? David can be very "convincing" ("Baka mo ichi-gei". ....Even a fool has one talent, as the Japanese say) if you have chosen to live in fear of the consequences of speaking out in opposition against the one-talent wonder!!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/13/2008 09:53PM by Malcolm Wesley WREST.

Quote
apostate
Gee Josh, does your generous offer extend to me as well?

If it were up to me it would, I'm not a moderator though so I can't unban you.

I liked your contributions to the thread on remarriage. I think it might have helped if you'd have been willing to drop the issue about the killers for Christ thing and the Kenya whipping. I think everyone knows your feelings on the issue and everyone knows how Dave and the other JCs feel about it. It doesn't look like there's movement from either side and it's clear they're not going to continue to talk about it since they're ignoring the repeated comments on this forum, so my advice would be to drop it and move on if you want to come to whatever common ground there is.

My personal view is you seem bright and would have some good stuff to say on several different threads going and I'd love to see your take on them, but the continued focus on the Kenya thing and the Killers for Christ thing gets annoying.

Quote
apostate
Dave talking about the "greatest" thing he has "ever" done [cust.idl.net.au]

We discovered how indifferent the church world is to the message of the cross when we conducted the mock trial in Long Beach a couple of years ago. It was a little painful, what we went through, but it was really NOTHING by comparison to what Jesus went through. And yet, because it was someone right here and now getting a few lashes from a rubber whip, suddenly the world was shocked. Those shock waves spread around the world.

Nevertheless, we still feel that this one scandalous event was one of the greatest things we have ever done, in terms of getting the message out that God has given us to tell.

We have to be willing to move on with each new revelation. It's always risky, and there is always room for us to slip off the rails; but it's far better than the lukewarm state of those who choose respectability and the freedom from change that goes with it.

Josh, Grace, anyone who is able, would you like to discuss the benefits of a Jesus Christian whipping the boy in Kenya?

I personally cannot see how something as abhorrent as publicly whipping someone can possibly be considered a "Christian" act, or that it in any way lines up with Quaker beliefs or practices.

Please take the time Josh, Grace, anyone, to explain to us how it is so if you happen to agree with it.

Listen to the delusional language Dave is using:

the world was shocked. Those shock waves spread around the world

The truth of the matter is that the world was NOT shocked. The sad incident of Dave baring his buttocks, shocking as it must be to see if one was to see such a thing, did not rate a mention on any reputable news broadcast. I do not recall walking into my local supermarket to hear the buzz of conversation about what Dave had just done, nor anywhere else for that matter. My neighbours did not raise the subject with me. In fact the only way I knew anything about it at all was because I know Dave, and know people who receive his newsletter.

So what comes next Dave? Public self immolation? I know you tried the threat of that once before. Going to do it again?

Next he says:

always room for us to slip off the rails; but it's far better than the lukewarm

Please explain how "slipping off the rails" is better Dave, or anyone who agrees with him?

I think you have already slipped off the rails. As soon as your group began to justify whipping people it was set in cement.

Oh dear! What a load of rubbish. Indeed, the ' world' wasn't shocked. As Apostate correctly points out- no one even knew about it. There are reports of cults doing horrible things ' in the name of God' all the time. The Jesus Christians are low rate media fodder- at best. The only message that got across was- ' here is another delusional cult doing something awful'.
Whipping a Kenyan volunteer was one of their lowest points. I believe it was Fran- Kim's husband who played a major part in this. I have met Fran. He is a repressed homosexual who joined the JC's because he couldn't deal with his sexuality. No doubt, the whipping of another male represented something symbolic to him. Perhaps it was his own desire for the other man that he was trying to subdue. Though I feel sorry for Kim- the wife he took in order to ' cure'himself. I don't believe homosexuality is a sin at all- so I'm not writing this from a position of homophobia.
Kim must have realised by now that her marriage is a sham. It's a community where men can spend time with other men- and ' forsaking' the emotional rights of your wife is seen as a positive thing. No ordinary heterosexual man who truly loved his wife would be able remain in such an environment.
Take away what the JC's ' say' and look at what they ' do'.
Sue- by her own admission was complicit in child abuse.
Just as shockingly- recently I learned that a female member of the JC's was a rape victim. Last year- she shared a dream about water- Dave advised her that this was a dream warning her about' guarding against her lust for her male members'.
Roland- Sue's husband was involved with two allegations of kidnap involving underage boys.
Dave's teaching is that ' as long as you don't do anything- but just masterbate while you think about it- it is acceptable.'
The JC's truly are ' People Of The Lie'.

As long as Dave continues to call sound theological doctrines "gnats" and refuses to read materials that may fully disagree with him, there will be lies. Indeed, despite what Dave says, masturbation is still a form of adultry for Jesus did say that "if you lust after a woman in your heart, it is the same as if you had committed adultry with her". Jesus linked thoughts and deeds together such that in truth, we are guilty of sin. If I think to want my brother dead, it is the same as if I had killed him myself (this is by way of example, my brother is actually in need of prayer due to health concerns). Dave really should take a Jesus a little more literally on this and repent of his teaching on masturbation. It won't help anyone to continue this teaching that does violate something that Jesus actually taught.

Hi blacksheep!
Dave violates far more of Jesus's teachings than that! lol I'm sorry to hear that your brother is ill and I'm sure we'll all include him in our prayers.

I too will include your brother in my prayers Blacksheep.

I like the point you have made about masturbation, i would feel violated if i was aware that someone was masturbating while thinking of me. I think its a terrible teaching that Dave has gone totally overbored with.

Hello, your points about homosexuality are good ones, there does seem like there is a lot of homosexuality surronding the JC. It would not suprise me if they started teaching that it was right to have sex with a person of the same sex, as long as they were a Jesus Christian of course!

The whole cult has seriuos issues, whether its homosexuality issues or child abuse and kidnapping or rape, almost everyone has deep issues that they believe are being sorted by joining a cult. In fact what really needs to be done is deal with the issues and not hide them away which is what Dave et al teaches. One can feel better on the outside that does not mean those issues are dealt with. One can look as though they are dealing with it by keeping a smile on thier face but deep down they can be screeming for help.

I will pray that they members of this cult will be given the chance to recieve outside help, and not just get it from Dave. He is not trained to deal with such issues. He has no idea!

I do not think Dave would really care that he violates others by teaching his lackeys that they can masturbate over the image of someone else. He cannot think with that degree of empathy. He once boasted to a homosexual about his sexual endeavors with his own wife in an attempt to get this person to confirm Dave's suspicions that he was gay so Dave could then condemn him of being a sinner! Quite funny actually, if it was not so pathetic. I wonder if Cherry knows that took place.

I have already commented briefly on Dave's new article, but I thought it might be worthwhile to make a full reply.

Moving On [cust.idl.net.au]

"This morning we were reading through the study called "I Will Have Mercy", and it led to Cherry saying something about the fact that we have been lucky that members who are attracted to tradition more than truth always seem to lose interest in us and leave. It led to an observation that there is a similar dynamic happening amongst those of us who ARE seeking more and more truth."

It sounds like Dave might be in another cycle involving disillusionment amoung his ranks, although in typical fashion he tries to project those with the courage to "move on" from the empty rhetoric and repetitive JC routine to seek new directions in life as the "traditionalists", and establish the rusted-ons who are committed to supporting Dave regardless, as the progressive seekers.

The description of people just "losing interest" and fading away was not my experience. As a community email posted on this forum earlier proves, Dave's son was targeted as a threat to the status quo for the 'heresy' of suggesting a leadership model that involved less autocratic rule. When a strategy to expel him by stealth was exposed in contravention of all the declared standards for dealing with grievances, Dave expanded his target which resulted in him kicking out half of the community in a huge scene.

"In our quest for truth, we keep CHANGING. We are constantly drawn outside the box. And, while this change draws us closer to the truth, it also repels those who are just wanting to settle down into some kind of a comfortable tradition, especially with regard to respectability."

It is good that Dave recognises that he is the one constantly changing, and not those poor "traditionalists" who wonder why he keeps moving the goal posts while using the "Rock" of Christ's Teachings to hammer everyone else with.

"Even now, ten years after the split in the community, there are still reports coming back to us that members who left at that time are bitter because we were just achieving respectability in terms of the media interest that surrounded the social work that we were doing in India at that time, and then we handed it all over to other organisations so that we could move on."

Poor Dave. Everything seems to come back to that event 10 years ago doesn't it.

Tell us more about this "report", Dave. Are you referring to something posted here?

It is true many of us involved in that project found great satisfaction in what we were doing; this attracted international attention while Dave was in Australia; when he returned it bothered him that the media asked to speak to me or Kevin; and he asked us to step down from leadership positions before the centre was systematically closed down. But this took place two years before we were expelled, and I don't recall it being raised as an issue by either side at that time. It is interesting that Dave feels the need to link that project with the people he has labelled and rejected and it raises the point that perhaps this is when Dave began to imagine that things were "moving on" without him and he needed to intervene.

"The study I mentioned above talks about how "sacraments" or rituals serve a purpose for a while, but eventually the people doing the rituals become immune to them. Whereas they were first meant to shock, they soon take on an opposite role... that of comfortable conformity."

It is interesting that Dave slides from practical service to the poor to ritual observances with the idea that both are motivated by comfortable conformity. Jesus made the former the standard for identifying the sheep from the goats in Mt 25, while he openly defied the later.

"Catholics take comfort in the fact that, no matter where they go to worship, all over the world, even if the mass is conducted in another language, they still know what to expect, because it's so totally the same for everyone. Protestants are not as obvious, but still there are cliches, hymns, and styles of speech/praying that can be readily identifiable all over the world, at least within their own denomination if not in other denominations. These traditions do what Jesus said they would do... they make what God is really trying to say of no effect. People shelter in the known, as an escape from the unknown."

The internet, has no doubt helped establish a JC routine throughout the few teams around the world (i.e. Listening Times, dream analysis, handicapped runs, distributing quotas, grievance meetings, reports to Dave) which helps sustain a group identity while the various media events give the impression of being open to change.

"Killing an animal as a sacrifice to God was instituted in the Old Testament as a way of shocking people into thinking about the awfulness of their sins; but eventually the Jewish people became desensitised to all of the suffering... So then God came up with this idea of sacrificing his Son. Surely that would shake people up, and make them think more deeply about the seriousness of sin...."

Actually Jesus fed the hungry, helped the sick, welcomed the outcasts etc, and the religious authorities feeling their authority threatened plotted to have him killed. Wicked men were responsible for inflicting physical harm and killing him and it was in the passive acceptance of such an atrocity and in forgiving his tormentors that Jesus demonstrated the power of mercy to triumph over judgment.

"We discovered how indifferent the church world is to the message of the cross when we conducted the mock trial in Long Beach a couple of years ago. It was a little painful, what we went through, but it was really NOTHING by comparison to what Jesus went through. And yet, because it was someone right here and now getting a few lashes from a rubber whip, suddenly the world was shocked. Those shock waves spread around the world."

I've already addressed the grandiose delusions associated here, but I will point out the doublespeak once again. While Dave dismisses the years we spent cleaning public toilets, dredging a sewer, teaching English, helping the sick etc for years in India as being motivated by a desire for respectability, and associates it with religious ritual, by contrast he tries to present a one-off ritualized act of aggression as the more significant progressive thing to do!

Dave can try to justify the confused issues of such symbolism all he likes, but we know that immediately prior to this, the community was boasting of whipping a servant in Kenya as the kind of vigilante justice that could replace the penal system. And, when their self imposed trial passed sentence on Joe's family, the accused were asked to submit to the punishment, which would have been like Jesus trying to crucify the Pharisees! In the end they administered this aggression on each other, which might be better compared to the intentions of a cell of suicide bombers than with Christ's crucifixion. On the Jeremy Kyle Show Cherry said this media stunt was necessary in order to embarrass the authorities into laying charges so they could initiate legal proceedings to recover medical expenses. So when you boil it all down, the JC's are correct in one point, the love of money was at the root of this evil!

"But, sadly, the shock expressed itself in some very anti-Christian ways. We were reprimanded for supposedly thinking that we could take the place of Christ, who had already "done it all". No thought of whether or not we might have been INSPIRED by Christ to take up our cross and follow him in this dramatic illustration of mercy, mind you, but just condemnation of us as heretics for even thinking that there was any point in ANYONE taking the punishment (even a token punishment) for the sins of anyone else."

I suppose they had the gall to suggest that when Reinhard was brutally beaten that could have been related to Jesus' suffering and used the forgiveness which Reinhard had freely offered as an example of Christ's response? Who do these church people think they are to suggest anything to Dave? (sarcasm intended)

"Nevertheless, we still feel that this one scandalous event was one of the greatest things we have ever done, in terms of getting the message out that God has given us to tell. It's all part of getting outside comfortable boxes that were never meant to be comfortable in the first place. It's all part of graduating from old cliches and rituals and moving on to new ways to preach the old message of mercy."

Dave can babble gobble-de-goop and no one will accuse him of using cliche's, but the bizarre thing here is he has turned to symbolic ritual AND cliches to try and justify it all. No one is buying it Dave, and I suspect that this whole article is a desperate attempt to resell it to your own people who may be thinking of "moving on".

"In our search for truth, we do not need novelties or gimmicks..."

Dave seems to think if he preaches the sermon it pre-empts it being preached at him, but I will agree with him here and say searching for truth has nothing to do with the novelties and gimmicks Dave uses or the media attention it attracts. Love is the only thing that matters, and according to I Cor 13 everything else will fail.

"... but we will certainly discover things that are radically different from the norm. Those discoveries are what have kept us growing spiritually all these years. Thankfully, it is also what has blown away so much of the dead wood. Whether it is burning money, working for free, telling the truth about masturbation, going on survival outreaches, donating a kidney, recycling wasted food, or taking a beating on behalf of someone else, we have always had something deeply serious to communicate, and it has always shocked a lot of people. That's the way a real spiritual journey generally progresses. There are always times of quiet faithfulness, but sooner or later, there also comes a shake-up, as new revelation comes through"

And WHO have these "new revelations" come through? Why Dave of course! And what happens when revelations come through another source? They are expelled and dismissed as "dead wood".

"We have to be willing to move on with each new revelation. It's always risky, and there is always room for us to slip off the rails; but it's far better than the lukewarm state of those who choose respectability and the freedom from change that goes with it."

It might be time for some JC's to get some new revelations of their own. What do you reckon Dave? Are you willing for people to move on?

That idea of less autocratic rule may not be so heretical after all!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/15/2008 04:53AM by apostate.

(I acknowledge that Josh has made an effort to post here in response to Apostate....and in THAT one regard, my hat is off to him....)


Quote:
"apostate"
Gee Josh, does your generous offer extend to me as well?

(Josh in reply.....to Apostate....Malcolm in bold!)

If it were up to me it would, I'm not a moderator though so I can't unban you.

If it were "up to you" Josh, then you could at least go "on record" writing publicly on the JC, requesting that you believe Apostates right to post, should be reinstated....as it seems that you have not (...or have I simply missed this entreaty, on your part....well you can always "cut'n'paste" your effort on the JC's board, onto this site, can't you....if it actually exists, that is!!)......then you must actually be quite content with the current state of affairs.....!

I liked your contributions to the thread on remarriage. I think it might have helped if you'd have been willing to drop the issue about the killers for Christ thing and the Kenya whipping. I think everyone knows your feelings on the issue (and everyone also knows they are not FEELINGS in any sense of the word and that your purposely deceitful use of language that deliberate seeks to belittles the issues says all about your complicity with the JesusChristians), and everyone knows how Dave and the other JCs feel about it (Yes they realize that their behaviour is indefensible, hence want to avoid being exposed). It doesn't look like there's movement from either side and it's clear they're not going to continue to talk about it since they're ignoring the repeated comments on this forum, so my advice would be to drop it and move on if you want to come to whatever common ground there is.

If anyone tried to strike up a conversation with Tony Mokbel (or even his arresting officers it appears [www.theage.com.au]) they would likely find that the gentleman loved to wax eloquent about the Greek Islands and sipping ouzo while watching the sunset in the azure waters surrounding Mykynos....Mr Mokbel though might be ever so reticent to discuss Cocaine trafficking or "wasting" any of his competitors....funny that, isn't Josh? Perhaps then to avoid the discomfort that it would cause Mr Mokbels' "feelings" the police should avoid questioning him about anything that would upset him.....I'm sure that they'd be able to find some "common ground" if they limited themselves to more pleasant topics, perhaps reminiscing over the souvlakis' that they enjoyed while walking through the grounds of the Acropolis, one star-filled evening......("sigh".....!)

(Are you somehow like Glenn, Josh, in that you lack any "love" in your world....and coddling up to David, somehow supplies you with the "warm fuzzies" that your world otherwise lacks?....That's why you need to pander so?)

My personal view is you seem bright and would have some good stuff to say on several different threads going and I'd love to see your take on them, but the continued focus on the Kenya thing and the Killers for Christ thing gets annoying.

...and your voyeuristic "boot licking" of someone who swindles people out everything they own, years of their lives, (and these days the very organs of their bodies) advocates welfare fraud (in my time, the mass enrolment of members for unemployment benefits....and of course David's still on Govt. welfare now), blackmails the immediate family of members into silence, engages in misrepresentation and fraud for reasons of gainful advantage.... ...is frankly ever so irritating!!

Quote
Josh
I think it might have helped if you'd have been willing to drop the issue about the killers for Christ thing and the Kenya whipping. I think everyone knows your feelings on the issue and everyone knows how Dave and the other JCs feel about it. It doesn't look like there's movement from either side and it's clear they're not going to continue to talk about it since they're ignoring the repeated comments on this forum, so my advice would be to drop it and move on if you want to come to whatever common ground there is.

My personal view is you seem bright and would have some good stuff to say on several different threads going and I'd love to see your take on them, but the continued focus on the Kenya thing and the Killers for Christ thing gets annoying.

Actually, Josh, nothing will move forward until the Jesus Christians acknowledge the "Elephant in the Room" regarding the Kenya whipping.

Sorry if it "gets annoying", but it is actually a serious matter! David McKay claims Quaker membership, and this is so totally NOT QUAKER, annoying to you as it may be!!!!!