Quote
private eyes
Excerpted from, “Something to Say”, circa August 2002 (emphasis mine)

I couldn't find this on the net. Is it from something on paper?

sWord,

You might like to refresh your memory with a missive from Dave which is on the net, on his own site.

[jesuschristians.net]

This document contains many occasions of David claiming Divine Authority over all others in the regions he is working in. Here's a sample for those who haven't read this yet, or who may be newcomers to this forum.

"God has at this time and in this corner of the world, anointed me as his apostle. As long as I am doing my job right, he is not going to anoint someone else to rebel against me. If I get away from God, then I will lose my anointing and God will give authority to someone else to take my place. But beware! Just because you get a chance to start a rebellion, doesn't mean that you have authority nor that I have lost mine; and if I catch you rebelling, I will wield the rod of correction in obedience to God, since it is really God that you are rebelling against when you do that."

This is a taste of the David who emerges when he is seriously challenged.

As to some new comments over on that other nasty forum....

This mother happens to have gone on with her life and is enjoying every day of it. This mother is very fortunate, her children saw the light and abandoned Dave and all he stands for.

They have now time and freedom to do charitable deeds in their communities and in other parts of the world, are happy married, go to universities and relate lovingly with their family. All these normal things were denied them during their time of servitude for Dave.

I happen to feel that every son and daughter under Dave's control and those who are still suffering from the aftermath, are people I care deeply about. For me there is no "I'm alright, Jack" type of thinking.

Other mothers helped me and stood by me when I was in the same predicament. We will overcome some day.

Blackhat, thanks for refreshing our memory about Dave's statements on his own divinity.

For heaven's sake, doesn't that nonsense make people want to get as far away from him as possible?

Here's a few more choice quotes:

More evidence of David Mckay's control and the obedience he DEMANDS from followers. They comply because he teaches that his authority and God's are one and the same.

I am the captain of this ship. I know where we are going, because I am getting my orders from God....If he has appointed me to lead this work, then he will expect others to work in submission to me...God has at this time and in this corner of the world, anointed me as his apostle....and if I catch you rebelling, I will wield the rod of correction in obedience to God, since it is really God that you are rebelling against when you do that...


SOURCE: [jesuschristians.net] (7 Jan 2007)

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.


[www.jesuschristians.net]

This one talks about his thought policing of cult members in his group:

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.


[www.jesuschristians.net]

I have a whole file of demented "Davequotes." These are the more egregious ones. Want to see more?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/07/2008 08:46AM by zeuszor.

Thanks for the quotes, private eyes, blackhat and zeuszor. It amazes me that there is all this evidence on the table (the insane writings of DM) and those most closely influenced/affected by it chose to either accept it or ignore it. Can't the JCs see that their leader is a dangerous and deluded individual? Obviously, from their point of view, I'm (we're) the one/s deluded. Worse than that, that we at this forum have an agenda of hate and ignorance. What prevents them from seeing that our concerns are for the welfare of the human spirit? I mean, besides our ever-burning hatred (LOL), what other agenda could we possibly have? I, for one, am not making any money or friends from participating on this forum.

I can't help thinking (and, perhaps, it's one of the very reasons I'm so involved in trying to understand the blatant abuse perpetrated within 'cultish' communities) how people can accept narcissistic logic, outright abuse and brazen lies. My childhood was governed by a man like Dave McKay. My father was (is) very intelligent and very perceptive about so many things, but lacked the human decency to know when he overstepped his authority. My family tolerated his madness for many, many years. Breaking away not only meant having a strong support network of friends but also having the courage to physically walk away. When you're in the middle of the storm it can seem normal and calm. However, there is no substitute to standing back and away to see the full fury, the catastrophe, the annihilation.

So, Dave McKay thinks/believes he is the messenger of God. The only thing that bothers me about that claim is his insistence that he is the sole messenger (even to the level of being the only sole messenger on this planet). Personally, I like to think that every individual is a messenger of 'God'. As Joseph Campbell once said, we all represent the centre of the universe. It's an interesting observation/idea. I read this in his book, The Power Of Myth, and I thought it was a lovely idea. It certainly stretches one's normal perceptions. It's such a delightful notion to think that each of us equally represents the very centre of divine truth and existence. I think it's a humbling notion, but one that opens our minds and hearts to every living being, no matter what anyone thinks or believes. And, I suppose, the point is that Campbell put that notion on the table without resorting to 'group building' and 'power building'.

YOU DIDN'T ASK FOR IT, BUT YOU GOT IT. I HOPE THAT THE QUAKERS READ THIS.

[welikejesus.com]

Quote:
"But a better example is paedophilia. Kids are not FORCED to have sex, and yet society says it is wrong. I know, I know, they are not adults. But you see, we each have our restrictions that we think makes it wrong or doesn't make it wrong. And so what we decided to experiment with is just trying to follow the rules as we honestly and humbly think God wrote them."

Here McKay (leader of the Jesus Christians) is saying that pedophilia does not involve force, and is trying to use this principle as an example of why it's OK for members of his cult to attempt to recruit minors. This guy is getting more and more and more demented.

XXX

Here are Dave's latest comments on his forum. As you can see, his persecution complex is flaring up big-time. Dave McKay confuses criticism with “persecution” and thrives on it. We have always found that to expose Dave it is best to be controlled in how we do it as he uses outbursts to provide evidence to his followers that we are all a bunch a raving loony's frothing at the mouth with hatred for him. This man believes that he is one of the Two Witnesses and loves being “persecuted.” This is probably the most potentially volatile cult out there. Here are some more demented quotes (carefully organized into one large email this time; sorry guys about the annoyance yesterday; I didn’t realize. This time is was necessary for me to split them up like this).


QUOTE:
Posted: Sat Dec 16, 2006 4:13 am Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The latest (ironic) news from the Rick Ross forum is that Brian (hardly our best friend over there) is being attacked from several different sides at once for posting Bible verses on the thread about the Jesus Christians. Some of them are being very pointed that they don't want any Bible verses put up there, that even if Brian thinks there is something in the verse that can be used as ammunition against us, he has to point it out for them, explain it very simply, because they have no interest in the Bible EXCEPT as it can be used to hurt us, and even then, they aren't able to see the point he is trying to make unless he gets very specific about leading them step by step through what it means.

Poor ole Brian is being forced to throw his Bible away before he will be allowed to be part of their club. I guess that since they have all thrown Jesus away already, it's not all that hard to trash the Bible as well

Nice group, eh?
END QUOTE

Dave


Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 870
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posted: Fri Dec 15, 2006 8:04 pm Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
This has gone on long enough. I am bailing out here.

Isn't it interesting how snipers always bail out just after they've sprayed everyone with gunfire?

Quote:
It certainly aint worth the lost sleep and compulsive investigating you spend looking for something to expose.


Kev, your last two posts were made at 3am Australian time. Who's losing sleep and getting compulsive?

Quote:
I see Tony every couple of months and have never claimed otherwise.


Those of us who know you best, Kevin, can see through your dishonesty. In this modern age you don't need to see someone to be emailing them several times a day, or phoning them equally as often. You rather obviously left that out of your rebuttal to my claims that you and Tony are working together on this campaign. As for whether or not it is a campaign, Tony went online at Rick's forum and announced that we have something planned up close for Dave. You have been exhibit A in Tony's campaign almost from the start, and still you pretend that he did all of this without your knowledge. Bullshit, Kevin.

Quote:
Your argument against the role of force in pedophilia and saying it and homosexuality are immoral because the Bible says so, seemed to either decriminalise pedophilia, or criminalise homosexuality.


I don't think anyone has any easy solution, but if I had my way, paedophiles would all be required to live in a humane environment away from all contact with children for the rest of their lives, with the emphasis on humane (i.e. NOT a prison). Yes, in a way, it is a suggestion that homosexuality should be decriminalised, and dealt with in a different way. (I hate to think what is going to be made of THAT shocking admission )
Quote:
My concern was that in the forum debate and the real life drama Dave seemed more interested in the academic challenge of accommodating the pedophile (as they have with non practicing homosexuality) than in defending the boundaries which should protect children.


So are you advocating that homosexuality should be criminalised? or maybe even that non-practicing homosexuals should be locked up? Yes, we have a non-practicing homosexual living with us, and yes, we experimented for a while with a supposedly non-practicing pedophile living with us. Academic challenges are part of finding real solutions to real problems, whereas YOUR challenges don't seem to produce anything positive.

Quote:
Dave took such a heavy approach in sending Bruce back to Australia, handing him over to Federal Police, and in persuading him to confess everything to the courts, that I actually felt guilty for the heavy sentence he received.

You're a strange one, Kevin. Thanks for the apology about saying that most parents were not informed. I don't think you made it clear, however, that NO parents were not informed.

But why is it that YOU feel guilty for something that I did. Weird.

You see, when leaders make decisions, they always need to find the fine line between being too harsh and being too soft. It means considering all possibilities and listening to counsel.

You have revealed that in our discussions about how to deal with Bruce I raised the possibility of not telling everyone about Bruce's background. You also revealed that Cherry and you thought others SHOULD be told. What you were not so upfront about was that I ACCEPTED your counsel.

If there is any one consistent grievance that bitter ex-members make against me (and which, conveniently, can never be proven conclusively one way or the other by people who have not lived in the community), it is that I dominate all decisions, and that people are not free to disagree. But those of us who were around up until the time that you left know that almost on a daily basis (and often SEVERAL times a day) you objected to suggestions that I would make, and at least half of the time, the suggestion was altered to go your way.

Quote:
Bruce’s contact with the community was spread out over a number of years.


And could that number have been one or two? And how much of that time did he LIVE with us? And how much of that time did we know that he was a pedophile. Boy, you sure can distort the truth

Quote:
I recall a family feeling imposed upon and compelled to suspend their intentions to care for children and several people feeling uneasy with the way Bruce followed a young child around.


That family was a COUPLE, Kevin (no children). And what does compelled mean? The community made a decision democratically, and it led to them suspending (temporarily) their intentions about fostering a child. Are you saying this to resurrect your claim that I did something unfair and underhanded against families in the community? And you say several people felt uneasy with the way Bruce followed a young child around. Of course we did There was a LOT of unease about having him there. But the decision was made fairly and democratically, and you were a contributor to it. Stop ruining a good apology with more effort to paint a nasty picture.

Quote:
Complete strangers know of the relationship breakdown between us because YOU tell them. Its in your writings, on your website.


The best that can be gleaned from reading our website is that there was a major split in the community in 1998 (and even then, I think it is a restricted article). So don't accuse me of making a public scandal out of your behaviour. The point is that I am accusing you of feeding information to a LOT of people, but particularly Tony and Brian, and that information provided by YOU has been used on Rick Ross' website. You were careful to keep your name out of it, but that was all. The idea was to embarrass and humiliate me, which you and Tony and Brian did extremely well.

Just two days ago, Brian listed a bunch of verses about me not being a fit leader because I cannot control my own family, forgetting that you were 33 years old when you left, and that you are over 40 now. I have certainly not been proud of the fact that you and your siblings have used your children as bargaining tools in your war against Cherry and me. So if I have been guilty of any deception in my life, it has been my attempt, even on the Rick Ross forum, to cover that up, by straight out accusing Brian of lying; which is when he revealed his source, apologising to you for doing it.

I wrote of you: Quote:
Surely he knows about Rick Ross... but maybe not.


You wrote in reply: Quote:
you are about to hang me on forgetting a name that I may or may not have heard


And you say that *I* have a persecution complex?
END QUOTE

Here Dave is engaged in an exchange with his son, from whom he has been estranged since 1998. Their estrangement is described here:

[www.accsoft.com.au]

As you can see, he has absolutely no sense of accountability and no idea of the pain and suffering he has been responsible for bringing into the lives of others, especially his own children. He is becoming more and more obsessed with all of this “persecution” (which is really an expression of public outrage for the “trial” and whipping in Long Beach) and more and more obsessed with his impending “martyrdom”. THIS MAN MUST BE STOPPED. PEOPLE ARE GOING TO DIE.
XXX

see [www.abc.net.au]

I got this from this URL:

[welikejesus.com]

"David Rutledge: If we look at the practice that some Jesus Christians have made of kidney donation: last year, when the law in NSW said that you’re not allowed to make a kidney donation to a stranger, members of the Jesus Christians who wanted to donate a kidney lied to health authorities, and led them to believe that they had long-term relationships with prospective recipients when they actually didn’t. What did you think of that? Did you approve of that?

Dave McKay: Definitely. Every decision we make, we have to measure the means up against the ends. Tell a lie, save a life. That’s the means and that’s the end. Now, 'have sex with somebody to get a new member', that’s another means and end. And so we have to weigh each one up individually.

David Rutledge: But the Jesus Christians community isn’t just anybody, this is a small group - I would say a vulnerable group - who have this sort of cult baggage around them, that I assume you’d like to get rid of. And to that end, wouldn’t complete openness and transparency be an advantage?

Dave McKay: It was open. We were the ones that went and publicly told the media we'd told a lie. Our teaching is: if you must tell a lie, be honest about your dishonesty.

David Rutledge: Dave McKay, leader of the Jesus Christians movement "

So, it's OK to lie when the end justifies the means, Dave?

XXX

"The Overall Scenario

The scope of this book does not allow us to cover all of the details that fit together to make up the big picture of what is about to come to pass in the world in the next few years. There certainly is room for disagreement on some of the details, since they are all based on interpretations of Bible prophecies. However, in this chapter we will give you a rough outline of some of the things that we expect (Many of them have already begun.) and then proceed to explain specifically how some of the conclusions have been reached.

As for whether anything dramatic is going to happen when the calendar ticks over to the year 2000, we can say with relative certainty that nothing will happen at that time that is any more significant than the sort of things that are happening now and that will continue to happen after January 1, 2000.

It appears that there will be problems with computers, and Sydney will be gearing up for the Olympics, but that's based only on what we read in the newspapers, and not on anything we read in the Bible. We'll say it again: There is nothing in Bible prophecy to support the theory that the year 2000 marks the end of the world.

But don't be too surprised if the end comes just a few years after the start of the new millennium. It has nothing to do with the calendar, but plenty to do with developments in world politics, and especially with developments in world banking.

Here is the picture as we see it.

There will be more earthquakes, more epidemics, and more famines. An increase in wars, and more problems with the world economy, will lead to drastic changes in both government and banking.

Russia will more or less rise from the dead and turn on America, virtually destroying it in a surprise military strike over the North Pole. Russia will, as a result, gain control of the United Nations, and use it to set up a world empire. An extremely popular man will lead this movement. He will usher in a time of world peace and prosperity.

The world's banking system will be totally transformed, with computer scans eventually controlling all business transactions. People will do all of their buying and selling through a microchip implant on the back of their hands. (Amputees will be able to get an implant put on their forehead.) This implant will virtually eliminate the need for paper money.

The changes, both in government and in economics, will bring great benefits to most of the earth's population. This will further increase the power and popularity of the world leader.

The Jews will rebuild their Temple in Jerusalem, and resume animal sacrifices. There will be, for a while, greater religious tolerance than ever before. Only the most rabid fanatics will oppose the changes. Amongst opponents will be a small group of Christians who will argue that it is all a mask for something unbelievably evil.

This group of Christians will try to tell the world that the popular leader is actually the Son of Satan in much the same way that Jesus is the Son of God. They will also warn that a global disaster is about to strike the earth. They will warn of an asteroid (or possibly nuclear satellites) crashing into the earth and poisoning much of the earth's water supplies, killing life in the oceans, and destroying much of the world's vegetation. Millions will be killed as a result of this disaster.

About the time that the disaster takes place, the world leader will begin a campaign against the fanatics, possibly accusing them of playing some part in causing the disaster that has struck the earth. The leader will order that all forms of worship be abolished and that he alone be worshipped as god. Anyone who refuses to worship him will be arrested and executed. This program of systematic persecution against all who believe in God will result in the deaths of more people than have ever been slain by any world leader in history, including Hitler and Stalin.

Two spokespersons for the fanatics will repeatedly elude capture at the same time that they succeed in getting the world to hear their message of warning. A worldwide manhunt will eventually track them down, and their execution will be televised around the world. Their bodies will be displayed in public for three days.

And then Jesus Christ will return to earth.

The two people who were executed will suddenly come to life, as will thousands of others who were killed for their faith in Jesus Christ. They will all be given new bodies that are not subject to gravity as people are now. All of these people, plus those who are alive and who have refused to worship the world leader or to allow a microchip implant on their bodies, will be able to float up to meet Jesus in the sky. This amazing escape will be documented with television coverage around the world. All those who are drawn together in this way will disappear into another dimension, possibly into some kind of a huge starship, where they will celebrate their deliverance. At the same time, new problems will confront those left on earth.

More disasters will strike the earth over the next few weeks, causing suffering for billions of people. Those left on the earth will continue to put the blame on the departed fanatics, and will become convinced that they are dangerous aliens from another world. All the armies of the earth will be drawn together to challenge the aliens, as a show-down looms over Israel.

When those who disappeared have finished their celebrations in their refuge in the skies, they will swoop down on earth behind their leader, Jesus. The weapons amassed in the valley of Megiddo, in Israel, will be no match for them. This is the famous Battle of Armageddon, and it will be totally one sided. Those mortals who mistakenly thought they could fight God, will be wiped out. The victorious army will be fully occupied for months just burying all of the bodies and disposing of the ruined weapons.

Then Jesus and his supernatural army will set about rebuilding the earth with the few survivors that remain. The Devil will be bound by God, so that evil will no longer triumph on earth. Whereas all past governments had been corrupt and cruel, and had appealed to people's greed, the forces for good will triumph in this new world.

Jesus will begin a reign of a thousand years on earth, in which he and his supernatural followers will seek to educate the inhabitants of this planet in the ways of God. The earth's mortal population will increase during that period of time.

At the end of the thousand years, the devil will be loosed once again, to see if the people of the repopulated earth have learned how to resist his lies and deceptions. But enough for now. That's another story.

Obviously all of this must sound a bit far-fetched for most readers. There are probably details which we haven't gotten exactly right. But anyone who has studied Bible prophecy at all would have to agree that the overall picture is pretty accurate. In the chapters that follow we will attempt to lead you through some of the steps in how we arrived at these conclusions, including a timetable that you can use to actually count down the final seven years before Armageddon."




Does he actually believe that he is one of the two witnesses and that he will one day help rule and reign over the earth with the Virgin Army? Does he really believe that a starship will take them to heaven and that they'll one day be watching the Marraige Supper of the Lamb on huge big-screen TV's (The aliens angels explain how the New Jerusalem has been hidden in a secret dimension all this time, and how when the great marriage of God to the Church takes place everyone in New Jerusalem will be able to watch it on big screens) What?!

XXX

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!

XXX

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.

XXX

[www.accsoft.com.au]

XXX

Dave is discussing whether he would kill for Christ on this thread

[welikejesus.com]

XXX

"There is no contradiction between me talking about killing someone to save someone else's life, and other members saying that they would strongly question any interpretation of the teachings of Jesus that said we should kill our enemies rather than love and forgive them."

Source: [welikejesus.com] (accessed 30 December 2006)


In light of the previous two quotes from David McKay he has audacity to throw out a challenge.

"Now we challenge anyone to show us someone who is more serious about teaching people to obey Jesus than we are"... Dave.

"Pain seems to be the most humane and speedy form of human punishment. We could whip them strongly, without doing any damage to their teeth, brain, or spine. And it would all be over in just a few minutes."

SOURCE: [cust.idl.net.au] (accessed 29 Dec. 2006)

XXX
A quote from Dave McKay, leader of the Jesus Christians, on "letting your light shine". From:

[welikejesus.com]

"As we really do get closer to God, and as that of God begins to shine forth from us, there is going to be a different sort of a light that comes, which may actually be symbolised by those saints who were burned at the stake for their faith in days gone by.

It's coming, Friends, and we need to see it as an inseparable part of our decision to follow Christ. In the end, he said that he would cause divisions between us and everyone else who is in opposition to him. In these dark days, that is going to include almost everyone. But we can rejoice, "for so persecuted the prophets which were before you," and we can rejoice because "great is our reward in heaven." Our rejoicing in itself is going to anger them further, but it will all hasten the day of His returning. Burn, brothers, burn!"



Dave's deluded persecution complex is getting more and more acute. I am attempting to draw the attention of the international apologetics community to this group (the Jesus Christians) and this situation. They are becoming more and more obsessed with their "enemies" and appear to believe that the whole world, and everybody in it, is persecuting them. The talk of impending martyrdom is frequent at their message board. (www.welikejesus.com) The group's irrational fear of "The System" extends to his followers, too. This quote is from Ross, a long term member of the Jesus Christians, speaking on the topic of the Jesus Christians' critics: ""Imagine what would happen if we fall into their hands."

The Jesus Christians are conditioned to equate criticism of their behaviors as a group with persecution and they are getting more and more paranoid and bent on martyrdom. Again: please pray for this situation. People are going to die unless somebody does something (Through the proper legal channels, of course).

There is a team recruiting presently somewhere in the US. Apparently they are either on or near the East Coast. Does anybody know anything more specific?

XXX

Here Dave tells a mothe whose child was being touched inappropriately within the group that she is being "over sensitive".

[welikejesus.com]

XXX

Dave is continuing to rail against ex members, while accusing others of having "mental problems".

"... a number of the ex-members who are presently fighting us so fiercely seem to have serious mental problems, i.e. to be a bit crazy. But I had to point out that most of them had similar problems when they were members of our community, and many of our present members and supporters have mental problems as well. It's just that within the community these tendencies were being dealt with, whereas outside the community they seem to run rampant."

SOURCE: [cust.idl.net.au] (3 Jan 2007)

Once again he asserts that any outside his direct influence will go crazy. It is clear that such comments say something about his own state of mind.

XXX


More fear mongering from Dave with a dash of false accusation, sprinkled with a seasoning of what if.

"I just turned 62 years old, and yet one of the recurring thoughts on the RR forum is what they will do after I die. Is this just very long-range preparation, or do they know something that I don't?"
SOURCE: [welikejesus.com] (2 Jan. 2007)

XXX

Another edifying quote from David McKay:

"It is amazing how many of these bitter ex-members were actually pretty hopeless when they joined us"

SOURCE: [welikejesus.com] (1 JAN. 2007)

A telling window into the mind of a cult leader and how he views those who choose to follow him.

XXX

First of all to my brothers and sisters who live in Europe and other places where one must pay by the byte, please accept my apologoes for my frequent posting on David McKay and the Jesus Christians. McKay's communiques on his own discussion board are becoming progessively more and more bent and he really lets a lot of his "true colors" come through in his writings here. Here is a collection of quotes in which Dave is discussing his sense of entitlement:


A classic example of the control Dave exerts is seen in his own writing:

Quote:
When parents start demanding that grown children give in to all of their demands before they will be allowed to come into the house, then it's a good time to call their bluff and hand back the key... or, in Ash's case, to mail it back.
SOURCE: [welikejesus.com] (6 Jan. 2007)

Ash, chooses not to see the hypocrisy in this direction from his leader. The cult leader is demanding that the actual parents of the child give in to all his demands before they can see their own child. It is emotional blackmail to the inth degree. Is it any wonder some parents may react protectively of their child in such circumstances? The events surrounding Joseph's recruitment into the Jesus Christians is definately understandable, not justfiable, but understandable; and worthy of consideration by a judge as Dave is repeating the same manipulative callous control with Ash's parents.

I have heard that in some states of America a burglar can be shot by a house owner under property protection laws, I think some thought regarding a deceptive manipulative cult coming to your door to steal away your children can be seen in a similar light... so in some ways it could be considered justifiable self defence.

Ash does not realise how strange his behavior has become seeing that he now thinks he needs protection to visit his own parents... people that raised him from birth. Ash thinks he is following God by dishonoring his parents in such a way to follow a cult leader. In time he will come to see that his behaviour is disrespectful and unloving towards those who truly do care for him. Ash does not realise yet, but he will in time, that Dave does not care for him... but in fact views him as quite hopeless and suffering from mental problems. He has said as much publicly in his latest rants.

Children born to members within the group soon become communal property with parents relinquishing parental authority to David. Children are viewed as liabilities until they can start getting out on the street distributing tracts. It is an action which comparable to child labour. I have personally had conversations with group members who viewed their child as a liability.

I recall Christine taking a two year old boy to task because he said "I am a big boy", as little kids are wont to do. For this he was given time out until he could acknowledge he was a little boy. To her it was a sign of pride, in need of smashing through discipline. If a parent objected they were seen as bad parents who did not really love their kids enough to discipline them according to Jesus Christian "spare not the rod" standards of child raising.

Christine does not know any different; it was how she was raised as she is Dave's youngest daughter. She used to get in such a burnt out mental state that she would lock herself away from others, self medicating in order to calm her nerves. A sad and pitiful sight as she seeks to please a cult leader for a dad.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

More evidence of David Mckay's control and the obedience he DEMANDS from followers. They comply because he teaches that his authority and God's are one and the same.

I am the captain of this ship. I know where we are going, because I am getting my orders from God....If he has appointed me to lead this work, then he will expect others to work in submission to me...God has at this time and in this corner of the world, anointed me as his apostle....and if I catch you rebelling, I will wield the rod of correction in obedience to God, since it is really God that you are rebelling against when you do that...
SOURCE: [jesuschristians.net] (7 Jan 2007)

PART TWO OF ABOVE. QUAKERS, RED ALERT!

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Evidence of David McKay's CONTROL of group members from his own mouth:

This is not a holiday camp. It is an army, and we're involved in a war. There will be casualties. There will be costs. And for those who survive, there will be victories. But if anyone wants to be a part of this army, then they need to get it clear that they must obey orders.
SOURCE: [jesuschristians.net] (6 jan 2007)
And like an army, it is not a democratic community. Members "must" obey orders or suffer the consequences. Ash "must" take a stranger to his parents house. Joe "must" fight against his own parents. They all "must" meet distributing quota's, both numerically and financially. It is the direct command of the cult leader.

XXX

www.laindependent.com

XXX

"Divine Authority
More needs to be said about the actual gift of leadership. I have tried all my life to convince myself that anyone can be a leader; but no amount of effort on my part has been able to get some people to see past following whoever happens to be shouting the loudest at the time, regardless of whether they are right or wrong in what they are shouting. We can't put all the blame onto bad leaders if people are silly enough to follow them unthinkingly; but then, if the issues are complex and the bad leader is clever with words, I'm not so sure that we can put all the blame on the followers either.
The ability to lead is a gift, that can be used for good or evil. But you need to learn how to choose good leaders over bad ones.
I can't help but feel that if I had better access to some people, I could get them to follow me in preference to their churchy leaders. And I feel that if I could them to follow me, I could eventually get them to follow Jesus. BUT MAYBE NOT. Maybe some people are just attracted to rebellious leaders, and it was just a matter of time before they would find one to follow. At any rate, it is important to realise that, merely being a gifted leader does not guarantee that a person will not abuse that gift.
There is something else that I'll call divine authority, which is something quite apart from gifted leadership. Every leader will claim some kind of authority, which seems to be almost synonymous with being a leader. But DIVINE authority is different, and it can only come from God.
It is something like the difference between pride and confidence. People often confuse them, but one is the counterfeit of the other. A confident person has the respect of others; but is actually humble enough to accept criticism. A proud person tries to demand that people respect him or her, and a proud person hides from criticism.
Rebel leaders are like this. They hide from criticism and teach their subjects not to criticise them. But having such power does not say anything about whether they have God's authority to be leading. In fact, as a general rule, the worst leaders are usually the ones whose so-called authority needs to be most protected from ciriticism. And the best leaders are the ones who are most tolerant of criticism.
I have always tolerated a great deal of criticism, even criticism from rebels, ex-members, and outright enemies. But don't forget that I am the captain of this ship. I know where we are going, because I am getting my orders from God. I don't have to preach long sermons on it or abuse people in order to make it clear. Nor do I need to hide from confrontations with critics. For the most part, my record will speak for itself, both in showing my authority from God and in showing my ability to take criticism. But the bottom line is that I am here because God has given me a job to do, and I must do it. I'm not here to promote myself in opposition to someone else. I'm here to get God's work done.
I would like to think that each one of you could leave this community and start another community all over again, as Cherry and I did from scratch; but unless you did so under clear direction from God, you would almost certainly be led astray if you tried, just as has happened with others who have left our community. The problem is not that they lacked ability, but only that they lacked authority from God to do such a thing. "Except the Lord build the house, they labour in vain that do it." And being clever with words and having a stack of my teachings won't amount to anything if you aren't being led by God. For the time being, God has put me here to lead you, and you are not free to just declare yourself to be the leader and automatically expect God to honour your decree.
I rebelled against the "covering" doctrine in the churches, because they were saying that, right or wrong, people have to follow church leadership. No way! If the leaders are wrong, you must not follow them; but if they are right, it's a different story. If you rebel against a "right" leader, you rebel against God, and he will lift his anointing and protection from you. The reason you would fail would not be because I'm so special, but just that any kingdom divided against itself will not stand. God is not stupid. If he has appointed me to lead this work, then he will expect others [in this movement] to work in submission to me.
He may have other leaders out there (whom we haven't met yet) who also have his authority; but he is not going to anoint two leaders in opposition to one another. Even completely separate ministries must be willing to submit to one another in love.
God has at this time and in this corner of the world, anointed me as his apostle. As long as I am doing my job right, he is not going to anoint someone else to rebel against me. If I get away from God, then I will lose my anointing and God will give authority to someone else to take my place. But beware! Just because you get a chance to start a rebellion, doesn't mean that you have authority nor that I have lost mine; and if I catch you rebelling, I will wield the rod of correction in obedience to God, since it is really God that you are rebelling against when you do that.
For many years in the churches, I listened to sermons from desperate men trying to keep their troops together. They preached submission to themselves in sermon after sermon, week after week. Because of that I more or less vowed not to preach such sermons in my community, and I urged followers to think for themselves and not to be afraid to question me. But over and over the very people I have taught this to have turned on me when they got out of the spirit, and argued that I was power hungry and cruel, just as they have argued with God.
All that was bad in all those preachers has come out through the lips of those who have rebelled against my leadership. They have become obsessed with protecting themselves from criticism, and refusing to talk to anyone who criticises them. Now I see that, in over-reacting to a false teaching, I had missed an element of truth in it as well. People are given a choice between leaders who welcome criticism and ones who outlaw it, and they end up attacking the ones who tolerate criticism, because they know we will be tolerant of their outbursts.
I now see that, in an effort to do what is right myself (i.e. to accept criticism), I failed to teach respect for divine authority. So gutless followers who are too frightened to stand up to really dictatorial leaders, will turn on the gracious one because they know that he will take it. And if he doesn't, then they'll quote his own teachings back to him in an effort to get him to justify their actions. It is time to put an end to this misconception. Just because I am willing to listen to criticism (and my critics are not) does not mean that the critics are right. In fact, most of them are eternally wrong.
What I am saying does not exempt you from a need to develop a strong conscience and personal accountability before God. These things are especially important in the event that I do go off the rails. But I am ruling out everyone running off with their own opinions and saying that they have as much right as me to say what is right. The plain truth is that you don't. You don't all have the "divine authority" which God has, at least for the present, given to me, to lead this movement.
What I am saying here also does not make me infallible, nor does it exempt me from criticism, as I've already said above. But it does say that if you are going to take a grievance against me, you had better be sure before you start that you are right, or you may be dealt with harshly for taking a false or frivolous grievance. We need to put an end to all those vexatious litigations that I used to almost encourage, in order to make it clear that I wasn't trying to railroad people on issues.
I have authority from God, to lead this movement back to obedience to Jesus, and back to living by faith, in preparation for the return of Christ. There is a difference between divine authority and the political manoeuvrings of those who seek power for selfish purposes. The political empire builders are like blithering idiots when confronted with someone who is sincerely looking for the truth. And when they're not spreading hatred against me personally, they are running in fear that they will have to answer for something that they have said. The truth is that they are running from God, to whom they will have to answer for their actions, no matter how much they run from me.
I want to especially thank those of you who had the courage to act on authority from God in confronting rebellion even when I was guilty of trying to be soft on it (in order to make myself look like a "nice guy"). Confronting rebellion of your own initiative is the kind of action that makes you true leaders. Mind you, it doesn't guarantee that you too might not be lifted up with pride one day; and that's why God has put me over you for the time being. But it does show that you have a certain amount of divine authority already, which will just simply make way for itself if you continue to sincerely and humbly follow God."

XXX

This is what David had to say when I was asking him questions under the name Andy ; at that point he thought I was a potential recruit. This was in response to Andy's question to him about why he thought it was OK for his people to deal with kids, minors:

Quote:

Dave

PostPosted: Tue Jan 09, 2007 10:04 pm

I thought it was great what Andy was saying. It's good that he has had a look at what the opposition is saying, and it seems like he can see through it pretty well.

He says that he can see how Joe's parents would be upset. So can I. Of course, the article doesn't say that Joe left a note, and that he talked with his parents (by phone and email both, I think) while he was away for that week. He knew them well enough to not just front up and say, Hey, I'm going to head out to New Mexico for a week, okay?
As for us communicating with a sixteen year old, Andy, I think you need to ask yourself if anyone else is forbidden to communicate with sixteen year olds, via the internet, via the media, via literature, or just when they bump into them on the streets. If not, then why should we be condemned for communicating with Joe when he was sixteen. Virtually every sixteen year old in America has access to information that their parents would rather they NOT have access to. But parents learn to live with it and work around it. The law may say that they can force him to stay under their roof until he is eighteen (although a lot of police will not bother bringing runaways home after they turn sixteen, because they realise that between sixteen and eighteen the child is starting to make some more independent choices and force can no longer be your primary means of control.) but it does not say that you can force a sixteen year old to stop thinking about anything the parents don't want them to think about.

Joe's contact with us between sixteen and eighteen weas primarily through visiting our website, btw. I think there were only a handful of times when he arranged to meet up with people at fast-food restaurants. He would not even tell us his real name (No joking , he called himself Joe King ) possibly for fear that WE would notify his parents. So he was very much in control of his own thoughts.

Just thought I would clear up those points a bit, because the media always seems to get a few things wrong.

End quote

What he says, in other words, is “Well, it’s not my fault if they aren’t paying attention what their kids are up to.” Always somebody else’s fault, always somebody else’s problem with this guy.

Also keep in mind his previous quotes on the subject of pedophilia:
Quote:

[welikejesus.com]
Quote:
But a better example is paedophilia. Kids are not FORCED to have sex, and yet society says it is wrong. I know, I know, they are not adults. But you see, we each have our restrictions that we think makes it wrong or doesn't make it wrong. And so what we decided to experiment with is just trying to follow the rules as we honestly and humbly think God wrote them.

Here McKay (leader of the Jesus Christians) is saying that pedophilia does not involve force, and is trying to use this principle as an example of why it's OK for members of his cult to attempt to recruit minors. This guy is getting more and more and more demented.


Dave is a spiritual pedophile, a spiritual pervert. The above quotes provide a window into his demented mind. Maybe it's because young kids' minds are more impressionable and pliable, and therefore they're easier to manipulate. Maybe it's because having destroyed his relationship with his own kids, and now he feels compelled to damage other people's relationships with their kids. I don't know, probably a combination of things.
I hope some kid out there, and/or his or her parents, is reading this, and can make a more informed judgment about what you might be thinking about involving yourself in.

XXXXXXXXXX

Quote:

_________________
Quote:


There are Friends like myself who not only believe in the existence of God, but who actually love him and worship him. Any suggestion that our love for God is the cause of all the troubles in the world is understandably offensive to us.

I do not think we are deluded, and I do not think it is appropriate to even suggest such a thing. We believers in God have tried to show loving acceptance of those who do not believe; but is it too much to ask that the non-believers do the same thing for us as well?When we learn to hear what we don't want to hear, we're well on our way to finding truth.


[forum.quakers.org.au]


The quote above is from one of Dave's posts at a Quaker site
Amazing, is it not, that Dave claims to show 'loving acceptance' and asks to be shown 'loving acceptance', yet does what he does. He goes on to say that ' I do not think we are deluded' ( hmm) and explains that he does not think it is 'appropriate' to suggest such a thing. This is the same man who belittles parents for being too controlling ,whilst also criticising them for not knowing what their teenage children are doing. One of his 'damned if you do and damned if you dont' scenarios. The same man who spits venom on one forum and oozes peace on another. The same man who demanded that a parent renounce her friend if she wanted to retain contact with a family member in the group. The same man who splits up families and does not spare a thought for their pain.
Which brand of 'loving acceptance' is he illustrating ? He still refuses to hear what he does not want to hear! He is demonstrating a deep seated hatred but labels it 'loving acceptance'. In his upside down world, that is what he chooses to believe. In order to justify his actions, that is what he chooses to do; twist reality, by calling day, night and night, day. The 'god' he loves is a strange little character.
He should follow his own advice and learn to listen and to hear those he does not want to hear.

XXXX

The Family/COG connection

n 23 December 2003 someone called Hope (aka Freelance) posted a message on newdaynews.com confirming that
'The Family and the Jesuschristians had a get together in Ocean Beach California. ' .....' This was organized by Freelance.'

One of the topics under discussion was the latest Family teaching the LJR or the Loving Jesus Revolution. there have been other meetings, this is just one example that is documented on a forum. *Dave usually denies that he makes contact with them, despite using their literature and artwork)


A poster called 'Not surprised' responded on 29th Dec 2003 to say

'Well Hope, you appear to be related to/Freelance
So Dave has gone back to the fold then , like a dog to its vomit. His teachings on masturbation and the importance of dreams always reflected the Fam beliefs on sex and spirit guides. He never left. Always contributed to World Services. The Jesus Christians are more than an offshoot of the Family. The leader has always been a member, always supported them financially and continued to be a Berg 'shepherd'. My guess is he will be very angry that you have spilled the beans. News like this got him thrown out of a few churches he had 'joined' in the past. The Quakers will not be impressed.'


On friday 26th December a poster called The Jesus Christians
posted the following message in support of Hope and in response to a poster called Darkangel (ex member of the Family_

What are the numbers of the Jesuschristians? How can you say Hope only talked to 2 or 3?
By these very statements you have lied! As for the LJR the Bible itself talks about a marriage relationship between Jesus and His bride!
That means sex real sex with all of the trimmings!
If Love is the paramount rule as Christ taught than sex between non-marriad adults is an expression of love your either with the law or your not!
As for Lydia your meeting with the Jesuschristians was correct you forgot to say you screamed your head off in the streets at the very sight of them!
You cant nickname yourself (Darkangel) such as the Devil is and then claim to be a soul winning Christian!
This whole board has perjured itself your own words condemn you!


Freelance and Dave seemed posted regularly on NDN around that time and had a similar writing style. Dave was very critical of Family ex members and those who campaigned against the Family's work. Both got banned from NDN

Freelance had a reputation on the newdaynews site for posts that were leery and sex obsessed. Dave was aware of this as were the entire readership of NDN. Here is one example of Freelance's postings.

NewDayNews Crossfire
Re: David F'lance you are probably HIV POSITIVE
By:David Freelance <Send E-Mail>
Date: Monday, 14 January 2002, at 12:05 pm
In Response To: David F'lance you are probably HIV POSITIVE *N/T* (Mekka)
Just had the test a second test Im clean thank God! How do you like? Do you like it over the shoulder or below the shoulder?
Enquiring minds want to know! Personally I like it up and down and it turns me on to hear a woman Pant,Pant,Pant! I like em all the long the short and the tall I like it tight but Ill take it loose! I hope you like turkey cause I like a hot goose! Ive did it in church and in a lake Ive had a lot but thers alot more to take!
David Hotpants Freelance




Freelance travelled extensively with the JC's and appeared on TV with them in the Kidneys for Jesus documentary.

A few questions here in light of comments posted at JC forum.

1. What lengths did Dave go to to keep this man seperate from youngsters and to inform them and protect them?

2. What differences are there (if any ) between the LJR and Dave's latest spin on masturbation?

A final thought

The JC's have issued numerous statements denying the connection between themselves and the Family but it is not entirely true to say that they are merely influenced by the early COG. Cherry may have left Dave if he remained in the Family. Dave left because of her reaction and on condition that she left her church and joined him. In his own words he 'took advantage of a COG ruling' ( posted on exfamily ) which allowed anyone who had a couple of disciples to set up independantly as a COG shepherd. The JC's were started as an off shoot of the Children of God. It evolved over the years but spiritually Dave never made that break away from them. Dave's only objections to that group are on the liberal teachings on sex but on nothing else of significance. dave still looks up to Berg. Berg's letter was prized by Dave. Berg had his spirit guides. Dave has his dreams. The spirit of Berg remains in the group and it is still obsessed with sex. Dave works round the clock controlling the groups lives and their sexuality, manipulating their private lives, enforcing celibacy and teaching about masturbation as a substitute. The Family also preach masturbation in the LJR. Both teach members how to and when to lie. A rose by any other name.....
XXXXXXXXXX

Another Newdaynews post from the archives. NDN is a site for ex mambers of the Family or COG. It appears that they were tiring of Dave's posts and efforts to attract ex Family members to the JC's and began to take the 'mickey'.


The fantasies of Dave M, madness or what?
By:connie spiratores alertus
Date: Wednesday, 27 November 2002, at 3:04 pm

This tale is based on DM's ravellings and plans for the end time as written in his little book 'Armegeddon for beginners'. It is a modern day parable about this 'sinister cult leader' as he calls himself.

The Armenian government has uncovered a conspiracy in lane 101 on the Texan freeway, 730 miles from one place and 1300 miles from a place in another direction, possibly a white house which is up for forsaking. It involves the JC?S, a bone fide prophet impersonator AND one Freelancer. These individuals henceforth designated the CONSPIRATORS are believed to entwined and 100% human or 99% idiot. They are responsible for numerous scare tactics and possibly for the reacent threat of war on Iran, Iraq, Israel, India, Ivory coast, Ingeland, Ireland, Imerica, Istanbul and Indoneesia, otherwise known as the ten headed i- monster from the book of ravellations. These places have plagued DM for years, assaulted his ego and will be subject to name changes in the McKay era. Zeke is armed with a knotting needle with which to poke out all i?s. Anger levels in McKay?s immediate domain on the freeway region, 721 miles from nowhere and 1564 miles from nowhere else, were way off the Richter scale and directed towards posters at NDN, manly Lydia, Charlie, Freethinker and others with the odd exceptions notably one head nodding guy who declares himself to be so open minded that his brain fall out periodically. The conspiracy dates back to the seventies when DM had hair on his chest and ate French fries like any other normal half wit. In the COG Dave KNEW he could do better than Berg and besides he could not tolerate the discipline. Suddenly he had no COG, no hair and no fries. Deprived of these and filled with grandiose ideas about his 'prophetic mentality' and his authentic 'Ezekial' status, he hatched a plot which involves taking normal open minded people and exers hostage, in the nicest way possible, and incarcerating them in North Carolina or elsewhere in cardboard boxes or other secluded spots, with the aid of 15 camels or anything else and turning them into his disciples or slaves. Posters at NDN are currently targets and will face diversions to other boards via links in a bid to get their attention. In the proverbial 'cardboard box' they will be bombarded with 'near scriptures', subdued until they pisteo and forced to listen to DM aka Zeke shake, rattle and roll on about hell, damnation, system infiltration, profits and other ingenious fantasies he entertains. All information will be guaranteed 100 million % absolute crap. Plans are afoot to force NDNers to provide the backing vocals for his theme tune
?Been spending most of life, living in a Gangsters paradise,
As I walk through the valley of the shadow of death I took a look at my life and blah blah blah?
NDN?s will be forced to read LIT, (stop wincing please ex COG) discuss it, believe it, distribute it, distribute more of it and then more again and pass the donations to the leader who will count it, pocket it, spend it, relish it, spend more of it and then distribute it to the media in a bid for privacy, secrecy, solitary and keeping his own kidneys well under his skin. NDN has been warned that the plot thickens, the chicken is hatched, the die is cast and the bugle is blown. Dave swings from his camper van and hovers over the highways like a tantalizing purple parrot singing in unison with Freelance ?I?m in a Gypsy caravan, come and get me , dudes? whilst dangling off telegraph wires, all smelly and cute but posing a threat of cataclysmic perportions principally, predominantly and primarily to himself alone notwithstanding the unfortunate camels and the JC?s underneath who as every child knows have the hump!. All of the group and associate groups are heavily involved with the conspiracy and know absolutely nothing about the plans due to the absurd yet sensitive nature of the operation and the paranoia, that?s the PARANOIA (Boo!!! excuse,counter scare tactics) of the punk leading the action who is now reported to be past his sell by date. In the twinkling of a pork pie NDN and then the entire human, astral, cyber, plant and animal population will surrender to the conspirators and then THEY the conspirators, I repeat CONSPIRATORES (complete with newly forged typo manifested Mafia connections and dispatched by one Marie Pierre) will follow the leaders script for world occupation. The unlikely McKay army, plan to take over where Bush leaves off and ruin the nations, oops, I mean rule the nations. Each member will govern an assigned region which they will steer, I mean scare towards salvation. Imagine. Oh Happy Day! Come on everyone clap your hands, Oh Happy day e ay! Yeah. In scenes foretold in McKay?s ?Armageddon for beginners? and reminiscent of the heroic geek, Dave in ?Independence Day, the show will commence. Background music from Coolio?s hit with the NDN backing chorus will be piped across the planet as Dave howls it out from his camper window with gusto ?lalala and
even my Mamma thinks that my mind is gone,
la la lalalalala I?m a educated fool with money on my mind,
got a pen in my hand and greed in my eyes lalala
been spending most of life living in a gangsters paradise?
Suddenly at an unknown time that has been incorrectly and correctly foretold and reforetold by the Family and JC?s, a Jesus look alike will return in a yellow submarine, sorry that?s a Star Wars space ship (seriously )and take out those who rejected Zeke?s or McKay?s message. Angels carrying shovels will help the JC?s mass burial operation. Oh yes, very angelic. Struth! Oops. Steady on, dammit. NDN must take decisive action now, swiftly, rapidly, at high speed and like greased lightning, at high propulsion rates or to put it bluntly, very quickly. All or any actions at all, decisive or indecisive, frenetic or sluggish will be beneficial or otherwise in the summary diversion of the conspiracy.
NDN?s call to action follows.
Volunteers are required to locate the purple monkey as a matter of urgency, infiltrate the bus and report overts, coverts and diverts back to the motherboard. You do not need scientology experience for this tech, but it may help to bridge the knowledge gap. All toolkits are to remain hidden. Twenty six powerful entities are required to report for action immediately to NDN in order to halt the conspiratores, undo the damage and restore their mental stability and possibly mine. These must include A, B,C, D, E and may be upper or lower case. Should this fail plan B will begin. Ha will lead the offensive comix reaction and initiate posting ?Yo mamma? insults to Dave. Check it. There is nothing in the bible that specifically prohibits this. Nothing at all. The purple parrot might fall off the vehicle laughing and Dave could lose the plot, oops and even the prospect of Freelances house. Spontaneous and decisive actions by literate or semi literate individuals may prove to be the best antidote to the conspiracy or they might not. I cannot decide. Time will tell and tourists have been warned to stay out, I repeat OUT of the area. OFF the patch unless you want your brain stewed in your local shopping mall, your i?s ripped out and end up living in McMerica. All inaction counts as action. You are either for it or against it. Go on, leggitt you loopies, this is not a spectator sport. This is the salvation through fear zone. Learn the words of Dave?s Coolio theme song, look frightened and come on in.
All these things shall come to pass and remember you heard it here first and foremost on the boreds at NDN where everyone talks and everyone can profit,see!
This message is bone fide. We live by faith but beg for money and communication costs money. Send a donation today and pay for the truth. Its in print and it has Dave McKay's name on it.
Madness
That is what your message represents Dave. Jesus does not kill people. It will not happen. Just as Berg was deluded so too are you deluded. You will not get to rule the world.
Stop peddling that trash to scare people
Excuse our tone.
We are the conspiracy hustlers.

Thank you for reading. You can invent your own moral for this conspiracy warning.
For example >
Never push your plumber down the latrine.

I am trying to pick out my favourite line here, but the tears have reduced visibility on my screen.

XXXX

Link to Makay's open letter to FBI which he has posted on his website.
(Perhaps it is worth remembering that McKay actually believes that his group will rule the world one day soon )

Please be aware that it has been claimed that the website collects the email addresses of those who visit.

[cust.idl.net.au]

Extracts from McKay's letter to FBI agent

'We would be silly to co-operate with them or you either one while this continues. As I said on the phone, we sent Joe, who is legally an adult, away from Reinhard and Jeremy, on his own, so that there would be no doubt about the fact that he was not being held if/when you finally find him. He has, however, had some contact with members of our community since then.

In our first phone conversation, I asked you if Joe could just show up at some police station, letting them know that he is free, and you immediately started back-pedalling. That wasn't good enough. You wanted advance warning about which police station he would turn up at. I had to ask myself why you would not agree to that, and it seemed that what you wanted was a meeting at which you or the parents would be present, so that they could then press charges against him for some false crime. He has, however, now given a report at another police station, sharing face-to-face at length with a couple of police. We have their names and the name of the police station. So you can be sure that if you continue with this charade, and particularly if any arrest is made, then we will be using this letter and that police report if we decide to take action against you for false arrest.'

'Once again, I have to ask you if this sounds like something kidnappers would do? Have you even bothered to question the family about the veracity of these claims? You see, if you haven't bothered to question them, then it becomes obvious that you are not really interested in the facts

XXXXX


See this post on ex family from the groups website


[www.exfamily.org]

The following is an extract from the jesuschristians website by David McKay


'New Kidnapping Scandal,

May 20, 2006

It's like all our past nightmares coming back to haunt us, and yet it seems like this is going to be the pattern more and more in the days ahead.
Yet another enraged parent has decided to accuse us of kidnapping. This time it is Jared and Sheila Johnson, the same people who were responsible for bashing Reinhard so badly on Friday, May 5, that he ended up in hospital with a broken vertebra, many deep cuts to his face, smashed teeth, smashed glasses, and bleeding on the brain. Police who arrived at the scene after Jared and his stepson, John, had finished their handiwork and fled, said that Reinhard's condition was so serious that they would be charging Jared, a local high school teacher, with assault with a deadly weapon. This was in one of the rougher areas of Los Angeles, where violent assaults are almost commonplace.

But now the 'c' word has been mentioned by Sheila, and suddenly everything has changed. Once again (as happened in England and in Kenya) we are being treated as the enemy. The FBI has been called in, we have been told by the police themselves that there is little point in pressing charges against Jared and John, and we ourselves are being accused of kidnapping Joe.

Think about it. Reinhard received the beating when he turned up at the house with Joe, in an effort to meet with the parents. Is this the sort of thing that kidnappers do? Just after the beating, Joe was taken forcibly by his family to a motel where he remained for the rest of that day and the following day before walking out of the motel late on Saturday night and re-joining the community. We felt that he might not be fully convinced of what he wanted to do so we actually SENT HIM HOME early the next week to think things over. He spent a day or two with his family, watching TV, listening to their rants against the Jesus Christians, playing catch in the park, doing chores around the house, and then decided once again to come and ask to be a part of our community.

So why has the FBI been brought in? The 'c' word, remember? His parents said that the Jesus Christians are a cult. The general public hasn't got a clue what the word means... well, let's face it, no one does. It's a word without a meaning, but it conjures up something so despicable that even murder becomes justified by comparison.

The point is, that we are a cult. Or so they say.

So what is going to happen in L.A.? For starters, Joe is on the run. We have sent him off on his own, as we did with Betty in Kenya. If he is finally captured (and make no mistakes, it is really Joe who they want to capture, because they know that we have not kidnapped him) he will be captured on his own. Joe is not a minor. He is a very mature 18-year-old. There will be no legal reason to prevent him from making his own decision about how he wants to live his life.

But don't forget... we're talking about a cult here.

We have talked to parents who have consulted cult busters like Prince Sullivan, the one Jared and Sheilah Johnson contacted in Long Beach, California. They have told us that the cult busters start by asking them if they are willing to invent false charges against their son or daughter in order to get the son or daughter arrested. So far, the only parent to have done that was Betty's father, Fred Njoroge, In Kenya. But then no parent has ever attempted to kill one of our members either... before now.

We have advised Joe NOT to turn himself in to the police. They have no legal right to demand that he "come down to the station" unless they are going to arrest him, and so far they have not admitted that that is their plan. They have spoken to him on the phone and he has assured them that he is not being held against his will. But, like we said, they already know that. '


XXXX


Dave has been misrepresenting some of the commments and questions I posted, pretending that he has refuted them. He is employing cheap straw man tactics in an attempt to dump the Children of God connection and sidestep some uncomfortabel questions. It is common knowledge that JC literature is heavily based on Berg literature. Dave himself claimed that he started out as a COG shepherd. There is no doubt that the group evolved and developed its own distinctive ethos in the years that followed, moving away from the Family but taking the Berg teachings with them. The roots remain the same.

Many JC antics are a repeat of the COG antics; the prophets of doom, the silent prophets, the money burning, the walks of faith, church tasting and infiltration. The new recruits are not aware that it is mainly copycat.
Perhaps Dave himself has forgotten what he posted on an ex Family board .

link [www.exfamily.org]

'I am the member who was once associated with the Family. My wife was never a member, and I spent only a couple of weeks away from her and living with the Family more than a quarter of a century ago, before I decided to take advantage of a rule that said one could become a "shepherd" by setting off on their own and getting another disciple or two. I returned to my family, enlisted my children as members, and then proceeded to receive postings from the Family (COGs then) as a shepherd. It always frustrated the Family that they did not have me conveniently under their thumb, and eventually Cherry agreed to leave the church scene if I would leave the Family, and the two of us set off on our own, along with our own children. Thus the Jesus Christians were born.
The similarities between us and the Family are many; but almost none of them relate to sexual matters. We appreciate the idea of more open and frank discussion of issues which deeply concern young people, but our community on the whole tends to be regarded as opposite to the extreme, because we do not believe in divorce, remarriage, homosexuality, adultery, or even kissing and cuddling between engaged couples.
Dave McKay <fold@idl.net.au>
Newcastle, NSW Australia - Nov 29, 2003'

link [www.exfamily.org]

( Confused that he claims he was the ONLY one from the JC's involved in the Family but that here he claims he enlisted his own children/ family ! )


It was common knowledge in Australia in the 80's that the JC's distributed COG lit.
[www.culthelp.info]

Extract from very old Australian article available from the site above relating to the source of literature distributed by JC's ( aka Christians)


'THE CHRISTIANS

A religious group from Australia is operating on the streets of Britain. They call themselves simply "Christians". They are a breakoff from the Children of God.

On the surface they appear to be a group of young people who are simply trying to live according to the pattern of the early church,and disseminating the Gospel through the use of literature. Their literature comes in the form of booklets and comic books which they exchange for a few pence to "cover the cost of printing".

The teaching contained in these booklets is radical and uncompromising in its nature, attacking and condemning what they see as the hypocrisy of organised religion and a society greedy for material gain.

However what most people are unaware of is that much of the material contained in these booklets are either reprints of,or are based on the literature of the infamous religious cult the "Children of God/Family of Love"

The story of "Christians" begins in Australia with David McKay who was at one time national public relations officer of the Bible Society(Australia); he was also a lay preacher and youth worker in the Methodist church; later became active in the Assemblies of God Pentecostal movement; and a one time member of the Children of God/Family of Love cult. This background may explain the reason for some of his distorted interpretations of Christian doctrine, and some of their bizarre publicity seeking activities.

Like the COG/FOL,and numerous other cults and extreme groups the McKays actively encourage young people to leave their homes and families; to discontinue college and university, leave employment; and join their "family" and become itinerant "preachers"

For years the McKays have been telling people to quit working for money and "trust God to provide their needs", yet in 1989 the group clashed with the Australian authorities over their members receiving unemployment benefits!

Their enthusiasm, daring and apparent sincerity are obviously impressive to a lot of idealistic young people, however, this is a group which demands total loyalty under the threat of God's judgment. To leave the group is perceived as leaving the will of God. This type of emotional blackmail is typical of all destructive cults.'


Not the same groups but the same rotten roots.

Interesting addition

The archives of Crossfire exist at NDN. Use the details here to search the archives for this post. Who knows how genuine it is, but it is very interesting letter.
Here is the header and the website is www.newdaynews.com
The Crossfire board has closed but the archives remain.
NewDayNews Crossfire
Re: NO ONE CAN!!
By:YOU CANT STOP THEM!!
Date: Thursday, 27 March 2003, at 12:41 pm
In Response To: NO ONE CAN!! (YOU CANT STOP THEM!!)

Finally his pronouncement of my identity is mistaken. Who was it at NDN who said This guy cant even get his false accusations right !

Here David discusses whether his people would be willing to kill for Jesus under certain circumstances:

[welikejesus.com]

In this thread David discusses his involvement in the COG and says that paedophilia can be acceptable because it does not involve coercion:

[welikejesus.com]

Quote:
"But a better example is paedophilia. Kids are not FORCED to have sex, and yet society says it is wrong. I know, I know, they are not adults. But you see, we each have our restrictions that we think makes it wrong or doesn't make it wrong. And so what we decided to experiment with is just trying to follow the rules as we honestly and humbly think God wrote them."

Here McKay (leader of the Jesus Christians) is saying that pedophilia does not involve force, and is trying to use this principle as an example of why it's OK for members of his cult to attempt to recruit minors. This guy is getting more and more and more demented.


Here DM announces that fat people cannot go to heaven:


[www.accsoft.com.au]

A BIT MORE, IF YOU CAN STOMACH IT

This is what David had to say when I was asking him questions under the name "Andy"; at that point he thought I was a potential recruit. This was in response to Andy's question to him about why he thought it was OK for his people to deal with kids, minors:

Quote

Dave

PostPosted: Tue Jan 09, 2007 10:04 pm

I thought it was great what Andy was saying. It's good that he has had a look at what the opposition is saying, and it seems like he can see through it pretty well.

He says that he can see how Joe's parents would be upset. So can I. Of course, the article doesn't say that Joe left a note, and that he talked with his parents (by phone and email both, I think) while he was away for that week. He knew them well enough to not just front up and say, "Hey, I'm going to head out to New Mexico for a week, okay?"

As for us communicating with a sixteen year old, Andy, I think you need to ask yourself if anyone else is forbidden to communicate with sixteen year olds, via the internet, via the media, via literature, or just when they bump into them on the streets. If not, then why should we be condemned for communicating with Joe when he was sixteen. Virtually every sixteen year old in America has access to information that their parents would rather they NOT have access to. But parents learn to live with it and work around it. The law may say that they can force him to stay under their roof until he is eighteen (although a lot of police will not bother bringing runaways home after they turn sixteen, because they realise that between sixteen and eighteen the "child" is starting to make some more independent choices and force can no longer be your primary means of control.) but it does not say that you can force a sixteen year old to stop thinking about anything the parents don't want them to think about.

Joe's contact with us between sixteen and eighteen weas primarily through visiting our website, btw. I think there were only a handful of times when he arranged to meet up with people at fast-food restaurants. He would not even tell us his real name (No "joking", he called himself "Joe King"!) possibly for fear that WE would notify his parents. So he was very much in control of his own thoughts.

Just thought I would clear up those points a bit, because the media always seems to get a few things wrong.

What he says, in other words, is “Well, it’s not my fault if they aren’t paying attention what their kids are up to.” Always somebody else’s fault, always somebody else’s problem with this guy.

Also keep in mind his previous quotes on the subject of pedophilia:

Quote

[welikejesus.com]
Quote:
But a better example is paedophilia. Kids are not FORCED to have sex, and yet society says it is wrong. I know, I know, they are not adults. But you see, we each have our restrictions that we think makes it wrong or doesn't make it wrong. And so what we decided to experiment with is just trying to follow the rules as we honestly and humbly think God wrote them.

Here McKay (leader of the Jesus Christians) is saying that pedophilia does not involve force, and is trying to use this principle as an example of why it's OK for members of his cult to attempt to recruit minors. This guy is getting more and more and more demented.

Dave is a spiritual pedophile, a spiritual pervert. The above quotes provide a window into his demented mind. Maybe it's because young kids' minds are more impressionable and pliable, and therefore they're easier to manipulate. Maybe it's because having destroyed his relationship with his own kids, and now he feels compelled to damage other people's relationships with their kids. I don't know, probably a combination of things.

I hope some kid out there, and/or his or her parents, is reading this, and can make a more informed judgment about what you might be thinking about involving yourself in.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/07/2008 11:36AM by zeuszor.

Gosh I wish I had access to my scanner right now. I'd so love to scan and post the "Nappy Chappy" and "Voices in the Wilderness" photos that I got.

Hilarious. Grown men in diapers! Calling themselves "The Children of God." Real original, huh?