Dave teaching his followers that without HIM they will fail because he brings "God's protection (see "Divine Authority")
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. 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.


Dave, myth-making about destruction visited upon those not under his "Divine Authority" [welikejesus.com]
I've been thinking (rather desparingly really) about some of the people who have left us, and how they CLAIM that they have found a happier, freer, more satisfying life. Yet it seems that there are some really sad stories about how various ones have ended up. It seems that several of them are actually on disability pensions for mental problems, one may have committed suicide, one has turned into an outright hater of Jesus, and even created a web site on which to voice his hatred for God and Jesus, and several others have become open atheists. And these are just of the ones that we know about.

Dave seems quite desperate with these fabrications. It seems to fit the pattern for a cult leader to create a fearful world in the minds of his followers where all who leave the protection his "Divine Authority" affords them are doomed.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 02/20/2008 11:39AM by apostate.

David's Lamentation about being banned from the "Money Savings Expert" Forum. I am surprised that the Jesus Christians Leader, so against money and all it means, should be attempting to dominate a forum dedicated to money. I am also baffled that he can't see why his sudden barrage of involvement should result in his being shunned.

[welikejesus.com]

"In just five days (following the Wife Swap show) there were almost 500 posts on the "Money Saving Experts" forum in the U.K., but on about the sixth day, the entire thread was deleted and I was banned for life, without any reason being given. I cannot even READ that forum now. Pretty reactionary stuff, considering that I was dispassionately explaining the ins and outs of freeganism, and answering some of the most basic arguments, such as those raised by Anna."

I am not surprised that David has been banned from this "Money Saving Forum". Last time I looked, he had posted nine lengthy posts in three days. He virtually took over the forum. (Surprise surprise). And some of us wondered where David had been! I thought it was Susan who did the hard yards of going on Wife Swap. (OMG I just want to see David doing a husband-swap!)


Is David her manager and spokesman (read: Leader) regarding her involvement on the show? Is she not capable of speaking for herself on the forum about the show SHE DID FOR ALL THAT TIME. Susan made the posts she considered were appropriate following her lenghty experience. But not good enough for David, so it seems! So you still think the JC's are not a cult? Why was David so keen to take over yet another public forum, over and above what a JC member (Susan) had done for a reality TV show, and her own posts on that forum? Why did he need to speak over Susan and result in the whole thing being shut down? I humbly ask if maybe it was because he needs to have CONTROL, and the more he chases it, the less, it seems, he has it?

(Let me see now....could there be any relation to this and the shutting down of the Quaker Forum?.....Hmmm, I don't honestly know, but I think I'm seeing a pattern here....)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/20/2008 07:07PM by Blackhat.

I also want to make a note about freeganism.

If you spend your life eating what Supermarkets throw away, you miss out on the essential vitamins found in fresh food. I suspect we may see a recurrance of scurvey and other diseases. Out of date manufactured food is not good for you in the long-term, although I agree it's a good supplement to a fresh diet. But you need to eat fresh food with all the vitamins, and not out-of-date manufactured food that was really bad to start with because of how it was made. Think about your long-term health, and especially that of children in your care!!!!

Eating garbage might be a good survival tactic to teach your children, but I question that this is giving them optimum fresh food in the long-term.

I would pay for a box of fresh vegies over a "found" bag of chocolate bars any day, especially when it comes to feeding growing children.

Dave writes: [welikejesus.com]
"P.S. Johanna, I didn't have the time to read all that you posted. If you keep it shorter next time, people will probably read more of what you have to say."

Dave writes a 450 word reply to something he didn't have the time to finish reading. It really is just another example of the shameless arrogance that defines a man who compulsively needs to provide all the answers, retorts and last words such that he is too busy replying to finish reading what he is responding to first. Dave should not be surprised when there is no "next time".

I thought Josh wrote a good reply, in that it felt honest (not over-inflating the significance of what he does), and with some consideration of what annajohanna had written by someone who is an individual making decisions for his life rather than just another JC towing Dave's worn out one liners.

Dear Apostate, (Joshs' contribution below...)

"Hi annajohanna. Do you agree with the sentiments of the article you posted? I think the line of thinking freegans use to say that their refusal to buy things divorces those things from the guilt they associate with them comes from the fact that buying something increases it's demand. By paying money for a particular product you are encouraging it's production. Unless Nike is producing shoes just for the fun of it getting their shoes for free from a dumpster doesn't encourage them to make anymore shoes. Maybe that will help you in your understanding a freegans point of view.

I think the moral high ground claimed on those freegan websites is a little overstated myself. I think critics do have a point when they say freegans would do better to work with food distributers like americas second harvest rather than just grabbing the food at night for themselves.

I thought I'd let you know though, I am a person who works at a job for money and eats out of dumpsters by choice. I don't do it for a pollitical statement but because it seems silly to spend money I'm selling my life for on food I can get for free. I am also a person who contacted Americas Second Harvest about the amount of waste I was finding. They contacted one of the grochery stores I told them about, asked them to donate the food they were throwing out. The store refused citing a national non-donation policy and went further by locking their dumpsters so no one would be able to see how much good food they were throwing out.

Since that happened I've went back to silently getting my food from the trash and not rocking the boat by contacting any other charities so more locks can be put on dumpsters. Maybe that's selfish of me. Maybe you could give me another good idea of how I could better serve humanity, because your first idea only resulted in more food getting wasted."

Yes I see what you mean....(and who is Josh exactly by the way???); I can understand that the Department Stores in question here would have been concerned about legal liability (they would CERTAINLY have been sued in America once someone fell sick) but definitely some shining humility there on Josh's part that David (desperately!) needs to aspire to.....as you say Apostate, "shameless arrogance" but it's of course even more blatantly on display in the examples Blackhat provides....

Sue should also understand by now....it's the "man" not the "message" (perhaps we should just say that the man IS the message)....Sue's scriptural quotations or her own motivations utterly FAIL to reflect upon the life and times of DAVID JOHN MACKAY (in flashing lights) hence David needs to gently draw the dialogue back to the central issue that the JesusChristians stand for (...HIS glorious authority)....although of course, we understand that David would have lied to himself, that he had to become involved simply because he'd do such a "better" job of it than Sue, and that she didn't mention "such and such" a vital issue (that only "knowledgeable" David can see...)


(....I wondered if David has ever considered producing a lifesize "inflatable" version of himself (AKA those "female" companions for lonely men on XXX websites).....he could of course make it mandatory for every Jesuschristian "cell" to purchase and possess one ....and then at last he woudn't have to suffer the ignominy of being the only thing in the JC's full of nothing, but hot air....



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 02/21/2008 03:04PM by Malcolm Wesley WREST.

I liked the way Josh isolated the issue of consumerism from capitalism and pointed out how consumer demands create waste more than supermarket policies, although the correlation between wealthy consumers and waste could no doubt be linked to big cities and big business (capitalism) which generates the wealth that gives consumers the power to be picky.
But Josh's earlier comments about culture vs political power was good too with the idea that people can change their habits when they want to and it does not require a Marxist revolution or Armageddon to change the social consciousness of people.

It was good that he could admit the bottom line that bin raiding is really about getting free food, and personally I have no problem with people utilising stuff from the side of the road or from dumpsters on those terms, any more than I would begrudge a homeless person selling The Big Issue (a magazine that gives a portion of the sale price to the seller). The point is that the JC's are not truthful with themselves when they condemn others for "working for the food that perishes" and then work hard to maximise their donies, take an organised approach to collecting discount coupons, making the most of promotional offers, and looking for all the freebies they can get from the same system they condemn. They are claiming to be representing a radical alternative and have to 'squint' at the fact that they are operating largely by the same rules.

Doney distributing has been instituted as the JC system for generating funds and involves perfecting a slick approach where the time frame is razor sharp between when someone takes literature thinking its been offered for free and the request for a donation is delivered so that the recipient feels they must have misunderstood and so embarrassingly slip their hand into the pocket. Also, when they ask what they are giving money for, the line in Australia, which is far more secular than the US, is "This is a comic/novel that a friend of mine wrote, and we are just trying to cover printing costs" and so they think they are supporting a young artist who is trying to get a foot into the industry, and so with no fixed price set they commonly give a dollar or two. Dave tells the new disciples that this system is effective in getting the most people to read the literature with the least waste, but since it is/was based on teams purchasing their literature from Dave at a price that includes a "levy" on top of the printing cost that guarantees his income, they are in the position of having to get back at least what they paid and with a profit on top to cover their expenses. An Indian guy Israel, who barely speaks English has been working out a nice business arrangement on these terms and raising money this way to support his family with virtually no allusion to being part of the community (following The Big Issue model). A lot of idealistic JC's struggle with processing the idea that we are asking for money while we are telling people they don't need to work for money and a lot of time is spent "training" this cognitive dissonance away, particularly when dealing with so many irritated 'customers' on the street. It might be a step forward for the JC's to just admit, like Josh in relation to helping himself to some free food, that they are operating within the reality of a capitalist system and adopting its approaches in generating a basic income.

It really is the hypocrisy of Dave doing practically everything for which he condemns others which turns so many people off.

Taking the same issues that Dave uses and his methodology we could see that our society uses taxes instead of levies to provide services for the general good, rather than a fixed autocratic leader, and in more socialist countries like Australia and the UK control over this "common purse" is determined by democratically elected leaders who debate the details with opposing representatives, with much of it spent on providing universal healthcare, education, public housing and welfare benefits so in effect, distribution is made to all according to need.
We are free to chose our vocation, to pursue the things we feel passionate about, to get the education we need to gain those skills which help us serve the needs of others more effectively, and to be part of a community instead of a parasite on the side of it puffing up its own sense of importance with nothing but disdain for the host which supports it.

Dave reacts to Josh having an independent thought: [welikejesus.com]

"Josh and I seem to have a problem with understanding both what socialism is and what freeganism is (and perhaps what capitalism is too)!
Josh says that, in his opinion, the UK is much more socialist than the U.S.
But then he says that "all capitalism means is that we are allowed to own our own property and the choice to do with the fruits of our labor as we wish."
So are we to assume that people in the UK are not allowed to own their own property and to do with the fruigts of their labour as they wish? I think not. Because the UK is still an example of capitalism with just a dash of socialism. Heck, even the U.S. is capitalism with a dash of socialism. These days, all governments do SOME things to help the poor... horror of horrors!"

Guess, what Dave. Through Globalisation the whole world is different shades of Capitalism... horrors of horrors! The difference is that in some countries our culture is more consumerist than others which results in more waste, which I understand to be the point that Josh was making and which you just tried to ridicule.

"But what Josh has (rightly, in my opinion) noted is that there seems to be less waste in poorer communities. And if you'll look at the world in general, there also seems to be more socialism/communism in poorer areas of the world as well. Socialism represents an attempt to redress the imbalances, more or less taking from the rich (who want the right to be rich and do with their riches as they wish) to help the poor. I think it is still fair to say that when that happens, i.e. when we seriously restrict the obscene wealth that resides in the hands of a limited few, suddenly there is less waste, and supermarkets start exercising a lot more common sense."

Josh asked if there is less waste in the UK as a result of their socialism which Dave fails to answer, but it would follow logic that when the poor have more money they can afford the mark downs and so less goes into the dumpster out the back. Curious to know though, when Dave says "when we seriously restrict the obscene wealth that resides in the hands of a limited few..." who is he including in his "we" and when and how does he sees himself restricting the "wealth of a limited few". If Dave is identifying with the Australian electorate in voting in a more socialist government, perhaps we should welcome the JC's back into society, and with a bit of retraining find a place for them where they can serve the greater good. I don't see anything in the teachings of Jesus that involves his followers imposing restrictions on anyone other than ourselves.

"Finally, Josh says that his main concern with dumpster diving is a greedy one, in that he is able to get some good free food. Okay, fair enough. But that is not freeganism. We tend to call that scavenging. Good luck to you, but please don't confuse that with the ideas of freeganism."

The Bible describes it as "gleaning" which could be compared to the welfare system we have today and which Jesus utilised in Luke 6:1. But Dave can label Josh a lowly "scavenger" if he wants to isolate him from his inner sanctum where the same activity is magically transformed to lofty "freeganism" as it saves us having to convince him of how Dave uses in-group/out-group labelling to his own advantage. Basically, Josh is being scapegoated here for his honesty, i.e. "if you are happy to help yourself to some free food, don't think we are doing the same." Yeah, sure Dave, you are the worthy Emperor who is magically clothed in the justifications that one of your subjects has had the courage to admit is a fabrication to disguise personal opportunism.

"You say that if we are really dedicated to helping the poor, we should be doing more than boycotting the markets that waste stuff (by living off their waste instead)... that we should be mounting some kind of a campaign instead. Well, I don't think that four million viewers of the Wife Swap show and all of the controversy that it stirred up as a result is such a pitiful campaign to begin with!"

Josh, with typical humility of the sincere, accepted and personalised the point made by a Freegan critic, but Dave with the defensiveness of the desperate takes it as an attack upon himself and his community and tries to pass off something he had previously minimised as just a fun piece of entertainment (for which Roland and Sue were paid) into a noble campaign to end waste. Dave can spin it both ways at the same time when he tries!

"And, as Christians, we are not allowed to tell you much more than that. But believe me, we believe! We aren't perfect, but I think we're doing a fairly good job of living what we believe."

Believe me we believe in what we believe? Strewth! If as Christians you are not allowed to say much more than that we can just sit wonder WHAT exactly that is except the fact that YOU are central to whatever it is you think you believe. Clearly Dave is playing the ol' we can't talk about our charity line here, but if they are sharing what they pinched from a dumpster and have too much to use anyway, there is no charity in that and playing the whole implication trick is even more hypocritical than a direct answer that doesn't hide behind a "we are too principled to say more" shroud.

Hmmm....and haven't we just seen it all before.....! As you note, Apostate:


But Dave can label Josh a lowly "scavenger" if he wants to isolate him from his inner sanctum where the same activity is magically transformed to lofty "freeganism"


The self-righteous condemnation of others, who dare to "challenge" David's rule by independently aspiring to the principles that David in his vanity pretends he has somehow "patented"...


COMPLETELY unscriptural behaviour from the moral vacuous David McKay....


Mark Chapter 9

And John answered him, saying, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name, and he followeth not us: and we forbad him, because he followeth not us. 39 But Jesus said, Forbid him not: for there is no man which shall do a miracle in my name, that can lightly speak evil of me. 40 For he that is not against us is on our part.

By the rivers of Babyon....



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/21/2008 09:50PM by Malcolm Wesley WREST.

ASININE JC-RELATED QUOTE OF THE DAY

[welikejesus.com]

There is an interesting theological/philosophical issue illustrated by this discussion, and it has been brought to my attention by some fundamentalist writing on the Rick Ross forum. Some of the fundamentalists over there are making a big deal over the fact that we are each talking about how we picture good and evil, when supposedly what we should be doing is just quoting Bible verses.

If the Bible itself was God, then that would be fair enough. But for intelligent people, you START with your own understanding and experience of good and evil, which can LEAD you to taking a more fundamentalist approach to the Bible, or which can lead you to see that there is a great wealth of wisdom and truth in the Bible that is greater than what you could find anywhere else.


People that know me know that I am hardly a "religious fundamentalist" in any sense of the term. Quite to the contrary. That's a laugh.

These are the "fundamentalist writings" that DM is referring to, in a posting I made a couple of weeks ago in response to the amazingly ironic "Does Evil Exist?" discussion over there:

[forum.culteducation.com]

Yes, apostate, it is apparent to me that DM does not actually care what the Bible says about any given topic. He obviously believes that his opinions are superior to the mandates of Scripture, even where the red letters (Jesus' words) are concerned.

DM has painted me now as a fundamentalist in an effort to ridicule and deflect any perspective that conflicts with his own. He never even identified me by name in this instance, he said "fundamentalists" were questioning him. It was just one person, David, only myself. I merely asked, in an effort to get to the heart of the issue of whether evil exists, what the Scriptures have to say about the question. Better yet, I asked, "what did JESUS say about the matter?" It seems obvious to ask this of a group of people that ask whether Jesus meant what He said, and claim to live by those "commands," does it not? What did Jesus say about it? Isn't it obvious to ask what the Scriptures say, Apostle? If you even had to ask the question of whether or not evil exists, then I question your sincerity as a believer. DM's approach to the Christian Scriptures is like an intellectual buffet line: take what you like if it suits you, and leave the rest. So DM can do no wrong and his opinions are all that matter, not the Bible. A self-serve (self-servING) Scripture buffet. Who cares if Jesus taught us to pray, "And lead us not unto temptation, but deliver us from EVIL?" For one, I do. Jesus knew that evil exists and that settles it as far as I am concerned.

This was part of the response DM posted:


But for intelligent people, you START with your own understanding and experience of good and evil, which can LEAD you to taking a more fundamentalist approach to the Bible, or which can lead you to see that there is a great wealth of wisdom and truth in the Bible that is greater than what you could find anywhere else.

What on earth does that mean? It's a lot of double talk and word jugglery, but means nothing, really. Most of the time DM seems to do a lot of typing, but actually says little. He talks (types) a lot, but says nothing other than "David good, critics bad, David good, critics bad, David good, critics bad, David good, critics bad..." Basically DM is saying that anybody who questions him is not "intelligent." Arrogant and condescending is right. This statement represents more evidence of how DM paints anyone who questions his "Divine Authority" is either not so intelligent, mentally defective, or otherwise some kind of generally bad person.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 02/21/2008 11:32PM by zeuszor.

Dear Zeusor and Apostate,

Late last week, I drove up to one of the major public observations posts, overlooking North Korea, (three kilometres in the distance across the Imjin river)....it's only 40 minutes away from Incheon, but this in fact the first time I'v travelled up to take a look....

At the time the observation post was first constructed in the early 90's, the North Korean Authorities decided they needed to "prove" the superiority of Socialism, and they accordingly started the construction of 50 - 60 modern housing units in the immediate (viewable) vicinity....eventually their spies must have alerted them to the fact that the lack of residents therein actually only succeeded in ridiculing their efforts and hence they promptly frog-marched in a "population" and built a school, Hall of Culture (dedicated to Kim, Il Sung) and other facilities.....however, to date, some 15 years later, a third of the housing units are yet to be finished, (unroofed for example.....it is speculated that they simply ran out of modern building materials...most North Korean farmers have rudimentary, mud brick homes at best).....the entire "village" sits in a maze of earthern roads (there are no paved surfaces), only the public buildings are supplied with power, and in the surrounding fields, the farmers toil away with wooden ploughs and buffaloes.....all this directly across from the ten lane fully lighted freeway on the South Korean side and the bevies of snickering Japanese Tourists, atop the Observation Platforms......

....once the lies become THAT pathetic then its almost difficult not to feel some sympathy for the schmucks....

David Mckay is recorded as writing (links at the top of this page....thanks Apostate)

I've been thinking (rather desparingly really) about some of the people who have left us, and how they CLAIM that they have found a happier, freer, more satisfying life. Yet it seems that there are some really sad stories about how various ones have ended up. It seems that several of them are actually on disability pensions for mental problems, one may have committed suicide, one has turned into an outright hater of Jesus, and even created a web site on which to voice his hatred for God and Jesus, and several others have become open atheists. And these are just of the ones that we know about.

and at the same time (links in the posting immediately above...thanks Zeusor)

There is an interesting theological/philosophical issue illustrated by this discussion, and it has been brought to my attention by some fundamentalist writing on the Rick Ross forum. Some of the fundamentalists over there are making a big deal over the fact that we are each talking about how we picture good and evil, when supposedly what we should be doing is just quoting Bible verses.

...David's inane proclivity to psychologically "label" his critics, even with contradictory calumny, that is logically mutually exclusive (we are "fundamentalists who misquote the Bible" while at the same time we are "self-destructive, vile spitting atheists" again demonstrates the severity of the self-important psychosis that afflicts him....

It's such a lame effort on his part that (in parallel to North Korea's Socialist "Victories") it's simply laughable.....

(Although David may not be laughing when he is finally Judged to have spent his life robbing those he met of their faiths... Mark 9:42)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/22/2008 01:04PM by Malcolm Wesley WREST.