Australian cult: Anyone recognize this?
Posted by: Gladitzover ()
Date: October 31, 2006 11:36PM

Well, Dave's wildest dreams are finally coming true. People in a forum discussing him and his group. Maybe he no longer has to be jealous of the "real" cult leaders, the ones who attract members and publicity without having to stage performances for it.

My hestitancy in speaking out against him has always been that he wants that! He craves any kind of attention focused on him. Maybe it doesn't matter though if it helps other people know him. It is kind of nice knowing there are other people here who have experienced him. It takes a long time to unwarp your mind.

Australian cult: Anyone recognize this?
Posted by: Gladitzover ()
Date: October 31, 2006 11:45PM

Dave McKay
"Perhaps, Jack, you could start the ball rolling by telling the shocking story of two visionless hippies who joined the Jesus Christians, got married, and were sent off to college to become a nurse and a doctor? Those are 'facts', Jack. But if you want to fabricate something from your imagination, then don't even bother trying to call it truth."

Typical! I guess we should give him credit for all the good things that happen in people's lives and forget all the nasty things he does to people in the meantime. I am sure that being in the Hilter movement may have helped some people gain better focus in their lives. That didn't make him or his movement a good thing.

How many people get sent off to college now? How many nurses or doctors have been produced by Dave's group in the last 5 years or so?

Australian cult: Anyone recognize this?
Posted by: apostate ()
Date: November 01, 2006 05:21AM


It's your choice to delete your posts, but I don't think it's wise.

You should not let Dave mainpulate you through anyone.

It doesn't help to do that.

I understand and agree with what you say Rick. But there is plenty on Dave without endangering an ex member. Such is the nature of David McKay! He would even sacrifice an ex members reputation to protect his own. Yet another example of his nastiness. I think he is unable to see or comprehend this fact. Narcisissim blinds him. He thinks he is being persecuted. He has created a fantasy world, a vortex, or to quote the Bible "A hidden reef" ripping the guts out of any who sail his way. He destroys peoples faith in humanity.

I wonder if his members, or wife, are aware of his conversation with this particular ex member where he threatened to send the media his way? Are there any left there who even care? Is he going to do it again... probably?

Dave does not like what is being said about him. The fact that he has to threaten one of his sons is another example of what type of person he is, and to what lengths he is prepared to go to acheive his objectives. He has no qualms about engaging in threatening behavior, lies, stealing, cheating, manipulation. He has made these into virtues of good leadership.

David McKay tries to exonerate himself from culpability regarding an action of an individual within his group. Even though he teaches a particular doctrine which led to the action.

For example, he teaches it is a members duty to only be loyal and truthful to "God", and that the devil rules the "system"; and that the devil is a liar stealing everything from God. A sincere impressionable disciple sees that as a licence to enage in illegal activities because Dave has successfully removed their "social conscience". Is he accountable for his part in their actions? I would argue, most definately.

Dave teaches that the end time "army of God" consists of "virgins" and refuses to see a correlation between that and the large number of vascetomies in his group.

Dave uses the Bible to teach impressionable members "He who has two should give to those who have none" as applying to body parts, and has the arrogance to say that he has not influenced anyone to do so, and that there exists no peer pressure within his group. The question about Deborah from Africa is pertinent. It is a fact that people fleeing an abusive relationship will find another. It is the "devil they know", so to speak.

Dave is now beginning to teach that God could make someone rebel against a "good" leader" protecting himself from the possibility of people rebelling against him. What a bind he places himself in. If people do rebel against his biblical perversions he has already put in place a belief system that he remains a "good leader".

see []

How many have gone to uni in the last 5 years or so? None. Dave tries to cloak himself in the reputation and hard work of those who have left his community as though he is somehow responsible for it and that such people owe him for their successes. I speak of the "two hippies" who left to become a nurse or a doctor. What Dave does not tell you is that these people had to rebel against him to do so. He tried to stop them from doing it. He surrounded them in lies when they left because they skimmed a couple of dollars for bus fares from their tract distribution to get out of town. But then with the above new teaching about "engineered rebellion" Dave has already garnered himself from the impact of the moral culpability of his past actions.

It is this cloaking that Dave is engaging in with the Quakers. He is using them to hide his duplicity. He is the proverbial person who has "crept in" and caught people unawares, feasting and dining with them while teaching outright perversions. I quote the book of Jude here for some of his members if perchance they are reading this.

Yes "Gladitzover" it does take along time to unwarp your mind from his influence because he entangles himself in it replacing the concept of a loving forgiving God with an ogre who whips people gleefully tossing all who disagree into a fiery pit.

Yes David McKay is a cult leader. The Jesus Christains are a destructive cult. Any who leave him and them are by far much better off. I know I am.

Australian cult: Anyone recognize this?
Posted by: Jack Oskar Larm ()
Date: November 01, 2006 05:43AM

One thing that is plainly clear is DJ's use of intimidation. I choose to use my 'real name', but many choose to remain anonymous and that is fair enough. David McKay is a bully - a heartless bully - who respects no one and nothing (including himself).

Why reveal sensitive information about people who choose not to be involved? Rick, I think it's important to be vigilant with this person regarding this matter, just as you are with the posting of private email addresses.

Unfortunately, I have probably overstepped the 'comfort' zone for some people because of my brazen choice to use of my own name. But I am confident that DJ won't come between me and my loved ones, again.

So, I publically apologise to my family for using my 'real name' as a way for David John McKay to intimidate them.

I applaude people like Apostate who have the courage to stand up to this bully.

But guess what David John McKay ... looks like the Day of Judgement came sooner than you thought.


Australian cult: Anyone recognize this?
Posted by: rrmoderator ()
Date: November 01, 2006 06:09AM

The views appear to be quite high on this thread.

What people post here is being read by quite a few people.

Though you must join to post anyone can point, click and read.

Google and the other search engines seem to crawl through the board and do a good job of noting information here.

This may not be the discussion Dave McKay wants, but it one that interests people.

Australian cult: Anyone recognize this?
Posted by: Dave McKay ()
Date: November 01, 2006 06:50AM

(Sorry for the delay in sending this. I had to get clearance from other members before I could post it, and, of course, it had to go through Rick because I am a Jesus Christian 'apologist'.)

Let's talk about 'frank and candid'. First, a compliment to Jack and an apology. Jack, you are the only person on here (apart from Rick) who has the courage to be frank and candid about who you are. Thank you for that. And my apologies for mixing you up with your father. Jack is the BROTHER of a former member, folks, and not her father. I can't rightly remember Jonne. I think we met both of you guys when we visited your mum in Melbourne, and I think you both came to the wedding. Is that rigfht?

But back to 'frank and candid'. There is some concern that I have bullied Tony into hiding some information. Tony says that he hid the information because I made threats. So let's get the cards out on the table and see if we all can come up with something that would be both 'frank and candid' and fair to everyone.

Twelve years ago, three members of the Jesus Christians committed a crime. Tony was one of them. One of them is still a member. And the other is a relative of mine... no longer in the community. At the time, I reprimanded the perpetrators and said that if anything came out publicly about what they did, I could not defend them, that what they did was wrong, and that it was done without my knowledge or permission. However, I did not report them, and I now see that THAT too was wrong. It led to one of them in particular committing other petty crimes of a similar nature over a long period of time.

Now, Tony, in his zeal to be frank and candid about anything that might discredit me, posted information about that crime on this forum, forgetting (apparently) that he was one of the perpetrators and that it was done without my knowledge or permission. I spoke to the on-going member who was a part of it, and he said that he was willing to confess openly to what had happened. I then contacted the other people who were involved and reminded them of their part in the crime. My own preference was to hush it up, but to let it be a lesson to all of them that sooner or later, when you break the law, "your sin will find you out".

So the moral dilemma that I would like people on this forum to face is this: If such information can be used to discredit me, is it okay to use it? And, at the same time, if it can be used to destroy the career of an ex-member, should it be used?

I know that the traditional argument given by people like yourselves is that none of you is accountable for anything that you did while in the community (even if it was done in opposition to leadership in the community). But the problem is that the system is not likely to view it in the same light. Tony and his accomplices were not Patty Hearst. They acted independently and of their own initiative. They did use an article which I wrote in an attempt to justify their actions; but I clearly and repeatedly instructed them and others in the community that their action and similar actions were an abuse and misinterpretation of that article.

So, how about it, people? Can you come up with an answer which treats the goose and the gander equally? It's a great opportunity for everyone on this thread to be consistent for once. Or is that too much to ask?

Now, on to something else... Personally, I consider it a compliment that the best 'dirt' that Tony could come up with wasn't something that I did, but something that he did, and that it happened twelve years ago. Now Jack, Jonne, Gladitzover, and Free of DM have all turned up promising some dirt on me 'very soon'. This family has had almost ten years to come up with something. Why are they still dithering about what it is going to be? They have compared me to Hitler. Fine. Even I have to agree that Hitler was not a very nice guy. So tell us about the torture and executions of millions of innocents! I'm sure the public would be outraged at that. But if it's just my 'rants' that bother you, Freebie, why do you bother going to my web site to read the latest articles? Shouldn't you have better things to do with your time?

Australian cult: Anyone recognize this?
Posted by: rrmoderator ()
Date: November 01, 2006 06:59AM


When are you going to answer the questions I asked quite some posts ago on this thread?

Is there some things you feel ashamed about or must be hidden?

FYI--I don't consider you a "Jesus Christian apologist," that would be a role for one of your followers to play.

I consider you a cult leader.

Australian cult: Anyone recognize this?
Posted by: Dave McKay ()
Date: November 01, 2006 07:11AM

Hi Rick,

Thanks for the explanation about how you view me. I think that I have explained (several times now) that I don't answer questions just because you ask them. You have made it quite clear that you don't answer questions that you don't want to answer too. So have YOU got something to hide?

I find it disturbing that you have hinted in your penultimate posting that you are going to release the information that apostate deleted and then blame it on google or some other search engine that it got out. Hopefully my lastest post got to you in time for you to realise that it isn't really going to hurt me... at least nowhere near as much as it is going to hurt an ex-member.

If Apostate had just been more honest about why it was that he deleted it, this could have been avoided. Anyway, there is still some hope that you have not leaked it yet.

Australian cult: Anyone recognize this?
Posted by: Gladitzover ()
Date: November 01, 2006 07:39AM

DJ lacks compassion and empathy for his followers.
Example: He will confiscate their travel docs. and tickets if they get out of line in a foreign country. Then he has been know to expell them from the community. Knowing very well that they will be left to sleep on the streets until they coming groveling back or demand their possessions and decide to break from the community permanently.

DJ is a controlling manipulator.
Example: He seperates families and causes division between them. That is inside and outside of the community.

Example: I have been present when a letter from DJ has been read to the community concerning kidney donations. I can't remember word for word but something along the lines of, if you DON'T want to donate a kidney I will wonder what is wrong with you, was written. That was just one letter there were many.

Example: In a community grievance he often interprets what people mean for the followers, rather than just letting them figure it out themselves e.g. he might say you don't know this person like I do, they may sound like they are saying sorry but they really mean blah blah blah.

We of course fall for it hook line and sinker. Why? Well, he is the divinely chosen leader of the movement, right? If we disagree surely it is just signalling some unspirituality in us!

Australian cult: Anyone recognize this?
Posted by: matilda ()
Date: November 01, 2006 07:43AM

Dave McKay

So, how about it, people? Can you come up with an answer which treats the goose and the gander equally? It's a great opportunity for everyone on this thread to be consistent for once. Or is that too much to ask?

Does this mean you are plainning another televised public flogging ?

What about Debora?

Never heard of Dave having Jon as a middle name. Possible but then Dave does love to spread misimformationm too.

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