I have recently been reading quite a bit about the Branch Davidians. I have read arguments from those who accept the group as a legitimate (if flawed) religious community, as well as authors who consider them a destructive cult. I have yet to accept either argument.

The one thing I am sure of, having studied Branch Davidian theology, is that Koresh approached the Bible in a fascinating way. It doesn't work for me, but it is an epic and thorough take on the Bible.

Here are some hypothetical questions that might be interesting to discuss:

1. Had the BATF raid never occurred, where would the Branch
Davidians be today?

2. Did Koresh truly believe that he received Divine revelation?
The immediate instinct is to say, "no." Why not? His followers
believed it.

2a. If you have read any Davidian theology, what particular ideas
are interesting? If you have not read any firsthand, what are
your perceptions of it? What has shaped those perceptions?

3. It is known that Davidians were not confined to Mount Carmel.
Some lived in other states and countries; those who lived
there regularly went into Waco. Does this contradict the
perception of cults as groups that force members into
isolation?

4. The Davidians seemed to have faith in Koresh and his
teachings. Even though most people find these teachings
unconvincing, heretical, or bizarre, were the Davidians wrong
to accept them?

4a. The Davidians were established in the 1940's, basing their
worldview on the Seventh Day Adventists. Seventh Day
Adventism began in America in the 19th Century. David
Koresh based his teachings on the precedent of living
prophets that had a 100 year tradition. How, if at all,
does this change our perception of the Davidians?

5. Question #4 raises the broader question, are new religious
ideas inherently wrong? Since Luther, Christianity has
seen many denominations gain wide acceptance.
Better yet, look at Jesus. He claimed to be God's son,
demanded poverty from his disciples, vandalized the Temple,
and claimed not to bring peace, "but a sword"? When
someone challenges today's paradigm as radically as Jesus
did in his time, is it fair to dismiss it out of hand?


Thanks for taking the time to read and respond. I hope this may lead to some interesting discussion.

David Koresh actually had no systematic theology or meaningful hermeneutic approach to the bible. He often simply proof-texted. And what was supposedly "revealed" often-contradicted previous revelations and changed constantly depending upon his personal needs, desires and circumstances.

Like most psychopaths and/or destructive cult leaders Vernon Howell (a.k.a. David Koresh) basically concocted a belief system that can easily be seen as simply a means of empowering himself and exploiting others.

For example sex on demand, money from his disciples, etc.

There wasn't much here that fit the "paradigm" of Jesus, Buddha or Moses etc.

Control of the compound increased, as Koresh became more concerned that authorities might discover his criminal conduct. Specifically, the sexual abuse of minor children and illegal weapons activities.

Regardless of whether the BATF raided the compound Koresh had a history of violence and abuse, such as the molestation of Kerri Jewell at age 10 and his previous charge for attempted murder in 1987. It is very probably that this pattern of behavior would have continued to escalate as it had been historically.

A destructive cult does not require outside pressure to become violent or self-destructive. Witness the Solar Temple, "Heaven's Gate and Aum of Japan. They acted destructively without meaningful provocation from anyone.

The Davidians were an essentially benign group until Vernon Howell/Koresh took over. But once Howell gained power it was only five years until they were essentially finished.

If "new religions" most often called "cults" are benign and do no harm they draw little attention. But when their leaders behave destructively, hurt people and/or break the law, obviously this warrants attention and law enforcement.

The issue is not belief, or theology but really behavior.

In this sense religious studies students and/or teachers often offer what is essentially a "straw man" or false argument.

See [www.culteducation.com]