Edit July 31 2008: OK apparently Neotherm didn’t mention the post to Martin Kelley. Unfortunately, instead of directly asking me why I made the connection between he and Martin and my earlier remarks, he decided to go whine about it on the AW comments section.

Really Neo, you seem to have caught yourself in a Catch-22 bind here, because not only did you not contact me directly to find out what the deal was, you decided to whine and moan and be all passive-aggressive asshole about it on AW instead. Which is off-topic, on the wrong blog, and I’m surprised that Gavin even let it through.

You are still welcome to contact me, to find out why I incorrectly assumed that you were the one who pointed out my earlier remarks to Martin Kelley, but something tells me you’re just going to persist in being as passive-aggressive as you always were, and not deign yourself to stoop to the level of actually initiating any contact with an atheist.

No, you’re just going to run and whine to the other bible-beaters instead, because they’re the only ones you feel holy enough to have contact with. “Gird up the loins of thy mind” and “be not conformed to this world” and all that nasty stuff after all.

Ah well. C’est la vie. Glad you stopped by ISA anyway.

Well, well, well. Just like in The Godfather “I try to get out, but they keep pullin’ me back in!”

It looks like AW regular “Neotherm” has tipped off the Quaker Police to my post “I Wonder if it Ever Leaves you Part Four”. That has prompted this comment on my post.

Hi Neotherm!!! *wave*

Still beating your New Testament Gospels at whatever poor, “deluded” atheist crosses your path?!

Let us address the commenter however, and not his informant.

Hi Martin,

Welcome to “I Survived Armstrongism”. I would apologize if any of my previous post offended your sensibilities as a practicing Quaker, but that would go against the mandate here at ISA. So, true to form, I will simply say, if you don’t like it, don’t read it. Now to address your comments.

“I’ve had emails back and forth with the liberal Quaker who’s never been to services and she’s got a lot more depth than is readily apparent in the video.”

OK, so here’s my question Martin. If she’s never been to services, does that mean there’s some kind of baptism or initiation ritual that is not general public knowledge? I am not being flip here, I am genuinely interested in an answer. If she’s never attended, if she doesn’t belong to a particular group, then where does she get off saying she is one? And what is her local group’s reaction to her declaring herself “one of them” if she actually isn’t?

As for her depth or lack thereof, YouTube blogging is such that anyone can get their ten minutes’ of fame, but as Sturgeon’s Law indicates, not everybody should. But that’s neither here nor there.

“I started talking up her video on my blog, which is what inspired the prophecy guy, to make his video.”

Full disclosure here. As I have been involved in debunking Ronald Weinland for the better part of the past seven months, you will excuse me, but the rabid enthusiasm of prophecy guy just makes me physically ill.

Between Herbie’s “In our lifetime, brethren!” and Weinland’s “The Great Tribulation started on April 17th 2008! No wait it didn’t! God progressively revealed that I’m an idiot for not stretching it out longer! Reboot! Reboot! Send it in brethren! Reboooooot!” I can authoritatively say that I have had more than enough prophecy to last me for several lifetimes — and since I’m an atheist, I believe this is the only lifetime I’m gonna get.

So yeah I’m full up on the prophecy buffet, thanks, and I really don’t want to ingest any more of that lunacy ever again.

“For eight years I worked w/the equivalent US group to the ones that made the slick videos and I often dress in plain Quaker dress (yes, even on webcam).”

Two points here. The Americans didn’t make any propaganda videos? And should I take your last statement to mean that my off-the-cuff name for “conservative guy” was perhaps misplaced? Hmm. I will take that under advisement.

Or are YOU “conservative guy”??

“So what I can say is that all of these people have a great deal of integrity and very clear and well-thought out visions of what it means to be a Quaker.” [Emphasis mine.]

Um. OK. They all know exactly what it means to be Quaker, and they’re obviously all vocal about it.

Here’s the thing, Martin.

None of them agree with each other. At all. Even slightly. Not even remotely.

Or is this a case of the videos I have cited being from each of the three splinter groups that exist? Now that would make sense.

“If I sat down to dinner with you I could explain what the one fellow meant by “conservative” (probably not what you think) and why he plain dresses.”

I’m an atheist. According to the minority and the reception of “non-theist friends” (two of them whose blogs I have been reading semi-regularly have now exited the church, and nontheistfriends.org is virtually never updated and appears to be a wasteland at the moment) in your church, I strongly doubt that you would be inclined to sit down to dinner with me anyway. Not that I mind or anything. Just calling it like I see it.

As for “conservative guy”, his intolerance and blatant bible-beating was more than enough for me to understand “conservative” Quakerism, thanks. The only thing missing is the isolated colony, and the refutation of technology. Or is that next on their agenda?

“I could explain Callid’s enthusiasm for prophecy and how it’s always been an essential part of the Quaker experience.”

Full disclosure time again. The doctrine that Armstrong lifted from his Holiness Quaker parents was just about the only thing left from the church that I hung onto (the agnostic part of my personality at any rate), the holy spirit doctrine (Armstrongism was binitarian).  But let’s address your point, which is new information to me:

“Prophecy is an essential part of the Quaker experience”

?!?!?!

Seriously?

Wow.

Thanks for the warning. Yeah no, definitely a Very Bad Idea, on my part. Glad I dodged that bullet.

So, yeah, anyway prophecy: Been there, done that, never did get the kingdom I was promised. But you know what? There’s no kingdom coming. And that’s OK, and I’m OK too, and I don’t need no steeenkin’ prophec-. *ahem* Sorry where was I?

“There are some interesting reasons why Kleo hasn’t made it to meeting…”

I read the blogs listed through the www.quakerquaker.org service fairly regularly. Those “interesting reasons” would be the latent, blatant, and in some cases resistant homophobia the bloggers write about in their local congregations, I take it? Not to mention the elitism issues.

(Funny, there’s this thing in your bible about “that of god in anyone.” A clear-cut case of “Do as I say, not as I do,” I suppose.)

“…and I can guess why the British guy veered awkwardly between kiddie arts and crafts and “separation from the world” language.”

I don’t need to guess why, Martin, because I lived that life. It is called do not be conformed to this world, and quite frankly, it sucks.

At least I can take small comfort in the fact that showing pictures of children happily creating arts and crafts, then blathering on about how you must isolate yourselves from “the world”, will raise warning bells in anyone with more than three functioning brain cells, the slickness of the rest of the propaganda videos notwithstanding.

“So I started attending Quaker meeting–not because I knew or agreed with what Quakers believed but because I had a hunch that they had integrity and that there was something to learn.”

Mystical manipulation? Sacred science? Doctrine over person? (Sorry Martin. I know you won’t see it that way.)

“I don’t know Armstrongism but I’ve had some close friends who grew up in restrictive settings and I have my own bevy of weird childhood stories.”

Be glad you don’t know Armstrongism. Be warned that your last sentence is rather condescending, to one who was born and raised in it.

“I’m sensing that the challenge is getting to know people and understand them without feeling you have to agree or disagree, join or not join.”

Actually you rather missed the point. The reasons I cited here, and in the original post, are why I would NOT want to join your group (nor one of the splinters of your group). At all. Ever. By any stretch of the imagination. And you are not making your church any more appealing with your comments, I will be honest with you.

“Maybe if you can look at people as interesting characters in a novel?”

Again with the condescension! I would much rather look at people as they are, which was the point of my original post, and of this post as well. Something stinks, Martin, and quite frankly, it’s coming from the direction of your religion.

You people say one thing (your bible is beautiful, uplifting, inspiring, and even has room for atheists), but as with all closed high-demand groups, in practice, it is something very very different, indeed. Which the YouTube videos amply proved.

“Anyway, good luck. You’ll be seeing more of my videos up soon–though I suspect I’ll trigger the buh-bye response.”

Condescending and smartass. Looking for a two-for-one deal Martin? I will probably still read the ex-member and nontheist blogs, just to keep an eye on what’s going on. No matter how many “slick videos” your group or the Brits want to try and post up on YouTube, you can’t refute the truth about your religion, it’s being spread all over the Internet.

“Good luck and thanks for the really helpful and honest Quaker media take.”

Glad to be of service. I hope I can also be an early warning system to any ex-members looking to cult-hop into another closed high-demand religious group. Although I know you probably see it differently.

Bye Neotherm! Thanks for stopping by! *wave*