Talk:Divine Truth

Cult Accusation

The guy calls himself Jesus. He claims other people from the first Century have returned too. They claim to have their own memories, as he does, although his appear to have been more extensive. They all did not understand their few memories or experiences in the past. They do not live communally, but some people interested in Divine Truth teachings had moved to the Kingaroy area from other locations. Alan John Miller claims he didn't encourage or discourage this, as he claims to leave people free to make their own choices with their lives. He claimed many people moved to the local area out of "addiction". Later many of the people moved away again.

They do not preach the coming of Armageddon, as has been claimed by the media. Alan John Miller claimed that, from his understanding of God's Laws, he believes earth changes could result from unloving collective choices. He gave his personal opinion, which he said was his opinion at the time & formed in his discussions with friends in a "spirit world" or "dimensional space", and later he turned out to be wrong. He also says humanity's future could be very good, depending on collective choices made in or out of harmony with what he claims is "God's Definition of Love". He claims that predestination does not exist, as it goes against "God's gift of Free Will", so predicting the future depends upon human choices & habits, which can change.

The term "Cult" has a technical definition that is largely agreed on by many Cult Experts, which concerns the controlling behaviour of the person or group making spirtual claims. Cult Expert Steven Hassan uses the BITE Model, which can be found on www.freedomofmind.com

206.108.168.138 (talk) 23:26, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi,

 my paragraph has been removed. And I am sure that it will be removed again, but let try it again: Here is what it would look like (before someone removed it):

The guy call himself Jesus. He transformed his family and friends into biblical figures. They live in isolation...  and we are not supposed to call this a cult. How funny! ;)

A cult is a cult is a cult. Period.

I wish yo the best. 69.159.206.242 (talk) 00:49, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

If it isn't a cult, then what is it? It is a cult because it is a case of a religious leader trying to be a messiah, trying to gain people's trust by claiming to be Jesus. I don't know if he is lying or he is just deluded, but he is playing the role. I have seen his videos. He dabbles in pop psychology. The people who follow him have psychological issues and were crying and trembling. Quite a few have divorced their husband or wives, again, probably because they have psychological issues. The followers believe he is Jesus and aren't there to play games. He marries a lady and tells her she is Mary Magdalene. That is bizarre. It looks like a cult to me. Vmelkon (talk) 02:41, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Leader-group relationship

You said: "I don't know if he is lying or he is just deluded, but he is playing the role"

It is the same. If confronted, he will tell you that the end justifies the means. The only thing that maters for him is the addulation from his followers. Only them could have a "reality check" on him. Obviously this will never happen because they are the real victims. They have traded their critical thinking and life autonomy in exchange for his (fake) secrets to a "higher life"; a very unballanced relationship where you have one priviliged (Divine!) individual on top and a group of (abused) followers strugling to survive in order to access the leader's "secret".

64.231.30.187 (talk) 20:45, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

Has he ever said “the end justifies the means” in public? to you? Scott Cousland (talk) 18:49, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Serious

Any recent news from this group. (I mean apart from the official group's blahblah.)

206.108.168.138 (talk) 23:26, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Not that I know of. You can set up a Google alert and it will email you when certain search terms come up. You can also put a watch on this page so that you are notified of any changes. Exazonk (talk) 12:14, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Infobox

Something seems to have gone wrong with the infobox due to a page being moved? I don't know Wikipedia very well so maybe someone else could help with this?

90.197.10.25 (talk) 11:45, 26 March 2016 (UTC) Troy

Actually, no worries, I've managed to fix it myself! It was a template for the infobox that had been moved. 90.197.10.25 (talk) 11:50, 26 March 2016 (UTC) Troy

Article lacks neutral points of view + secondary sources

Hi there, after reading this article and doing some other research this page seems to be presenting quotations and primary sources as facts, or without proper syntax regarding their source. The article largely reads as if it has been written to promote the main sources, rather than analyse or collate them in a non-biased way. Would be great if the article could be re-written in a more neutral perspective as it would make it sound less like a brochure promoting the 'Divine Truth'.

Definitions that are gathered from primary sources need to be properly presented, and not presented as fact without proper secondary sources.

Additionally the main bulk of the article seems to be specifics about the pair's teachings which mostly come from their own sources, which could be removed or neatly summarised to create a more coherent reading experience. 123.243.15.7 (talk) 06:36, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

Agreed. Wikipedia is not a webhost for content promoting a religious faith. AndyTheGrump (talk) 07:55, 27 March 2023 (UTC)