|
Post by CherieKropp on Sept 30, 2009 6:54:56 GMT -5
Author of Article in Plain Truth has this to say: Pastor KenEdress: ken@kenarmstrong.net
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2009 7:16:19 GMT -5
Author of Article in Plain Truth has this to say: Pastor KenEdress: ken@kenarmstrong.net Well he's right about one thing, he's no 2x2 expert.....and continues to show no interest in being one: "A voice, perhaps, but in all honesty, not an expert. There are many people who have emerged from the group with scars - some emotional, some even physical, and many deeply spiritual. They are the experts,......." I wonder if those who have been hurt by their experience in the CC are the only CC experts around......or those hurt by their experience in any other church? How about those hurt by government....are they the government experts? Schools, social organizations, recreational organizations.....?
|
|
|
Post by ScholarGal on Sept 30, 2009 8:04:27 GMT -5
Pastor Ken is a pastor for a couple churches near Grants Pass, Oregon (close to California border). If he were interested in doing actual research on the 2x2s, it shouldn't be that hard for him to contact someone who actually goes to meetings. www.pastorken.net/ken.htm
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2009 8:21:37 GMT -5
Pastor Ken is a pastor for a couple churches near Grants Pass, Oregon (close to California border). If he were interested in doing actual research on the 2x2s, it shouldn't be that hard for him to contact someone who actually goes to meetings. www.pastorken.net/ken.htmYes SG, that was pointed out some time ago on another thread yet Pastor Ken has shown no interest doing real research into the church. This latest article is his attempt to extract himself from the mess he got himself in and pass the ball back to his sources, painting himself as a victim in the meantime (".....claims that I lied, fabricated information, etc.").
|
|
|
Post by gloryintruth on Sept 30, 2009 8:41:05 GMT -5
Author of Article in Plain Truth has this to say: Pastor KenEdress: ken@kenarmstrong.net Here we have a pastor who knows hardly anything of the subject about which he chooses to write. This kind of nonsense is ridiculous: There are many people who have emerged from the group with scars - some emotional, some even physical, and many deeply spiritual. They are the experts, and I defer to their deep and painful experience.Might I point out that whilst "emotional scars" are difficult to prove in a court of law, the claim that some exes have emerged with "physical" - that is to say bodily - scars is not. And I find it not only grossly offensive to have someone attempt to claim the fellowship has physically harmed them, but also insupportable. What and where is the evidence of such things? In the article itself, Pastor Ken alleges that the Workers control people in a manner similar to that employed by Jim Jones or David Koresh, both suicidal religious fanatics who led their followers to mass suicide. To attempt to make this claim about the Friends is ludicrous. The Workers are a corporate body, drawn from among the people of the church. There is no one controlling leader who wishes to isolate people absolutely from the rest of society, and whose mania could result in the mass suicide of a world-wide, and diverse body of people. This is simply prejudicial. It is not even a species of polemic; it is propaganda pure and simple. As evinced by this statement: " ...enables the group to grow largely undetected, like termites in teh woodwork of a home" (p. 8). You know what kind of calibre of thought you are dealing with when one gets described using the terminology of insects. There are so many distortions and twisted half-truths in this document that I cannot contain myself. I find myself greatly angered by this portrayal. Fair criticism and informed discussion is one thing; but outright lies and even incitement of hatred and disgust, which is precisely the point of this article, is anathama to me. Outrageous.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2009 8:42:51 GMT -5
I think we readily take Pastor Ken's statement that he is no expert on the 2x2 sect as fact. He is distancing himself from such credibility.
However, he HAS presented two statements allegedly from persons experienced with the sect which are highly supportive of his article AND there have been ex-2x2's on this board who have separately corroborated his article.
I feel there is little in Pastor Ken's article which serving 2x2's will agree with, but there is plenty in the article that many ex-2x2's will agree with. In fact there will be many ex-2x2's who will point to some of the things he mentions as being their reasons for exiting the sect.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2009 8:57:50 GMT -5
I think we readily take Pastor Ken's statement that he is no expert on the 2x2 sect as fact. He is distancing himself from such credibility. However, he HAS presented two statements allegedly from persons experienced with the sect which are highly supportive of his article AND there have been ex-2x2's on this board who have separately corroborated his article. I feel there is little in Pastor Ken's article which serving 2x2's will agree with, but there is plenty in the article that many ex-2x2's will agree with. In fact there will be many ex-2x2's who will point to some of the things he mentions as being their reasons for exiting the sect. Any thinking 2x2 will acknowledge that some people have emerged from the meetings with bad experiences, and with psychological scars. That's not the point. Pastor Ken has no interest in the "whole truth", meaning that there are not only a host of insiders who find their experience beneficial, but there are also lots of exes who express appreciation for their 2x2 experiences. As for the allegation that the church is responsible for physical damages, nothing could be further from the truth. The 2x2 church is about as pacifist as it gets. For goodness sake, my grandfather went to jail along with a number of other of his 2x2 friends for their refusal to do violence of any kind.
|
|
|
Post by gloryintruth on Sept 30, 2009 9:16:51 GMT -5
I think we readily take Pastor Ken's statement that he is no expert on the 2x2 sect as fact. He is distancing himself from such credibility. However, he HAS presented two statements allegedly from persons experienced with the sect which are highly supportive of his article AND there have been ex-2x2's on this board who have separately corroborated his article. I feel there is little in Pastor Ken's article which serving 2x2's will agree with, but there is plenty in the article that many ex-2x2's will agree with. In fact there will be many ex-2x2's who will point to some of the things he mentions as being their reasons for exiting the sect. I can only concur with Clearday's statement. Ram, you have a proclivity toward accepting without "digestion" a highly biased perspective of the Fellowship. It is essential that you do not confuse your bias with validity. Those of us who strongly believe in reforming and improving the Fellowship acknowledge without question that there have certainly been traumas experienced by those who have gone out. I personally know of several people who have left due to shocking experiences, yet at least one of those people refuse to indict the whole church because of one or two bad apples. I personally have experienced mishandling of very private issues. The problem lies in presenting this as even a remote attempt to correctly portray the Fellowship. It is little different from the tabloid papers who had a field day castigating the Roman Catholic Church because of the handful of abusive priests that came to light. Surely those incidents were distasteful, but to paint an entire group of people as wicked, rotten, oppressed etc. on that basis is wrong. And it is the same in relation to this article. The author is exceptionally ignorant. He has not interviewed members, he has not attended meetings, and he knows only what he has been told by other sources. Consequently, he has produced a brilliant slice of propaganda and distortion. Anyone who cannot recognise the half-truths in this article is patently dishonest.
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Sept 30, 2009 9:48:58 GMT -5
Pastor Ken applied today to join The Liberty Connection message board (aka TLC) under his name: Ken Armstrong. He was denied - He failed to meet the cardinal entrance requirement for board membership - that of being an ex-2x2. Wouldnt be surprised to find he is reading here on TMB... CK
|
|
|
Post by ClayRandall on Sept 30, 2009 9:53:52 GMT -5
When I first read the article I immediately objected to Armstrong's comparisons to death cults like Jim Jones'. Likewise I found his statement about physical scars to be over the top. Is there any proof of physical abuse? Even if so, what does that prove about the fellowship?
It looks to me like Armstrong thought he had found an easy target that made for sensational reading, and now he's not happy about being challenged on what he wrote....
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Sept 30, 2009 10:01:59 GMT -5
Perhaps someone could ask Pastor Ken specifically what other resources he used to research his article--besides Kathy Lewis book...
What specific support does he have for his claim that the article was well researched...
|
|
|
Post by rational on Sept 30, 2009 10:12:31 GMT -5
When I first read the article I immediately objected to Armstrong's comparisons to death cults like Jim Jones'. Likewise I found his statement about physical scars to be over the top. Is there any proof of physical abuse? Even if so, what does that prove about the fellowship? It looks to me like Armstrong thought he had found an easy target that made for sensational reading, and now he's not happy about being challenged on what he wrote.... More to the point, as the Catholic church has said over and over, one deviant priest does not make all priests deviants. Every system has faults but to look at a single data point and present that as the whole is wrong, and as a journalist, disingenuous.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Sept 30, 2009 14:29:33 GMT -5
The article consisted entirely of generalities with no specifics.
I found the following comment by Pastor Ken on his response page interesting.
Ken is peddling something that people clearly want to hear! Personally, I've never felt that Jesus requires nothing from me at all.
|
|
|
Post by Scott Ross on Sept 30, 2009 14:42:59 GMT -5
Ken is peddling something that people clearly want to hear! Personally, I've never felt that Jesus requires nothing from me at all. Actually, this Ken dude didn't say Jesus didn't require anything from us, he said the "amazing grace Jesus offers with no "performance" requirements from you at all"(Not sticking up for this guy at all...) I believe in the freedom we have in Christ. It DOESN'T have any 'performance requirements' attached to grace. It is a free gift that we won't 'earn' as we go. That is NOT saying that we don't 'do' anything. As disciples of Christ we will automatically follow His teachings of course, and try to share the gospel message with others. In my opinion, there are no 'performance requirements' from us as far as receiving grace. Scott
|
|
|
Post by ithascome on Sept 30, 2009 16:28:35 GMT -5
Yep... a saw that word "physical" ... thought is was a little bit over the top... no one has been stoned yet... Thank God!!! But I don't know.... I sure got some big whippings when I was a kid... I guess I could say that is 2x2 related... or is it just plain Biblical... spare the rod sort of thing. But they did not use a rod on me unless you want to count a Switch as a rod... the belt was my favorite... the blood stains on my undies were proof of it. so yes.. I may have had a scar of two... don't know ..can't see back there. Maybe I should take a picture and post it... then we all will know for sure!!! ;D
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Sept 30, 2009 16:38:25 GMT -5
Ken is peddling something that people clearly want to hear! Personally, I've never felt that Jesus requires nothing from me at all. Actually, this Ken dude didn't say Jesus didn't require anything from us, he said the "amazing grace Jesus offers with no "performance" requirements from you at all"(Not sticking up for this guy at all...) I believe in the freedom we have in Christ. It DOESN'T have any 'performance requirements' attached to grace. It is a free gift that we won't 'earn' as we go. That is NOT saying that we don't 'do' anything. As disciples of Christ we will automatically follow His teachings of course, and try to share the gospel message with others. In my opinion, there are no 'performance requirements' from us as far as receiving grace. Scott Clearly, we don't earn our redemption. But the Bible (and our service to Jesus) do make many requirements of us. To say otherwise is a deception.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2009 16:53:10 GMT -5
I think we readily take Pastor Ken's statement that he is no expert on the 2x2 sect as fact. He is distancing himself from such credibility. However, he HAS presented two statements allegedly from persons experienced with the sect which are highly supportive of his article AND there have been ex-2x2's on this board who have separately corroborated his article. I feel there is little in Pastor Ken's article which serving 2x2's will agree with, but there is plenty in the article that many ex-2x2's will agree with. In fact there will be many ex-2x2's who will point to some of the things he mentions as being their reasons for exiting the sect. I can only concur with Clearday's statement. Ram, you have a proclivity toward accepting without "digestion" a highly biased perspective of the Fellowship. It is essential that you do not confuse your bias with validity. Those of us who strongly believe in reforming and improving the Fellowship acknowledge without question that there have certainly been traumas experienced by those who have gone out. I personally know of several people who have left due to shocking experiences, yet at least one of those people refuse to indict the whole church because of one or two bad apples. I personally have experienced mishandling of very private issues. The problem lies in presenting this as even a remote attempt to correctly portray the Fellowship. It is little different from the tabloid papers who had a field day castigating the Roman Catholic Church because of the handful of abusive priests that came to light. Surely those incidents were distasteful, but to paint an entire group of people as wicked, rotten, oppressed etc. on that basis is wrong. And it is the same in relation to this article. The author is exceptionally ignorant. He has not interviewed members, he has not attended meetings, and he knows only what he has been told by other sources. Consequently, he has produced a brilliant slice of propaganda and distortion. Anyone who cannot recognise the half-truths in this article is patently dishonest. Jason, what specifically have "I" accepted in Pastor Ken's article without digestion ? I think YOU have jumped to enormous and unjust conclusions simply because you perceive that "I" am in agreement with it. Do you deny the article has received such support from sources of exes that extend way beyond the normal requirements for corroboration? Pastor Ken needs to be examined on the sources he cites to justify himself. I have little doubt that those sources would justify his statements as we've seen on this board and elsewhere. Regarding "physical" harm suffered in the sect. What does he mean by this ? Could it be the trauma of the no small amount of CSA victims, the not uncommon instances of women who have put up with abusive husbands because workers have encouraged their tolerance, children on the receiving end of corporal punishment because this is (or at least was) a worker approved child control tactic? If Pastor Ken says yes to these type of physical abuses then I fully support him, but as yet I do not know what he means. Pastor Ken has on the face of it (for what reason/ means of justification) produced sources (which need explained) upon which he has founded certain viewpoints in his article. I think if you re-examine my post you will see a degree of fairness. Innies disagree with much of it. Many outties corroborate much of it, some in its entirity. Did I base my own statements upon my own opinions/experiences, or upon what I have seen innies and outties posting on TMB and statements made elsewhere?
|
|
|
Post by ithascome on Sept 30, 2009 17:10:15 GMT -5
Perhap we can open this board up and just ask Pastor Ken to post here... you all can tear him apart... and prove to him the Christians that you are... May God help us all!!!
|
|
|
Post by sharon on Sept 30, 2009 18:15:07 GMT -5
Ken is peddling something that people clearly want to hear! Personally, I've never felt that Jesus requires nothing from me at all. Actually, this Ken dude didn't say Jesus didn't require anything from us, he said the "amazing grace Jesus offers with no "performance" requirements from you at all"(Not sticking up for this guy at all...) I believe in the freedom we have in Christ. It DOESN'T have any 'performance requirements' attached to grace. It is a free gift that we won't 'earn' as we go. That is NOT saying that we don't 'do' anything. As disciples of Christ we will automatically follow His teachings of course, and try to share the gospel message with others. In my opinion, there are no 'performance requirements' from us as far as receiving grace. Scott I think most of us who realize how much we're being forgiven for by the Blood of Jesus Christ, then it is to say the more WE WILL LOVE HIM and what do people do that LOVE ANOTHER PERSON? They often cannot do enough good for them simply because they love that person. Jesus, Himself, asked the man who's table He had sit at while the woman washed His feet with tears, wiped them on the hairs of her head, then anointed them with costly ointment....Jesus told him about the two men who needed forgivenness one more then the other...the Jesus asked the man "Who do you think loved the most? The one who had little to be forgiven for or the one who had much to be forgiven for." Simple answer isn't it? Human nature always wants to love MORE when they've been forgiven the most. So the salvation by grace brings a love into a person's heart according to how much sin they're aware of they've been forgiven for and perhaps the older we get and the more we recognize we need to be forgiven for, then the more we love God and the more we'll seek to do for Him free gratis.
|
|
|
Post by sharon on Sept 30, 2009 18:16:19 GMT -5
Ken is peddling something that people clearly want to hear! Personally, I've never felt that Jesus requires nothing from me at all. Actually, this Ken dude didn't say Jesus didn't require anything from us, he said the "amazing grace Jesus offers with no "performance" requirements from you at all"(Not sticking up for this guy at all...) I believe in the freedom we have in Christ. It DOESN'T have any 'performance requirements' attached to grace. It is a free gift that we won't 'earn' as we go. That is NOT saying that we don't 'do' anything. As disciples of Christ we will automatically follow His teachings of course, and try to share the gospel message with others. In my opinion, there are no 'performance requirements' from us as far as receiving grace. Scott Clearly, we don't earn our redemption. But the Bible (and our service to Jesus) do make many requirements of us. To say otherwise is a deception. What, are not those "requirements" love led and love fed?
|
|
|
Post by sharon on Sept 30, 2009 18:19:56 GMT -5
I think that Pastor Ken should be taken with a grain of salt, first. He may well have justifiable sources and reasons...but then he also could be someone on the make for notoriety as being some small time knight out to slay a dragon that doesn't really exist. Thus making him quite well known!
And I do not mean to be slaying him...but I think as we must take the workers with a grain of salt, so must we take this pastor with a grain of salt....test the spirits, please!
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Sept 30, 2009 19:12:15 GMT -5
I don't have any problem that the article is a piece of propaganda. Hell, we live in a world of propaganda. I feel sorry [only kinda sort of] for people who grow up to think their religion is the truth because they suppose then that all media must be so straightforward and truthful. Even if the doctrines of said church are correct, the sinners that Christians are violate them left, right, and center according to their personal bastardization of truth. So get use to piece-mealing your vision of God together. I'm free to concur or disagree with the article as I deem correct and a child is better off for being brought up to be so free. It's all good. Be glad to be alive at a time when you can believe whatever you want to. How else will God judge the world ?
|
|
|
Post by Scott Ross on Sept 30, 2009 21:44:10 GMT -5
Clearly, we don't earn our redemption. But the Bible (and our service to Jesus) do make many requirements of us. To say otherwise is a deception.I agree that there are many things we need to do as Christians. My point is it isn't based on any 'performance' criteria. There is no list of what we must accomplish during our lives. It is our own personal relationship with Christ that convicts us of how we are going to live our lives in His service, and that is going to be a 'unique to each of us service'. As Paul mentioned, he could do anything, but not everything was beneficial. I don't think we are judged by how many times we go to church, nor how often we read our bibles. We will be judged by how we love one another, and how we go about living a life dedicated to Christ. We each do that differently Even those in the same church do things differently don't they? Scott
|
|
|
Post by gloryintruth on Sept 30, 2009 21:56:23 GMT -5
Ram: I think you are "eager to believe" what this author has to say because in some measure it confirms your viewpoint. However, the article has gone so far off the deep end - i.e. associating the Workers with death cults - that it is impossible to regard it with anything but scholarly repudiation.
Even the language that is used; at one point the Fellowship is likened to termites. When an author feels the need to use de-humanising language, much of his credibility surely is gone already. Ad hominem is the sign of a weak position.
Whether Pastor Ken sought out exes or not is a mystery to me. I know he has not sought the viewpoint of those of us actually in the Fellowship whose experience is so far removed from what he portrays that he could be writing of a whole other religion.
Why assume that he is justified in writing a collection of distortions and half-truths?
Firstly, as all church groups - Catholic, Anglican, Baptist and even Professing etc. - have pointed out time and again, CSA is NOT something that is approved, and it has no place in our religion. Sexual deviancy is a clandestine behaviour that unfortunately is manifested by a very small handful of Workers, priests, ministers, and pastors. And yes, in the fellowship, as in all church groups that have needed to deal with CSA issues, the handling of these rogues have not always been up to standard.
These points have been made time after time after time. Those people who are regrettably abused do carry deep psychological scars (not physical scars); however, CSA is not part of our religion or our beliefs or our practices. It is repudiated by all morally sound people in all church groups. And to even imply that it is a singularly professing phenomenon or that it is part of "what we do" is outrageous.
As for women putting up with abusive husbands, or for strict corporal discipline - which was at one time urged by all church groups and was widely practiced even in the secular world (the WA Dept. of Education abolished the cane in 1988), are examples of an unfair perspective. One can link these social ills to the fellowship, and use that as the basis of one's repudiation of the fellowship. However, in doing so, for the sake of balance, one would have to repudiate every other church group on the same grounds and the government.
Really, this strikes me as an example of grasping at straws. I am yet to understand what "physical scars" are being carried by people as a direct consequence of their involvement with meetings. All of this filler, and "burn the witch" kind of mentality has not yet demonstrated that.
I do not see that at all. I you seldom exercise much generosity when analysing or discussing the fellowship, as your above remarks amply testify.
|
|
|
Post by ithascome on Sept 30, 2009 23:44:10 GMT -5
sounds great... but I really do not think he will come... why would he? I bet his box is already full of complaints.
|
|
|
Post by bryanfromak on Sept 30, 2009 23:47:07 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by gloryintruth on Oct 1, 2009 0:43:17 GMT -5
I seldom read threads through in their entirety, but I followed this one with fascination. It appears that Pastor Ken's comittment to the truth is somewhat economical. He suggests we check his sources. My question is this: has he published a list of sources (or did they accompany the article) so that his statements can be verified? That is the usual scholarly practice. Secondly, I point out that Pastor Ken - like a few other folk who tend to walk the extremist fringe such as Kathy Lewis (who has no training in socio-cultural analysis, I point out) - use the term "mind control" rather liberally. Mind control, as a concept, has been thoroughly debunked by none other than that most august organisation the American Psychological Association, along with its sister concept "brainwashing". Since at least 1980, these terms have been in the descendancy and their use is now restricted to a few oldies or folks who have a prejudicial axe to grind. I offer a few articles for those who might want to follow this through in more detail: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mind_controlOn quote of interest: Mind control theories have always been controversial within scientific and legal contexts. Currently most social scientists agree with the official stances of the American Psychological Association and American Sociological Association which dismiss these theories as unscientific. The majority of scholars in the study of religion reject theories of mind control. James Richardson, states that if the NRMs [New Religious Movements - often prejudicially called "cults"] had access to powerful brainwashing techniques, one would expect that NRMs would have high growth rates, while in fact most have not had notable success in recruitment.I put the text is large letters (see what large letters I have written with my own hand! - to paraphrase Paul) in order that they should not be missed. Ram, please pay attention!
|
|
|
Post by ithascome on Oct 1, 2009 1:36:46 GMT -5
Yes really Nathan I agree with you... I was the one that suggested it in the first place.... The problem is... this is pretty much the only information that is out there... this is why I asked the 2x2s to come up with a Belief Statement in the following thread... professing.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=14631But I have been given every reason in the world why this is not something the 2x2s should do... so I guess you will have to go on in the way that you are going without a well defined statement of what you believe... it just opens the door for anyone in the world to make assumptions as to what it is that you uphold most dear. GIC mentions sources... the problem is that you do not have enough positive sources out there to combat such false claims. I really feel sad that this is the case. Someone mentioned ... that he could have gone to the 2x2s themselves and ask them what it is that they believe... well this is true... but it has been proven to me in the above mentioned thread that you really do not wish to have any written material for people to read... I remember as a kid hearing workers preach against worldly church pamphlets. I really do not know what the big deal is about all this... why do you fear these things.... I cannot find any verse in the Bible that goes against it... It does say something about not adding to the Word... but really that is not what you would be doing if you used the Bible as your reference. I went to a Bible study tonight... the teacher was discussing in the book of Revelation where it talks about the end of times and when the devil will be chained... the question was asked about what will happen to those that never heard about Christ... say in the underdeveloped countries or when children died at an early age... would they have a chance to come back from the dead and hear Jesus' Word... the teacher said we do not know anything about that... but he was certain that God would be Just. But the thing that he added is the point that I want to make. He said that we in the US and other well developed countries do not have an excuse... because there is so much in books, on TV, and on the the Internet about Jesus.... He called it a GREAT LIGHT... no one can miss it... it shines so brightly. So when I think about it I wonder why the 2x2s ... the one true church (not only true church IMO) that claims to be right... does not make use of this GREAT LIGHT. Really it is a puzzle to me. I think this is a cause of a lot of your miscommunication... you (the 2x2s) are too hidden.... and you make yourself look bad because of it... no wonder you are called a cult. The Bible tells us to let our light so shine... that is not only talking about an individual... it is also talking about the church. You read all the time in the news paper about churches that are doing this and that for the poor.. having special dinners to invite guest...sending people overseas etc. Why can't the 2x2s do that .... there is nothing wrong about it... it is what is thought of as the Great Commission. Also it is nothing more than good PR.
|
|