|
Post by jason on Apr 16, 2010 5:09:22 GMT -5
I did not make the assertions you imply that I have. But hey, sweep it to the side! You go for it Ram. You believe whatever you want. No harm meant, Jason. It's just the way your post comes across. No harm meant from my direction either, Ram. I get irked when I think I am not being listened to. ;D
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 16, 2010 5:15:04 GMT -5
Perhaps my problem was that I WAS listening?
I guess I get irked too. Take care friend.
|
|
|
Post by Gene on Apr 16, 2010 5:32:56 GMT -5
I find it scandalous that Ms. Eileen Dover bent over backwards to assist her friend Ms. Christina Box to wrap the whole 'Cooneyite' thing up in a neat little package for the benefit of Dorothy, Willie, and their little dog too. I don't think such a grand story can be confined in such a narrow box.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 16, 2010 5:40:09 GMT -5
I find it scandalous that Ms. Eileen Dover bent over backwards to assist her friend Ms. Christina Box to wrap the whole 'Cooneyite' thing up in a neat little package for the benefit of Dorothy, Willie, and their little dog too. I don't think such a grand story can be confined in such a narrow box. Gene, methinks Baer has been mollykeddling you too much lately? Actually Eilleen Dover was an eminent author who wrote the cliffhanger "Too Near The Edge."
|
|
|
Post by Rob Sargison on Apr 16, 2010 5:47:15 GMT -5
I find it scandalous that Ms. Eileen Dover bent over backwards to assist her friend Ms. Christina Box to wrap the whole 'Cooneyite' thing up in a neat little package for the benefit of Dorothy, Willie, and their little dog too. I don't think such a grand story can be confined in such a narrow box. Gene, methinks Baer has been mollykeddling you too much lately? Actually Eilleen Dover was an eminent author who wrote the cliffhanger "Too Near The Edge." Hugo Furst wrote something similar I think.
|
|
|
Post by Gene on Apr 16, 2010 5:53:00 GMT -5
Gene, methinks Baer has been mollykeddling you too much lately? Actually Eilleen Dover was an eminent author who wrote the cliffhanger "Too Near The Edge." Hugo Furst wrote something similar I think. Yes, but wasn't his published posthumously by his companion, Elizabeth "Betty" Fahls? Some say she gave him the push he needed to finish the book before he died tragically while wandering the cliffs and rocky shores of Normandy.
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on Apr 16, 2010 6:46:10 GMT -5
As I read the letter I wondered about the need for secrecy? When the message of the Gospel is spreading why hide it, when the apostles did the opposite? They must have been very afraid for the lives maybe. Precisely.....this just reminded me of what an overseer told me when I told him about the "people" that Nathan had discovered.... This worker said this, "IF these people are direct descendents of the 'Apostles' they would have people going out and preaching what they knew!" He didn't believe that any one having such a rich connection would be "hiding" for fear of anything...simply because the Apostles didn't....I mean look at how the Apostles died...all except two of them met the same kind of death that Jesus did,...even poor OLD Peter!
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on Apr 16, 2010 6:54:47 GMT -5
Great Britain and Ireland are not synonymous. Currently the correct name for the "British Isles" which includes both Northern and southern Ireland, is, "The United Kingdom of Great Britain AND Northern Ireland. The United Kingdom therefore includes Northern Ireland but Great Britain does not. The Scots for many years have used a host of names for Ireland, including Eire. However, terms like alba etc as titles for Scotland are so distant in history that many Scots wouldn't have a clue as to what they refer to. On the subject of being skilled in the making of sounding instruments from the horns of cattle and sheep, this causes me to ask that there is a blowing of the ram's other horn. These animal parts were most commonly used as receptacles for infantrymen carrying their gunpowder. In the latter part of the 19th century many traditional churches regarded the time span of 2000 years since the time of Christ in much the same way as we regard 1100 hours as nearing mid-day. Nonetheless, caution as in all things should be exercised. As Oliver Cromwell, Lord Protector of Great Britain and Ireland once said to Parliament, "Be it unto me to deliver unto you, that which thou desirest." He was referring to Ireland in his subjugation of the British Isles and was warning of the dangers of meddling with the Emerald Isle. I did not make the assertions you imply that I have. But hey, sweep it to the side! You go for it Ram. You believe whatever you want. Jason, I don't believe Ram believes the document to be real and perhaps he really knows the real culprit of its' writings!
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on Apr 16, 2010 6:57:02 GMT -5
" He had to break away from the Faith Mission and somehow continue the way he'd learned in the glens of the Reeks."
He had to break away? Come on now this doesn't agree with what Cherie discovered from Faith Mission now does it? Didn't they "divorce" WI themself not the other way around?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 16, 2010 11:11:49 GMT -5
Kiwi, I have every reason to believe it is an authentic and true "letter" which I have posted on this board. However, you must understand that I too have reasons to be skeptical about its contents. Lately I have been carrying out some researches in the Press and Journal section of the Imagi vaults, which is how I came upon the whereabouts of this letter. ~~ Is this your experiement to see how many friends and workers fall for this Dorthy's letter? ;D so the exes can discount William Irvine's sister story as a made up story just like Dorothy?On the contrary Nathan. I'm trying to give you supporting evidence for the very tenuous and highly suspect Irvine's sister connection. I'm sure if Dorothy's letter is validated then it would be an enormous boost for your researches. In fact you could then sit back and thumb your nose at all your skeptics, including myself. I sincerely hope you are not discounting Dorothy's account? Are your doubts based on the fact you are convinced the lineage was rooted in the Alps rather than Ireland? You would have to climb down and admit you were wrong, even if you were basically right. You are beginning to confuse me (again).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 16, 2010 11:25:15 GMT -5
On the contrary Nathan. I'm trying to give you supporting evidence for the very tenuous and highly suspect Irvine's sister connection. I'm sure if Dorothy's letter is validated then it would be an enormous boost for your researches. In fact you could then sit back and thumb your nose at all your skeptics, including myself. I sincerely hope you are not discounting Dorothy's account? Are your doubts based on the fact you are convinced the lineage was rooted in the Alps rather than Ireland? You would have to climb down and admit you were wrong, even if you were basically right. You are beginning to confuse me (again). ~~ Forgive me my friend I don't believe Dorthy's account.... WI has no sister by that name. Where do you read Dorothy's name on the family list?Well Nathan, at least you accept it is Dorothy's account. I do not have details of the Irvine family. How do you know William Irvine did not have a sister called Dorothy?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 16, 2010 11:36:55 GMT -5
Just as I thought Nathan. You are content to use Cherie's factual information when it suits you, but at other times you give it the barge pole treatment. We must show consistency. Cherie's hard worked for information is not to be used for one's own convenient thinking and discarded on a whim when it doesn't suit us.
No doubt you are aware that Dorothy wasn't Christened Dorothy, but Agnes (I think)? She was called after a favourite aunt who knitted the family lots of socks and had a cat.
|
|
|
Post by Rob Sargison on Apr 16, 2010 13:29:48 GMT -5
Things began to go awry when the others followed Dorothy over the rainbow.........
|
|
|
Post by emy on Apr 16, 2010 13:32:03 GMT -5
Things began to go awry when the others followed Dorothy over the rainbow......... LOL
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on Apr 16, 2010 13:35:49 GMT -5
Things began to go awry when the others followed Dorothy over the rainbow......... Seems there was a horrific tornado first!
|
|
|
Post by Scott Ross on Apr 16, 2010 13:58:33 GMT -5
Hey!!!! Now we know where Ol' Willy got that scruffy little dog!!!! TOTO!!!!! Scott
|
|
|
Post by Rob Sargison on Apr 16, 2010 14:08:02 GMT -5
I think William Irvines heart was in the right place. He had a mind to do the will of God, and the courage of his convictions.
|
|
|
Post by Scott Ross on Apr 16, 2010 14:14:25 GMT -5
I think William Irvines heart was in the right place. He had a mind to do the will of God, and the courage of his convictions. I agree with that. Scott
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 16, 2010 14:28:29 GMT -5
I have no doubts about William Irvine's sincerity, but like many early workers he was over-zealous, a bit like a runaway train. Some early records reveal that nothing could contain the early workers. Enthusiasm for their new faith outstripped their wisdom.
|
|
|
Post by jason on Apr 16, 2010 17:08:59 GMT -5
Just as I thought Nathan. You are content to use Cherie's factual information when it suits you, but at other times you give it the barge pole treatment. We must show consistency. Cherie's hard worked for information is not to be used for one's own convenient thinking and discarded on a whim when it doesn't suit us. If we are now insisting on operating according to the rules of logic, then it is also the case that it is wrong to misrepresent the position and perspective of other people. Nathan's criticism of Cherie's work has never been that which is implied here. Although I do not agree with Nathan's historical positions, I would not say that he has given all of Cherie's work "the barge pole treatment". At times he has been quite complimentary of her website. Frankly, I do not know what the motives are in relation to this alleged letter, but reading through this thread, given the paucity of additional data and context, as well as the reactions of various folks, I am increasingly convinced it is a fabrication. It is surely an irony indeed that the Friends who would have most to "gain" from the authenticity of such a document appear to be the greatest sceptics, whilst an exe is defending and promoting it. The whole thing leaves an unpleasant taste in my mouth.
|
|
|
Post by kiwi on Apr 16, 2010 17:17:52 GMT -5
I did not make the assertions you imply that I have. But hey, sweep it to the side! You go for it Ram. You believe whatever you want. Jason, I don't believe Ram believes the document to be real and perhaps he really knows the real culprit of its' writings! Hum so you believe ram is speaking the truth?
|
|
|
Post by Sylvestra on Apr 16, 2010 17:24:49 GMT -5
This letter seems to have language too related to today. I doubt if it is true and not written more recently by someone. e.g. the non-denominational Christian sect this is definitely modern day talk: Quote: "I would have thought in the interests of fairness and "impartiality" that you would have given air to my concerns, especially since I have pointed out the incorrect, biased and grossly offensive manner of your reporting?" impartiality, grossly offensive manner of your reporting - seems more modern day politically correct language Adan thought. Who is this former member - again modern day talk of former members: Quote: "In view of this I will concentrate on the initial "false" claim by this supposed former member, " false in quotation marks, is a modern way of high lightening words Quote regarding: The history of the group and recent revival - what history? WI was with the Faith Mission prior to starting his group so the history started with William. The letter was defiantly made up by someone in recent years. Very recent. And if it's true? Kiwi, if it's true, then the modern day workers are making a real mess of what the bible really says and are no longer really lead by the Holy Spirit. Take the celibate ministry, for instance, and compare it to the "original ministry" they are supposed following...not the same. Their "doctrine" is their own and not the original doctrine of scripture, even though they say the bible is their doctrine. If this was "God's only true church", it would look a LOT different than it currently does! So, I think we're safe in saying the letter is a hoax! E
|
|
|
Post by september on Apr 16, 2010 18:09:52 GMT -5
Hahaha Ram! That's a good letter. I'm seriously impressed that you managed to get your hands on it. ;D
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on Apr 16, 2010 18:43:44 GMT -5
Jason, I don't believe Ram believes the document to be real and perhaps he really knows the real culprit of its' writings! Hum so you believe ram is speaking the truth? Ram, is only verifying it as a "letter" and that in quotes...tells me Ram knows that it is a hoax as far as a WI testimonial letter is concerned but it is a "letter" alright!
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on Apr 16, 2010 18:48:26 GMT -5
Jason, I don't believe Ram believes the document to be real and perhaps he really knows the real culprit of its' writings! Hum so you believe ram is speaking the truth? Kiwi, think of this...those who are in the fellowship and have continued to say "we were not lied to and we don't really think anyone else was" would be the most to lose face IF this letter by A Dorothy proved to be an authentic William Irvine of the 2X2 founder's sister...it would make THEM liars wouldn't it? I mean then they'd have to come forth and say they'd been lied to about the history of the fellowship because they'd known all along that it was founded in 1897! Come on we can't make liars out of them now can we? They're so steady in believing in the fellowship even THOUGH it WAS founded in 1897 by William Irvine...we don't want to rock their boat of belief now, do we?
|
|
|
Post by kiwi on Apr 16, 2010 19:29:22 GMT -5
Hum so you believe ram is speaking the truth? Ram, is only verifying it as a "letter" and that in quotes...tells me Ram knows that it is a hoax as far as a WI testimonial letter is concerned but it is a "letter" alright! No he is verifying it as an authentic and true "letter", his very own words
|
|
|
Post by kiwi on Apr 16, 2010 19:32:09 GMT -5
Hum so you believe ram is speaking the truth? Kiwi, think of this...those who are in the fellowship and have continued to say "we were not lied to and we don't really think anyone else was" would be the most to lose face IF this letter by A Dorothy proved to be an authentic William Irvine of the 2X2 founder's sister...it would make THEM liars wouldn't it? I mean then they'd have to come forth and say they'd been lied to about the history of the fellowship because they'd known all along that it was founded in 1897! Come on we can't make liars out of them now can we? They're so steady in believing in the fellowship even THOUGH it WAS founded in 1897 by William Irvine...we don't want to rock their boat of belief now, do we? I don't really care about William or Dorothy or who it effects, I care whether the letter is true or not.
|
|
|
Post by Gene on Apr 16, 2010 19:49:11 GMT -5
I can vouch for the fact that the letter originated from the home territory of the Irvine's in Scotland. I know things.
|
|