Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 17, 2010 11:51:47 GMT -5
As September pointed out, in my OP there were many "warnings" before the actual letter was reached. She did a good job of posting them. Saying I do not believe in something I've chosen to post is surely another clue?
You must admit I did stop way short of saying this letter was the only true word of God, that it was the only way to God, Jesus plus the letter, and so on.
Now that would be real deception!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 17, 2010 11:56:47 GMT -5
Since some people have found my posting of Dorothy's letter offensive, I shall refrain from posting the reply apparently sent to her by the acting Editor of the Impartial Reporter. This document gives an appropriate response.
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on Apr 17, 2010 12:01:18 GMT -5
As September pointed out, in my OP there were many "warnings" before the actual letter was reached. She did a good job of posting them. Saying I do not believe in something I've chosen to post is surely another clue? You must admit I did stop way short of saying this letter was the only true word of God, that it was the only way to God, Jesus plus the letter, and so on. Ram, I knew you were seeking to string Nathan along the past several days with "hints" of you searching the imagi vault! However, the "title" of this post was skillfully used to "suck" people in one way or another and I'm still quite disappointed in you....I think we all are laughing out of the wrong side of our mouth. IMO it sure seems you are poking fun at Nathan's insistence that WI's sister had anything to do with what WI and the other workers did! We all have tried to let that go and let him believe what he believed, knowing full well that sooner or later he'd come to some correct decision on that as we all have done. And as Jason points out, it is in poor taste to post the letter with the intent for a laugh when the history of the 2X2's has been such a thorn in many sides and maybe your own. IF you found the letter laughable so be it...it was posted here in poor taste and apparentlyu not only IMO! I don't like the appearance of trying to spoof Nathan's belief that the sister had anything to do with the fellowship being as it is today.... I think even as Cherie and I both tried to tell Nathan, that YES, the death of a young sister, but it turns out to be 2 sisters and even his own mother would in all likelihood made WI concerned about spiritual welfare! Would and most likely cause his "zeal" without real knowledge.....
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 17, 2010 12:14:53 GMT -5
As September pointed out, in my OP there were many "warnings" before the actual letter was reached. She did a good job of posting them. Saying I do not believe in something I've chosen to post is surely another clue? You must admit I did stop way short of saying this letter was the only true word of God, that it was the only way to God, Jesus plus the letter, and so on. Ram, I knew you were seeking to string Nathan along the past several days with "hints" of you searching the imagi vault! However, the "title" of this post was skillfully used to "suck" people in one way or another and I'm still quite disappointed in you....I think we all are laughing out of the wrong side of our mouth. IMO it sure seems you are poking fun at Nathan's insistence that WI's sister had anything to do with what WI and the other workers did! We all have tried to let that go and let him believe what he believed, knowing full well that sooner or later he'd come to some correct decision on that as we all have done. And as Jason points out, it is in poor taste to post the letter with the intent for a laugh when the history of the 2X2's has been such a thorn in many sides and maybe your own. IF you found the letter laughable so be it...it was posted here in poor taste and apparentlyu not only IMO! I don't like the appearance of trying to spoof Nathan's belief that the sister had anything to do with the fellowship being as it is today.... I think even as Cherie and I both tried to tell Nathan, that YES, the death of a young sister, but it turns out to be 2 sisters and even his own mother would in all likelihood made WI concerned about spiritual welfare! Would and most likely cause his "zeal" without real knowledge..... Sharon, My posting of Dorothy's letter had little to do with Nathan personally. Over the last few years similar genuine but "dodgy" accounts have been posted on TMB, even in recent times, all based on humour. What is one man's meat is another man's poison. We cannot please everybody all of the time. Either we go about with straight poker-like faces, lest we offend anyone, or we just go ahead and hopefully please some folks. I think you want to look a bit more carefully. There's actually quite a few people laughing out the right side of their mouths! Do they not matter? The sales of Pampers nappies have shot up in their localities. Laughter is the best medicine. I regret you are disappointed in me. That you don't see the funny side of the matter actually disappoints me. I have to get the balance right here. I have pleased others, who have found the whole episode along with the reactions very amusing. I mean no one any harm, despite what others may think, but I do know the audience I'm singing to.
|
|
|
Post by september on Apr 17, 2010 12:26:37 GMT -5
Ram, it's perhaps best to leave this alone. I can't imagine why anyone who has been reading these boards the past few days would have fallen hook, line and sinker for your letter. There were too may obvious clues with different plays on words for it to be anything but a hoax but in defence of those duped, perhaps Nathan's story of exiled Alpine tail-docking yodellers impressing the young Miss Irvine is finally through endless repetition, gaining credibility therefore rendering your letter believable?
And Jason, I'm afraid I don't get agitated at being harmlessly duped so if anything comes my way, there's a fair chance I'll laugh at when I finally figure it out. I can't imagine why your anger would know no bounds but I'm sure it's an interesting spectacle.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 17, 2010 12:27:03 GMT -5
I thought there was a good lesson in this.
Sometimes we will invest our souls in some of the dodgiest information out there and latch onto it as truth and in hope. We can never be too careful and some of the most credible-looking stuff can be the most deadly. I've been there before and will be there again sometime.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 17, 2010 13:01:45 GMT -5
September, do you mean you don't want to see the response from the Impartial Reporter?
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on Apr 17, 2010 13:04:02 GMT -5
Ram, it's perhaps best to leave this alone. I can't imagine why anyone who has been reading these boards the past few days would have fallen hook, line and sinker for your letter. There were too may obvious clues with different plays on words for it to be anything but a hoax but in defence of those duped, perhaps Nathan's story of exiled Alpine tail-docking yodellers impressing the young Miss Irvine is finally through endless repetition, gaining credibility therefore rendering your letter believable? And Jason, I'm afraid I don't get agitated at being harmlessly duped so if anything comes my way, there's a fair chance I'll laugh at when I finally figure it out. I can't imagine why your anger would know no bounds but I'm sure it's an interesting spectacle. The evident looking down one's nose at Nathan's repeated belief in a sister's influence on what has turned out to be really a nightmare of a sect of religion, seem very unkind to me and I think Jason and others feel the same way. AS I said in my first response, I wasn't sold yet...I didn't believe the letter but was not for certain the "why" it was posted, though my gut instinct was it wasn't nice because ram had told Nathan several times he was coming up with something...thus my very serious disappointment in Ram's behaviour in posting the letter. Now he has intimated he has an editorial response...NOW IMO, IF RAM had been on the up and up with the posting of these for public knowledge he would NOT have waited to post them so far apart and waiting with anticipated glee at the various reactions he got. No, I am more severely disappointed in him...there is NOTHING funny about it from any direction that I can see.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 17, 2010 13:14:39 GMT -5
Sharon, let me assure you, I have nothing at all against Nathan. I am very fond of the guy. Yes he was more than obviously primed beforehand. That's why he stated in his first response that he thought Ram was having fun! Lack of niceties doesn't enter into it. A questionable sense of humour? Perhaps, but it is appreciated by many.
At least my offerings were extremely short-lived and done with humorous intent. Look at the very similar stories which were done with intention to deceive, are not admitted to, and are continually perpetrated to this day. All done with sincerity before God.
Regarding the Editorial response. That has just come into my hands. I could not have posted that earlier. Perhaps I will refrain from sharing it?
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on Apr 17, 2010 13:25:07 GMT -5
Sharon, let me assure you, I have nothing at all against Nathan. I am very fond of the guy. Yes he was more than obviously primed beforehand. That's why he stated in his first response that he thought Ram was having fun! Lack of niceties doesn't enter into it. A questionable sense of humour? Perhaps, but it is appreciated by many. At least my offerings were extremely short-lived and done with humorous intent. Look at the very similar stories which were done with intention to deceive, are not admitted to, and are continually perpetrated to this day. All done with sincerity before God. Regarding the Editorial response. That has just come into my hands. I could not have posted that earlier. Perhaps I will refrain from sharing it? Ram, do as you are pleased to do...but a warning, Jason has said it and I think that anything you post anytime in the future is apt to receive less then favorable attention....I honestly think you could have "addressed" the posting of this thread in less of a "suck-in" attitude....and I think you know that! I honestly think even those who got a smidgen of a laugh out of this hoax, that their responses now will be somewhat less then you may want to anything...for IF anyone has a true heart of care for their brethren will realize that this hoax has hurt some tender feelings...that is my angst with the way you've done it. I hope you apologize to Nathan and any other non-confessed believer in WI's sister having anything to do with the fellowship's inception! I think it's all been in very poor taste considering some folks desire to get to the bottom of the fellowship's real history...the history issue is still much of a more-than-a-thorn in many people's side whether they're in or out. Did you not understand that? People have plead with the ones in power position to come clean and make a clean chest of the history and we all have been continued to be led around by the "it all goes back to the shores of Galilee" and even as a worker told me "Why all the questions. It all goes back before the world began." This is from people, one would like to trust something in...and then we come on here and find out there are MORE people we can't trust in? Do you want all people to become bitter? I wouldn't blame them actually after this posting!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 17, 2010 13:35:41 GMT -5
Sharon, I'm sorry to have to say this, but I see a gross exaggeration in your reaction. If not then there exists a huge issue of sensitivity, in which case your reactions may be based on something quite different from my post. I appreciate there will be a few that will line up behind you, but heck they'll have their own issues. Please consider who is likely to rally behind you.
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on Apr 17, 2010 14:03:47 GMT -5
Sharon, I'm sorry to have to say this, but I see a gross exaggeration in your reaction. If not then there exists a huge issue of sensitivity, in which case your reactions may be based on something quite different from my post. I appreciate there will be a few that will line up behind you, but heck they'll have their own issues. Please consider who is likely to rally behind you. Ram,. my whole objection is the INSENSITIVITY of the way you headlined the OP AFTER having spun anticipation toward Nathan! I hate to think of those who have read it who do not post on here! It isn't doing any good for those who are on the fence, If I must spell it out for you! You're as apt to push them right back into something they have grave questions about...think about that from back when you were on the fence not sure which way to go! Think, Ram! The responses you have gotten written to this thread ARE NOT the only negative OR positive responses...that's where the danger lies, RAM! Those of us who post often on TMB or elsewhere often do read and know each other's way of dealing with one another...but we are not the only ones who read here... I guess what irks me is this....this is such a sensitive issue for many yet, Ram....they do not know what to believe any more...their trust in the workers and older friends is shot...their trust in religion in general is shot....And NOW they won't trust any one that has exited either! To post something that may turn out NOT to be factual is one thing....but to post something that the poster knows is not factual but could make people think it is, is a deliberate attempt at poking fun at something that is exceedingly serious to those with questions...and you should remember that...it isn't a situation to be having fun with, IMO!
|
|
|
Post by lin on Apr 17, 2010 14:13:00 GMT -5
It's easy to get negative minded people to overreact.
|
|
|
Post by Happy Feet on Apr 17, 2010 14:56:43 GMT -5
[color=Maroon Nathan, you know as well as I do that people will only believe or reject what they want to, depending on which way they are persuaded with the 2 and 2 faith. Certified proof would not be sufficient for many. E'en though I went to Motherwell Sheriff Court and had the letter certified "All Truth" under Oath of Verity, do you think that would convince the skeptics? £50 down the drain! Which reminds me, where is the $50 that was supposed to be transferred into my account? How could I write Dorothy's letter myself? If it's Dorothy's letter then it surely must have been Dorothy who wrote it? You know full well that I was making searches in the imagi vaults, well in advance of this letter coming to light. I have said several times that I consider the letter to be a genuine letter (big deal!) but I am concerned about the accuracy of its contents. You ask me for a yes or no answer. I am really curious about this. We all know that if Dorothy Irvine's letter contains authentic details, this would be a massive boost for yourself. Why then have you distanced yourself from it right from it's production on this board? Ram, are you saying that Nathan knew about this hoax before you posted it on the board and offered you $50 for you to post it?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 17, 2010 14:58:00 GMT -5
Sharon, I do not think this is an issue for an open general apology. However, if anyone has a specific grievance that they wish to bring to my attention then I will receive them favourably via the PM system. Much friendly banter and joking takes place on this board and I'm one of the main culprits. I would be apologising every day.
I'm sure you appreciate I have a high regard for yourself and I have been turning my brain over as to what the best way is to reconcile any issues with you. Again I would welcome PM contact. I feel that it would not be appropriate to discuss any issues between us publicly.
I am aware there are many people who view these boards and who could be influenced by certain types of posting. However, this is the situation we are all in on a daily basis and hardly give it a thought.
I am quite certain that anyone who has been following this thread has by now realised that this matter has been a "wind-up." It was undertaken for no greater purpose than to cause some to change their underpants.
I understand there were some on both sides of the fence who did just that. Unfortunately this resulted in some uncontrolled expressions from both orifices, due to some taking fright "that it just might be true" as well as those who wet their pants through uncontrolled laughter.
In view of this and taking into account your valid concerns I will finish with a statement which should be given heed to by anyone weighing up this thread who may yet be in some doubt.
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN. PLEASE DO NOT TREAT THE CONTENTS OF THE ORIGINAL POST (INCLUDING THE LETTER BY DOROTHY IRVINE) ON THIS THREAD, MADE BY MYSELF, WITH ANY SERIOUSNESS AS THE WHOLE THING WAS PRESENTED AS A JOKE.
|
|
|
Post by StAnne on Apr 17, 2010 15:20:14 GMT -5
This letter seems to have language too related to today. I doubt if it is true but written more recently by someone, if not Ram himself. 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 and 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. Nathan, you know as well as I do that people will only believe or reject what they want to, depending on which way they are persuaded with the 2 and 2 faith. Certified proof would not be sufficient for many. E'en though I went to Motherwell Sheriff Court and had the letter certified "All Truth" under Oath of Verity, do you think that would convince the skeptics? £50 down the drain! Which reminds me, where is the $50 that was supposed to be transferred into my account? How could I write Dorothy's letter myself? If it's Dorothy's letter then it surely must have been Dorothy who wrote it? You know full well that I was making searches in the imagi vaults, well in advance of this letter coming to light. I have said several times that I consider the letter to be a genuine letter (big deal!) but I am concerned about the accuracy of its contents. You ask me for a yes or no answer. I am really curious about this. We all know that if Dorothy Irvine's letter contains authentic details, this would be a massive boost for yourself. Why then have you distanced yourself from it right from it's production on this board? Ram, are you saying that Nathan knew about this hoax before you posted it on the board and offered you $50 for you to post it? Thank you, believer, for giving us clues early on and perhaps once again into the nuances of this most
despicable entertaining thread.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 17, 2010 15:33:45 GMT -5
[color=Maroon Nathan, you know as well as I do that people will only believe or reject what they want to, depending on which way they are persuaded with the 2 and 2 faith. Certified proof would not be sufficient for many. E'en though I went to Motherwell Sheriff Court and had the letter certified "All Truth" under Oath of Verity, do you think that would convince the skeptics? £50 down the drain! Which reminds me, where is the $50 that was supposed to be transferred into my account? How could I write Dorothy's letter myself? If it's Dorothy's letter then it surely must have been Dorothy who wrote it? You know full well that I was making searches in the imagi vaults, well in advance of this letter coming to light. I have said several times that I consider the letter to be a genuine letter (big deal!) but I am concerned about the accuracy of its contents. You ask me for a yes or no answer. I am really curious about this. We all know that if Dorothy Irvine's letter contains authentic details, this would be a massive boost for yourself. Why then have you distanced yourself from it right from it's production on this board? Ram, are you saying that Nathan knew about this hoax before you posted it on the board and offered you $50 for you to post it? No, Nathan did not know beforehand. He was asked several questions about "Margaret Irvine" etc. Also there were several posts about Polish workers in the Tatra mountains etc, etc. It came as no surprise to me that Nathan avoided the obvious bait and even gave his opinion I was having fun when it was posted. I had even in a post or two in the recent past stated to him something along the lines that he was seeking to prove Apostolic Succession through historical fact whereas I was seeking to do so through historical fiction. Warnings were given. I'm quite sure Nathan would gladly pay $50 for an authenticated version of Dorothy Irvine's letter. However, we had no contact about this. I was merely attempting to draw a jovial response from him.
|
|
|
Post by Sylvestra on Apr 17, 2010 16:16:20 GMT -5
Oh dear, Jason, I thought you were responding in your usual academic way with clear understanding that it was a spoof! Sorry you were at all offended. I appreciate subtle humor! (I DON'T appreciate that it may have been directed with the intention of confusing anyone in particular.) No, I was fully and completely deceived, because, being a mere simpleton that I am, I was foolish enough to believe Ram was being forthright and upfront. Given that he will not answer a simple "yes"\"no" question from Nathan with a straight bat, I should not now be surprised that he was the author. Do I find it amusing? Assuredly I do not. Jason, I sorry your are "exercised" by this hoax. I do want to thank you for your very interesting, in-depth, and may I say, I think quite accurate research showing it for what it is. Edy
|
|
|
Post by Gene on Apr 17, 2010 16:38:27 GMT -5
I wanna see the editorial response! Post it!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 17, 2010 16:56:14 GMT -5
I wanna see the editorial response! Post it! Patience laddie. I am trying to contact a Welshman called Mr. Dai Reah who is the grandson of the late W.C. O'Stool, one time temporary editor of the Impartial Reporter, for permission to post. This may take a couple of days. It appears the withholding of this information will cause far greater disappointment than the posting of it?
|
|
|
Post by snow on Apr 17, 2010 18:36:10 GMT -5
I don't see why people think Nathan was hurt by this? He was one of the first to clearly state he knew it wasn't true and actually congratulated Ram for getting people "nervous". We should maybe not take ourselves quite so seriously? This has been buildingin conversations between Nathan and Ram for days and that's why many knew it was suspect from the start. Nathan sure did. He wasn't fooled. Here is his first response: "I believe Ram is having a fun day! Good one, Ram. You have made quite a few people nervous. Some of them almost had hearts attacks."
|
|
|
Post by Dubious Disciple (xdc) on Apr 17, 2010 18:55:43 GMT -5
What a funny thread! Ram, i congratulate you on your humor! Now go apologize to Jason like a good boy (not to Nathan, of course, who never fell for the bait in the slightest). One thing I have learned is that people take their religions far too seriously.
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on Apr 17, 2010 19:26:26 GMT -5
I don't see why people think Nathan was hurt by this? He was one of the first to clearly state he knew it wasn't true and actually congratulated Ram for getting people "nervous". We should maybe not take ourselves quite so seriously? This has been buildingin conversations between Nathan and Ram for days and that's why many knew it was suspect from the start. Nathan sure did. He wasn't fooled. Here is his first response: "I believe Ram is having a fun day! Good one, Ram. You have made quite a few people nervous. Some of them almost had hearts attacks."Snow it is suspect because Nathan has absented himself from the thread since! Nathan often tries his best to put his best foot forward, but he is not calloused or dumb.....Nor are those who read here but do not post their thoughts or opinions.. In case anybody needs to know, there are people hurting a great deal over the lie of the history of the fellowship and they are trying to make some sense in their spiritual lives and to play such a dirty hoax and then laugh at those who maybe even had a smidgen of a concern that the letter MIGHT be true but didn't really think it was as they are trying to be trusting in the face of having their trust already destroyed by the lie to start with! As TMB has felt so often the attacks by the exes against the innies, this hoax is perhaps the worst attack of brother against brother! It is inconsiderate and insensitive for those who have not settled their minds on what is right or wrong...we do NOT help them when we play such dirty tricks! I'm watching some people around me right now struggling hard with this history thing and the pain they feel is horrendous! Do we all want them to become bitter? Do we want them all to become cynical like some who post on here and question everything? Humans have to trust somewhere, sometime...don't send these hurting people off in the direction they're coming from...that isn't going to help any of us!
|
|
|
Post by Sylvestra on Apr 17, 2010 19:38:54 GMT -5
I wanna see the editorial response! Post it! Gene, who are you responding to? Thanx! E
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on Apr 17, 2010 19:53:10 GMT -5
I agree, Nathan...it is no laughing matters...there's too many people's spiritual lives in turmoil right now and being conscientious most of them want to make the right decisions for themselves.
My heart is hurting for some right here in my area right now....I can only try to be there for them!
Nathan, please just keep your faith in your Saviour and you will be okay! Love you brother!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 17, 2010 19:59:20 GMT -5
I like what Ronald Reagan said:
"Trust, but verify."
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on Apr 17, 2010 20:03:57 GMT -5
I like what Ronald Reagan said: "Trust, but verify." that helps, clearday...however some people are so torn up inside right now to think to verify is probably beyond them...they have little way of knowing which way to go to verify! I am feeling greatly for some of these folks, it is pitiful at the pain they're suffering!
|
|
|
Post by Gene on Apr 17, 2010 20:50:34 GMT -5
I wanna see the editorial response! Post it! Gene, who are you responding to? Thanx! E Ram, of course.
|
|