|
Post by quizzer on Apr 25, 2011 14:14:19 GMT -5
If workers get married, I want them to support their children. There have been several instances where workers got married, and different friends adopted the children. I do not want further disrespect shown to the God-given institutions of marriage and family. They gave away their children because they remained in the work? Yes, they wanted to remain in the work so they gave their children up for adoption. This was the stated reason.
|
|
|
Post by ru on Apr 26, 2011 1:42:18 GMT -5
That would be "misunderstanding". Not lie. Perhaps a falsehood or untruth.
[What's the difference? Isn't that like saying the fire doesn't get hot?
No, but perhaps what burns? The flames or the heat?
One thing to consider is "who lied?" We do not know. We know the original workers and the next generation of workers let the possible lie/falsehood/untruth/misunderstanding live and thrive. So, what to do now? Call it a grave misunderstanding with dire consequences? How then to fix the issue and consequences?
Although there was the allowing of the misunderstanding/falsehood/untruth by the original workers and the next generation of workers from the time 1903-1925 or so. That was not good. All with good intentions by sincere people though.
I don't think good intentions comes up with lies or colors the truth just to make sure people think it is the "one true way". That is a false doctrine built on a lie.
For sure. They saw the problem back then and perhaps had thought it would go away. Or if anything a sort of weeding out. Oh, and we have all heard about the path to hell being paved with good intentions and "sincere....just sincerely wrong."
This particular worker came to learn of the beginning of days a few years later. He was told the story and then had it likened to the finding of the book of the law in Isaiah. Justification. No harm. No foul.
I wonder if by now those who had been believing in the "back to Galiliee" and even "the one true ministry" and the "exclusivity" simply relate it all as misunderstanding.
I don't believe for truth's sake you can even begin to wonder about those finding out that they were misled are calling it anything but a lie and intentional lie. If people call it a misunderstanding and are justifying the lie, then they're lying to themselves and whoever they tell such lies to.
Admitting to a great misunderstanding/untruth/falsehood that had dire consequences would not be justifying the misunderstanding/untruth/falsehood. Contending it to have turned out to be a good weeding tool would be (self) justification. Allowing it to continue is an evil work.
All that has to be done is believe something along the line of "our service has always been on to God with faith and belief in God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit." And likely such has beeen for many F&W, just as for many in other churches.
I think the exclusivity can be dropped and still have a reverence for the work and the workers, the truth, and a care for the lost. The lifestyle should be able to remain the same, the meetings and conventions should be able to remain the same.
I hope you don't mean reverence but respect, to revere a person is to place them above other humans and that's what has caused a lot of the problems today...the worshipping of the workers and worshipping of the way.
Yes, you are correct...respect...and appropriate esteem.
|
|
|
Post by ru on Apr 26, 2011 1:45:39 GMT -5
They gave away their children because they remained in the work? Yes, they wanted to remain in the work so they gave their children up for adoption. This was the stated reason. Seems pretty foolish. They should have been given money to nurture the children as a family or got jobs and just did some meetings or gotten "fixed".
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 26, 2011 5:20:58 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Apr 26, 2011 5:33:55 GMT -5
Others farmed out their children. Others raised them. Wm Irvine required it. The Beatties had to farm out their firstborn. But after WmI was ousted, they kept their other children with them.
Of the married workers, the following are known to have had children:
Carrolls - daughter Bettys - 3 sons Richardsons - son Downies - at least 3 daughters Christies - daughter& son Cunninghams - daughter Gards - son McLeods - son Grahams - 5 children Beatties - 4 children Kilpatrick - daughter McIlwrath - a son, maybe more
There may have been others also...
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Apr 26, 2011 6:14:41 GMT -5
Perhaps they felt the end justified the means?
JO wrote:
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on Apr 26, 2011 7:00:35 GMT -5
Perhaps they felt the end justified the means? JO wrote: It seems I recall a letter from Jack Carroll(might have been posted on TMB) but Jack told the story that "this" started on the shores of Gallilee and/or "this" is a continuation of the Book of Acts....maybe those were not his words for words but in essence he pushed the idea, the lie....it was a means to gather in the converts and keeping them...it was the beginning of the "only true way" and the brainwashing that came from that where people were terrified that if they didn't profess then they were lost for all eternity. It was a control issue, a scare tactie all built on a lie. I don't know that George Walker ever used such tactics....I never heard him use any such type of words and those who knew him best say he willingly told about the "beginning days" and told them truthfully or at least from his point of view.
|
|
|
Post by ts on Apr 26, 2011 8:29:28 GMT -5
Perhaps they felt the end justified the means? JO wrote: It seems I recall a letter from Jack Carroll(might have been posted on TMB) but Jack told the story that "this" started on the shores of Gallilee and/or "this" is a continuation of the Book of Acts....maybe those were not his words for words but in essence he pushed the idea, the lie....it was a means to gather in the converts and keeping them...it was the beginning of the "only true way" and the brainwashing that came from that where people were terrified that if they didn't profess then they were lost for all eternity. It was a control issue, a scare tactie all built on a lie. I don't know that George Walker ever used such tactics....I never heard him use any such type of words and those who knew him best say he willingly told about the "beginning days" and told them truthfully or at least from his point of view. Maybe George didn't openly speak of "the only true way from the shores of Galilee". However, George was a very smart man and I think he would have picked up on that theme in the preaching of others. I have never heard anyone say that he rebuked that sort of rhetoric. I don't read of him embracing others who were preaching Jesus or encouraging attendance to other churches.
|
|
|
Post by ts on Apr 26, 2011 8:38:36 GMT -5
Others farmed out their children. Others raised them. Wm Irvine required it. The Beatties had to farm out their firstborn. But after WmI was ousted, they kept their other children with them. Of the married workers, the following are known to have had children: Carrolls - daughter Bettys - 3 sons Richardsons - son Downies - daughter Christies - daughter& son Cunninghams - daughter Gards - son McLeods - son Grahams - 5 children Beatties - 4 children Kilpatrick - daughter There may have been others also... Are you saying that all but three of these children listed were put up for adoption among the friends? Do you have record of where these children are now? I guess not. How can anyone think that this is an acceptable practice? I guess what the staunch professing folks will say is that these couples CHOSE to give up their children, so you can't blame the system. They weren't pressured. There was not rule about it. They were simply godly people who loved God more than their own children. Right. Noels, can you find it in your heart to thank Cherie for her meticulous research? Let's hope that the revelation of adopted worker children will ensure that this never happens again. May the hearts of the fathers be turned towards the children and the hearts of the children towards the fathers.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 26, 2011 8:42:42 GMT -5
Cherie, as part of my own research: when you left the meetings and divorced your husband - did your children go with you? how did this separation further the Kingdom of Heaven? Why did you hide this in your long-winded and oft published "exit letter"?
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Apr 26, 2011 8:53:36 GMT -5
ts asked: I only know of children of married worker couples being "farmed out" (raised by others) I personally do not know of any workers' children who were "adopted." Not saying it didn't happen - just that I personally do not know any who were. This list of married workers on TTT gives some details about what happened to some of the workers' children. tellingthetruth.info/workers_lists/wrkrmarried.php
|
|
|
Post by ts on Apr 26, 2011 9:00:43 GMT -5
Cherie, as part of my own research: when you left the meetings and divorced your husband - did your children go with you, or stay with him? Are you relating this to workers giving up their children "for the gospel's sake"? Not related at all. It is a tragedy whenever a family has to be broken up for any reason. The church should be the first place that strong family is encouraged. Did they tell the workers to not take part in meeting for breaking up their families? That is what they said to the friends who divorce and remarry. Do they tell the workers who commit adultery that they may not take part in meeting? Let's ask RF and LW. They have been shown mercy but the friends have not been shown mercy. You can't ask Cherie herself about her personal life. She did not get that luxury when inquiring about the workers. Ask her friends, bert. Ask all the people in her church how upstanding a citizen she is or isn't. I think she does have a church and you could easily contact them. I don't see where Cherie has lied or misled anyone. Do you? You do realize that the whole issue is not about immorality. It is about cover ups and lies and dishonesty. People more easily forgive shortcomings and character flaws if there is honesty, confession and repentance. That is scriptural enough to expect such from the workers, isn't it?
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Apr 26, 2011 9:01:35 GMT -5
Cherie, as part of my own research: when you left the meetings and divorced your husband - did your children go with you? how did this separation further the Kingdom of Heaven? Why did you hide this in your long-winded and oft published "exit letter"? I was married to my first husband when I wrote my exit letter, and remained so for several years after we both left meetings. My children were both over 18 when we divorced and both were attending university/college. I didn't hide "this" nor did I omit it from my exit letter. It hadnt taken place when I wrote the letter. However, divorcing a spouse is not the type information one writes in an exit letter...the exit letter is announcement of an exit/divorce from the 2x2 church. Depending on the circumstances, this information MIGHT have a place in a life story account (not the same thing as an exit letter). My life story was about my life events up through 1991, the year I left meetings. In fact, May 31 will be my 20-year Anniversary of leaving the 2x2 church belief system. My marriage divorce took place after 1991, so it wasnt included in my life story (nor my exit letter). "oft published"? I can only think of a couple places my exit letter is "published"...
|
|
|
Post by ts on Apr 26, 2011 9:10:33 GMT -5
Cherie, as part of my own research: when you left the meetings and divorced your husband - did your children go with you? how did this separation further the Kingdom of Heaven? Why did you hide this in your long-winded and oft published "exit letter"? I was married to my first husband when I wrote my exit letter, and remained so for several years after we both left meetings. My children were both over 18 when we divorced and both were attending university/college. I didn't hide "this" nor did I omit it from my exit letter. It hadnt taken place when I wrote the letter. "oft published"? I can only think of a couple places my exit letter is "published"... Hehe. So much for Bert's meticulous research. Sounds more like he's jumping to conclusions as a way of fishing for info. Bert's conclusion was drawn before he asked his loaded question.
|
|
|
Post by quizzer on Apr 26, 2011 9:27:30 GMT -5
Wow. When you realize how little care the workers showed to the children of workers, it's not surprising that so little respect is paid to friends...again, wow...
|
|
|
Post by eyedeetentee on Apr 26, 2011 12:45:53 GMT -5
Do they have guaranteed retirement if they don't retire as a worker in the church? Nope. Can they leave the work and draw SS when they are told they must obey the head workers dictates even when they dont agree with them? (Nope--not unless they worked some before entering the work and have credits for it) As things are currently, with the workers not paying in to SS, the workers have to buckle down and keep their place and submit no matter what their overseer asks of them--they have NO leverage. They're trapped. Being able to leave the work if they wanted/chose to without losing their old age pension/SS would give them the ability to let the Holy Spirit direct them. Even Catholic priests get to keep their pensions if they separate from the RCC church! "For the workers to pay into Social Security in the USA, so they could draw pensions and retire like others. I dont know what other countries do about this. Then they wouldnt have to buckle under to things they didn't agree with, simply because they had no retirement or money to suport them in their latter years." They already have a retirement system. The 'friends' pay for it by leaving money and property with the workers. And if that isn't enough, some live with 'friends' and some go to the preferred old folks' home in OK (I think that's where it is). Some live in apartments by themselves and collect money from the government. They already have retirement. So are you going to start a Worker's Union for them? That would be noble. Maybe we should ask Obama to form a committee to study the situation and form another committee to draw up some sort of a contract for them. Let's put more people on the gov't's payroll.
|
|
|
Post by Alan Vandermyden on Apr 26, 2011 13:46:22 GMT -5
Wow. When you realize how little care the workers showed to the children of workers, it's not surprising that so little respect is paid to friends...again, wow... It might prove interesting to contrast this with the amount of involvement workers have had in adoptions in general - whether it's adopting out the children of unwed mothers who are from a professing family, or involvement in bringing children from war-torn countries to the US for adoption by the friends. No criticism here of these other involvements . . . it just struck me as an interesting contrast, where the image of "the ministry" is involved.
|
|
|
Post by quizzer on Apr 26, 2011 14:39:45 GMT -5
Instead of suggesting a retirement fund, or a golden parachute, for workers needing to leave the work, how about re-training? No one is allowed to enter the work unless they have (at least) an associate's degree from college. A bachelor's degree is preferred.
Also, while in the work, a worker can take one college course per college semester. There are certain colleges that hold credits from other universities. Workers could apply to these universities, and transfer their credits from whichever college is closest to their field.
This way, workers could have the needed training to leave the work when they wanted. Also, they couldn't complain about "worldly" education, anymore.
|
|
|
Post by quizzer on Apr 26, 2011 14:41:28 GMT -5
noels, You mentioned that you didn't care much for the Truth Archive. Could you post recommendations for needed changes? Thanks, quizzer
|
|
|
Post by Alan Vandermyden on Apr 26, 2011 15:18:31 GMT -5
Instead of suggesting a retirement fund, or a golden parachute, for workers needing to leave the work, how about re-training? No one is allowed to enter the work unless they have (at least) an associate's degree from college. A bachelor's degree is preferred. Also, while in the work, a worker can take one college course per college semester. There are certain colleges that hold credits from other universities. Workers could apply to these universities, and transfer their credits from whichever college is closest to their field. This way, workers could have the needed training to leave the work when they wanted. Also, they couldn't complain about "worldly" education, anymore. I think this is a great idea. And some overseers did suggest things like this - that a worker have some college - or a job skill, such as carpentry. Many of us have left the work well before retirement age, yet with no "marketable" skills. But then, this happens to others too - finding themselves suddenly unemployed, and needing to get new training or schooling at middle age . . .
|
|
|
Post by eyedeetentee on Apr 26, 2011 15:54:54 GMT -5
No, nope, won't work. Knowledge is evil. Dumb down, that's better. They take that verse about the tree to mean that knowledge is evil. Besides, what good would it do to have smart workers? They'd quit once they realized they were wrong. You know, "World Religions" is one of the pre-reqs. for some courses. The overseers would not like it one bit if the workers knew more about religion than anybody else in that closed society.
You guys just cannot apply normalcy to those folks. Whatever works for other religions probably doesn't work for that one. They don't want educated workers.
|
|
|
Post by ts on Apr 26, 2011 15:55:29 GMT -5
Instead of suggesting a retirement fund, or a golden parachute, for workers needing to leave the work, how about re-training? No one is allowed to enter the work unless they have (at least) an associate's degree from college. A bachelor's degree is preferred. Also, while in the work, a worker can take one college course per college semester. There are certain colleges that hold credits from other universities. Workers could apply to these universities, and transfer their credits from whichever college is closest to their field. This way, workers could have the needed training to leave the work when they wanted. Also, they couldn't complain about "worldly" education, anymore. I think this is a great idea. And some overseers did suggest things like this - that a worker have some college - or a job skill, such as carpentry. Many of us have left the work well before retirement age, yet with no "marketable" skills. But then, this happens to others too - finding themselves suddenly unemployed, and needing to get new training or schooling at middle age . . . No, leaving the work and leaving a job is a poor comparison. When you go into the work you consciously forsake providing for yourself. It is a requirement. The promise is that you will be taken care of. The workers have failed in their promises. They have the money to do exactly what quizzer suggested. However, they prefer to hold on to their "trust" funds and save them for building convention grounds rather and rainy days(their own and not their exiting brothers' rainy days). What quizzer suggested would cost phenomenally little and the pay back would only grow. I am very surprised that the workers do not see the wisdom in investing in their own people who have given their lives in the harvest field. What more committed and dedicated people can you ask for? Yet they cast them off like tissue paper to fend for themselves in an obviously dire and stressful time in their lives. They trust them with the most precious commodity the world could have, the gospel, but they do not trust that they will wisely use any amount of money and training that the work has to offer them after they leave the work. Makes no sense. Further, to compare the work like a job means that your service for God and commitment to souls is done for pay and that work suddenly quits when one is no longer actively going around with a companion(or, for that matter it suggest that a worker is necessarily preaching the gospel on the merit of having a suitcase and a companion). I think that there are many workers who, like myself, freely gave their lives for the harvest field. It is not out of line to expect that the friends and workers would freely give of their natural provision to ensure that the exiting workers are trained and taken care of until they get on their feet. The workers treat exiting workers like a bad investment. However, spending a year working to build a new convention ground that cost $300,000 (and does not significantly raise the property value of the individual's convention home) as a good investment of worker staff time and friend money.
|
|
|
Post by ts on Apr 26, 2011 16:16:11 GMT -5
So many of my friends and family asked me what would happen if I could not make it in the ministry. Was I out of line to trust in my new found spiritual brothers and sisters who preached kindness and compassion and brotherly love? My friends and family saw the "cult like" potential of an "only truth and way" evasive group that was using me. I did not. I did eventually see that my trust was indeed misplaced. You can only put your trust in Jesus and in those in whom His spirit dwells. I thought His spirit dwelt in the workers, but I was mistaken.
|
|
|
Post by Alan Vandermyden on Apr 26, 2011 16:31:23 GMT -5
No, leaving the work and leaving a job is a poor comparison. When you go into the work you consciously forsake providing for yourself. It is a requirement. The promise is that you will be taken care of. You make valid points, ts, and I certainly don't intend to argue them. But, as a former worker myself, I do want to acknowledge that others have had some intense struggles - emotional, financial, etc. - as well. You're right, there is a certain "mentality" in going into the work, that can leave one unprepared to earn a living later in life. But I'm not the person to say what others struggle with either. Not meaning to diminish the struggle of former workers here, but simply acknowledging others' struggles in life as well.
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on Apr 26, 2011 17:33:34 GMT -5
Wow. When you realize how little care the workers showed to the children of workers, it's not surprising that so little respect is paid to friends...again, wow... It might prove interesting to contrast this with the amount of involvement workers have had in adoptions in general - whether it's adopting out the children of unwed mothers who are from a professing family, or involvement in bringing children from war-torn countries to the US for adoption by the friends. No criticism here of these other involvements . . . it just struck me as an interesting contrast, where the image of "the ministry" is involved. It's also interesting to see how the workers are spoken about AFTER the adoptions are into a few years...some parents still singing high praises for the workers and other parents privately being quite undone by their adopted children....just wondering how much to blame the workers for their adopted problems.
|
|
|
Post by Alan Vandermyden on Apr 26, 2011 17:37:46 GMT -5
It might prove interesting to contrast this with the amount of involvement workers have had in adoptions in general - whether it's adopting out the children of unwed mothers who are from a professing family, or involvement in bringing children from war-torn countries to the US for adoption by the friends. No criticism here of these other involvements . . . it just struck me as an interesting contrast, where the image of "the ministry" is involved. It's also interesting to see how the workers are spoken about AFTER the adoptions are into a few years...some parents still singing high praises for the workers and other parents privately being quite undone by their adopted children....just wondering how much to blame the workers for their adopted problems. That would be interesting. The few that I am personally acquainted with are all very good family situations, but some could be otherwise . . . it's probably a bit too personal for most to discuss on a public forum like this.
|
|
|
Post by ts on Apr 26, 2011 18:55:33 GMT -5
No, leaving the work and leaving a job is a poor comparison. When you go into the work you consciously forsake providing for yourself. It is a requirement. The promise is that you will be taken care of. You make valid points, ts, and I certainly don't intend to argue them. But, as a former worker myself, I do want to acknowledge that others have had some intense struggles - emotional, financial, etc. - as well. You're right, there is a certain "mentality" in going into the work, that can leave one unprepared to earn a living later in life. But I'm not the person to say what others struggle with either. Not meaning to diminish the struggle of former workers here, but simply acknowledging others' struggles in life as well. I know what you mean. I do think that we have every right to expect that the workers would be the first to be a help in these times of stress. At the very least, I think it is reasonable that the workers would not ADD to the stress. However, this is what they did. In our worst times, all we were asking was HONESTY from the workers. Honesty from them would have cured a lot of our woes. I do think we have every right to expect honesty from the workers. If you see a brother in need and do not help him, how can you say that the love of God is in you? The workers did indeed prove that the love of God is not in them and they would rather harbour a sexual offender and a child molester than to come clean and help a family in need.
|
|
|
Post by ts on Apr 26, 2011 19:00:08 GMT -5
The workers who were dealing with Alexander(who has adopted children) told him that they have never seen an adoption turn out well. The basically said that he chose to adopt those problems and those are the problems that he has to live with.
So the workers are showing no compassion for Alexander and shunning him because of the adopted children that he has. However, they encourage the workers who have children to put the up for adoption....or, "farm them out" as it were.
Sounds more and more like the workers find some way to justify themselves rather than finding ways of being righteous.
|
|