|
Post by fixit on Jun 24, 2013 0:18:18 GMT -5
That was wise VB.
I wonder how Queens University got duped into supporting a sectarian tract?
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jun 24, 2013 0:52:51 GMT -5
That was wise VB. I wonder how Queens University got duped into supporting a sectarian tract? This thesis of his was for a Master of Philosophy, following a Master of Theology. I suppose if one made an evaluation of one religion vis-à-vis the theology of another denomination's theology, then in a philosophy department it might pass if the bias is clear. I personally am not that interested in what one religion thinks of another.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Jun 24, 2013 1:30:03 GMT -5
Clearly Irvine Grey started his research with a bias and finished with the same bias.
Is he a great salesman, or does he have friends in high places at Queens University?
Imagine if a homophobic person (e.g a Westbro Baptist Church member) started research in the area of homosexuality.
Could the research results have any value at all?
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jun 24, 2013 2:15:37 GMT -5
Clearly Irvine Grey started his research with a bias and finished with the same bias. Is he a great salesman, or does he have friends in high places at Queens University? Imagine if a homophobic person (e.g a Westbro Baptist Church member) started research in the area of homosexuality. Could the research results have any value at all? People with biases conduct research all the time -- but the researcher has to defend his findings. And the validity of his findings has to do with their methods of research and the objectivity of their conclusions -- not whether any of the examiners "appreciate" (for lack of a better word) the conclusion. IG's research appears to rely very heavily on anecdotal evidence -- which can be manipulated in a variety of ways. But you are right -- his concluding statement doesn't sound like one that would impress a group of university examiners. On second thought, I can think of a few colleges (certainly not public colleges) where it might pass. I'm wondering how his published book compares with the text of his thesis.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Jun 24, 2013 2:30:35 GMT -5
Would the following suggest that the book IS his research thesis?
Irvine Grey was awarded the degree of Master of Philosophy by Queen's University for this research thesis.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2013 2:43:01 GMT -5
That was wise VB. I wonder how Queens University got duped into supporting a sectarian tract? Interesting how 2x2 supporters can so dishonestly find ways to disregard EVERY single expression of negative concern about their religious construction - Concern from from very closely associated individuals with intimate knowledge of the group .. and even from the most respected academic circles in our society. I understand that sometimes there are somewhat unreasonable and non-founded criticisms by disgruntled ex-members ... but on the whole there is an amazing consistency in a major part of the enormous volume of documented moral concerns regarding the group. Talk about eyes that refuse to see and ears that refuse to hear!!!! There are literally 100s and 100s of stores recorded of clear 2x2 abuse in different ways -- yet the vast majority are never even officially acknowledged or dealt with -- just put off as the wild fantasies of dissenters. But they continue with 'business as usual' leaving an unending trail of sorrow and grief behind them.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2013 3:15:58 GMT -5
I have not read IG’s book, but I have read portions of the concluding chapter. From what I have read I would not worry that any professional would accept his conclusions as objective because he very clearly identifies his biases – I can’t imagine it being acceptable in a non-denominational institution.. I would be more worried that the uneducated reader would miss the bias and accept it as rigidly exact. One of his operating definition for “cult” was: His other stated definition was: His final conclusion was: His concluding justification doesn't mention anything physical or emotional -- even spiritual -- just theological. [/b] [/quote] So Mr Grey gives an explanation for his conclusion of "dangerous sect," which all things considered is a very benign explanation at that. The moral of the story IS READ THE BOOK to assess what he has written and is meaning. To fail to do so makes us puppets of our own imagination, emotions ans not least of all "biases," especially when these matters have been clearly pointed out. Rather than Mr Grey being made out to be an ogre here, hell bent on attacking the 2X2 church, it is myself who should be the real target of abuse on account of my own description of dangerous cult.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Jun 24, 2013 3:19:50 GMT -5
That was wise VB. I wonder how Queens University got duped into supporting a sectarian tract? Interesting how 2x2 supporters can so dishonestly find ways to disregard EVERY negative concern about their religious construction - From very closely associated individuals with intimate knowledge of the group .. and even those from the most respected academic circles in our society. I understand that sometimes there is somewhat unreasonable and non-founded criticism by disgruntled ex-members ... but on the whole there is an amazing consistency in a major part of the enormous volume of documented moral concerns regarding the group. Talk about eyes that refuse to see and ears that refuse to hear!!!! Yes, its amazing how some people can see nothing wrong with the fellowship. And its equally amazing that some people can see nothing right with the fellowship. I like to think that I sit somewhere in the middle.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2013 3:25:23 GMT -5
Interesting how 2x2 supporters can so dishonestly find ways to disregard EVERY negative concern about their religious construction - From very closely associated individuals with intimate knowledge of the group .. and even those from the most respected academic circles in our society. I understand that sometimes there is somewhat unreasonable and non-founded criticism by disgruntled ex-members ... but on the whole there is an amazing consistency in a major part of the enormous volume of documented moral concerns regarding the group. Talk about eyes that refuse to see and ears that refuse to hear!!!! Yes, its amazing how some people can see nothing wrong with the fellowship. And its equally amazing that some people can see nothing right with the fellowship. I like to think that I sit somewhere in the middle. Bert, that's a fair enough position, BUT, my dear friend...................in the sitting position you can comfortably accommodate everything nice and cozy about the sect,however, you need to stand up to address the things that are not right in the sect. Jesus demands nothing less. The best way to get rid of justifiable labels such as "dangerous cult" is to get rid of the dangers and the things that are adversely cultic. Does this make sense?
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Jun 24, 2013 3:34:07 GMT -5
The best way to get rid of justifiable labels such as "dangerous cult" is to get rid of the dangers and the things that are adversely cultic. Is that what Irvine Grey suggested?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2013 3:41:39 GMT -5
Interesting how 2x2 supporters can so dishonestly find ways to disregard EVERY negative concern about their religious construction - From very closely associated individuals with intimate knowledge of the group .. and even those from the most respected academic circles in our society. I understand that sometimes there is somewhat unreasonable and non-founded criticism by disgruntled ex-members ... but on the whole there is an amazing consistency in a major part of the enormous volume of documented moral concerns regarding the group. Talk about eyes that refuse to see and ears that refuse to hear!!!! Yes, its amazing how some people can see nothing wrong with the fellowship. And its equally amazing that some people can see nothing right with the fellowship. I like to think that I sit somewhere in the middle. Remember it is 2x2ism that makes the claim of 'the perfect way' and as a main point it their doctrine clearly disqualify every other group in the world as being unworthy of their full fellowship. What is there to commend about this attitude, when it is so obviously so full of holes? OK -- they do make very good convention stew -- and they do do a marvelous job of detail organization of the special meetings rounds -- they are not completely without their merits.
|
|
|
Post by Greg on Jun 24, 2013 3:47:08 GMT -5
Ram and Edgar quoted "fixit" and refered to him as "Bert". I am pretty sure fixit is not Bert, but perhaps I misunderstand the reference to "Bert".
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2013 4:02:04 GMT -5
Ram and Edgar quote "fixit" and refer to him as "Bert". I am pretty sure fixit is not Bert, but perhaps I misunderstand the reference to "Bert". OK I have removed it!!!
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Jun 24, 2013 4:07:44 GMT -5
OK -- they do make very good convention stew -- and they do do a marvelous job of detail organization of the special meetings rounds -- they are not completely without their merits. I hope Mr Grey made a favorable mention of convention stew in his thesis.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2013 4:34:16 GMT -5
The best way to get rid of justifiable labels such as "dangerous cult" is to get rid of the dangers and the things that are adversely cultic. Is that what Irvine Grey suggested? No he did not! I did. I am sick and tired of Mr Grey getting ALL the attention. I want some. This is getting very close to "toys out of the pram" stuff! Keep in mind Bert, I have not read his book.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2013 4:36:00 GMT -5
Ram and Edgar quote "fixit" and refer to him as "Bert". I am pretty sure fixit is not Bert, but perhaps I misunderstand the reference to "Bert". In the absence of Bert, fixit is Bert. There that sorts things out. Fixit could be noels or anyone else. Whatever, he is Bert because he is Bert-like! Anyway, he is my newest friend!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2013 4:46:58 GMT -5
Hey! Maybe all the Prophets were Bert-like, no? Why am I endlessly connected to every Tom, Dick and Harry on this board?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2013 4:49:45 GMT -5
Hey! Maybe all the Prophets were Bert-like, no? Why am I endlessly connected to every Tom, Dick and Harry on this board? Sorry Bert!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2013 4:57:10 GMT -5
Hey! Maybe all the Prophets were Bert-like, no? Why am I endlessly connected to every Tom, Dick and Harry on this board? I apologise to both Edgar and yourself Bert..........oh and fixit also. Fixit displays many "Bert-like" qualities that I assumed that he was you! Fixit shall henceforth be known as "Bert-like" in order to distinguish the two of you.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2013 7:18:39 GMT -5
OK -- they do make very good convention stew -- and they do do a marvelous job of detail organization of the special meetings rounds -- they are not completely without their merits. I hope Mr Grey made a favorable mention of convention stew in his thesis. Fixit, can you do me a favour and change your name? You see, the only other geezer that I know of who went by the name of fixit was a guy called "Jim." Now he was a celebrity who had his own TV show called "Jim'll Fix-it" in which he went about fixing things for other people. Now that was all very well (at the time) but it turns out that he was a multiple, serial sex predator over many years. Unfortunately he wasn't found out until after his death.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2013 7:21:53 GMT -5
Ram, have you found many of my aliases on this board? Ha !!!!!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2013 7:26:46 GMT -5
Ram, have you found many of my aliases on this board? Ha !!!!! I don't know if I have found any except "Bert," Bert! Anyway, nice to see you back amongst the living. In your absence I was having to stand in for you and attribute much imaginary support and statements from yourself. I knew you wouldn't mind.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Jun 24, 2013 8:54:38 GMT -5
I wonder if IG disclosed his agenda (doing this work to glorify God) while he was working on this, or did he conceal his sectarian agenda until after the book launch? If he concealed his sectarian agenda until after he received his degree, that may be a partial explanation as to why a secular government-funded institution would back a sectarian attack-piece. Also, he may have altered his conclusions for the book, leading the academics to believe that his work lead to a conclusion of a more benign organization. Unless he has stated the two are the same, it is unlikely that the book and the thesis are exactly the same. Just some possibilities. I have asked Mr.Grey about the second possibility, but Mr.Grey isn't forthcoming on answering questions. Before IG launched into his research he corresponded with me, and I decided not to continue a correspondence with him about his project because he said that his objective in studying the 2x2s was to attract people to [his brand] of Christianity. I had no problem discussing the culture of the 2x2s, and I have no problem supporting academic research -- but I was uncomfortable with the notion that I might be participating in some kind of sectarian message I disagreed with. That's precisely the reason I disassociated myself from the workers. To his credit he has been quite upfront about his intentions and faith-based motivations in performing his research, at least on this board. I wonder if he also disclosed this information to the workers with whom he had dealings, or did he go "undercover". I have much less problem with his research being by and for Baptists, and their associated partners in crime (just an expression) than I have in this being presented as academic research with the imprimatur of Queen's University - Belfast.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2013 9:14:18 GMT -5
Before IG launched into his research he corresponded with me, and I decided not to continue a correspondence with him about his project because he said that his objective in studying the 2x2s was to attract people to [his brand] of Christianity. I had no problem discussing the culture of the 2x2s, and I have no problem supporting academic research -- but I was uncomfortable with the notion that I might be participating in some kind of sectarian message I disagreed with. That's precisely the reason I disassociated myself from the workers. To his credit he has been quite upfront about his intentions and faith-based motivations in performing his research, at least on this board. I wonder if he also disclosed this information to the workers with whom he had dealings, or did he go "undercover". I have much less problem with his research being by and for Baptists, and their associated partners in crime (just an expression) than I have in this being presented as academic research with the imprimatur of Queen's University - Belfast. We do know that he was upfront to VB that his purpose was to promote his brand of Christianity. The book cover suggests the same thing: " I always wanted my work to glorify God and lead to the extension of His kingdom"......extension of the kingdom meaning to castigate the 2x2's enough in the hope that they will quit and join his "true" version of Christianity. Whether or not the QUB understood what he was up to can only be determined by examining the full thesis itself. The conclusions indicate no such purpose that he reveals after the fact. We have seen indications that he presented to the QUB that he was merely examining and analyzing the 2x2's in order to categorize them into one of four(?) categories. There is no indication that his work was to attract a following of his brand of religion. We also know that he managed to convince not a few people that he was doing "objective" research into the 2x2's, not trying to lead people out of it. He had our friend Noels totally convinced that this was an objective, outside third party evaluation....so much so that Noels enthusiastically offered his help in telling his part of the story. Personally, I wasn't impressed when I saw him manage his way into the youth group, intended to be a safe place for young people.....unsuspecting that Mr.Grey was looking for ammunition to support his "dangerous cult" allegation.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Jun 24, 2013 9:27:16 GMT -5
That was wise VB. I wonder how Queens University got duped into supporting a sectarian tract? Interesting how 2x2 supporters can so dishonestly find ways to disregard EVERY single expression of negative concern about their religious construction - Concern from from very closely associated individuals with intimate knowledge of the group .. and even from the most respected academic circles in our society. I understand that sometimes there are somewhat unreasonable and non-founded criticisms by disgruntled ex-members ... but on the whole there is an amazing consistency in a major part of the enormous volume of documented moral concerns regarding the group. Talk about eyes that refuse to see and ears that refuse to hear!!!! There are literally 100s and 100s of stores recorded of clear 2x2 abuse in different ways -- yet the vast majority are never even officially acknowledged or dealt with -- just put off as the wild fantasies of dissenters. But they continue with 'business as usual' leaving an unending trail of sorrow and grief behind them. Edgar, the problem I have with your analysis is that the kinds of behaviour we mutually abhor, present to greater or lesser degree in every church and religion. So why single out certain groups as cults on the basis of their theology? Do you have a level of intimate knowledge of any other church or religious group? I do, and I can tell you that the issues that plague the 2x2 fellowship, plague other churches as well. The only difference I can perceive is that some churches dealt sooner and more effectively with the severe effects of socially conforming pressures, effects such as persecution of GLBT, hiding child sexual abuse, emotional and spiritual abuse. These effects were present in every single church 50 and more years ago.
|
|
|
Post by quizzer on Jun 24, 2013 10:26:01 GMT -5
Is that what Irvine Grey suggested? No he did not! I did. I am sick and tired of Mr Grey getting ALL the attention. I want some. This is getting very close to "toys out of the pram" stuff! Keep in mind Bert, I have not read his book. Seems easy enough to get some of this attention, ram. All you have to do is study for a Masters (or Doctorate) in Theology, and then publish a paper on the 2x2s. You could have similar success in the fields of psychology, sociology, and/or history, keeping the 2x2 practices in mind.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2013 11:02:48 GMT -5
No he did not! I did. I am sick and tired of Mr Grey getting ALL the attention. I want some. This is getting very close to "toys out of the pram" stuff! Keep in mind Bert, I have not read his book. Seems easy enough to get some of this attention, ram. All you have to do is study for a Masters (or Doctorate) in Theology, and then publish a paper on the 2x2s. You could have similar success in the fields of psychology, sociology, and/or history, keeping the 2x2 practices in mind. No thanks Quizzer, that won't do. As CD pointed out nobody would listen to me. Not one blind bit of attention there I'm afraid. Got to start chucking out the toys now!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2013 11:02:50 GMT -5
Edgar, the problem I have with your analysis is that the kinds of behaviour we mutually abhor, present to greater or lesser degree in every church and religion. So why single out certain groups as cults on the basis of their theology? Do you have a level of intimate knowledge of any other church or religious group? I do, and I can tell you that the issues that plague the 2x2 fellowship, plague other churches as well. The only difference I can perceive is that some churches dealt sooner and more effectively with the severe effects of socially conforming pressures, effects such as persecution of GLBT, hiding child sexual abuse, emotional and spiritual abuse. These effects were present in every single church 50 and more years ago. The fact that other groups make some of the mistakes 2x2ism makes is absolutely no justification -- Especially serious for 2x2ism when they actively claim to be the ONLY way to heaven. The documented trail of misery, grief and corruption 2x2ism leaves behind is proportionatly far greater than any other group I have been able to find. Disgruntled and dissapointed ex-membership seems to me to be a greater group than of active and supportive membership so it is hard to deny the seriousness of countless 2x2 blunders in policy enforcement -- We have to also realize that the documented ills of 2x2ism are only the tip of the iceberg.
|
|