Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 28, 2015 15:59:20 GMT -5
3 My purpose here is certainly not to argue. I have very clear reasons for participating here which I have set out before and will gladly set out again for anyone who may be interested. You'll also recall that it was you who presented the open invitation to 'talk about this a bit'. That reply was to Mary, it wasn't an open invitation, it was a response to what she said. I didn't expect you to come roaring in from the sidelines to defend Parker. There are many links, it's there if you read carefully and think about it a bit. It's not there. Matt10
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 28, 2015 16:18:00 GMT -5
Thank you for your thoughtful reply, Matt10.
Now could you please attempt to express what God you might believe in, as I am equally curious about such a Being?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 28, 2015 16:23:53 GMT -5
Thank you for your thoughtful reply, Matt10.
Now could you please attempt to express what God you might believe in, as I am equally curious about such a Being? This is much easier. The god who makes the grass grow. Matt10
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 28, 2015 16:37:39 GMT -5
SMILE! Thank you, Matt10. I believe in that God also.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 28, 2015 17:23:20 GMT -5
SMILE! Thank you, Matt10. I believe in that God also. Great. Ive been wanting to start a new church for a while but couldn't find a fellow believer to start a recruitment drive. Let me know when you're ready for a spot of going forth into the highways and byways. You can bring two coats this time. And a purse ..... with a big wad of money in it hopefully. And you won't have to spoof if anyone asks you how this started. Matt10
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 28, 2015 17:53:43 GMT -5
I'm sorry, Matt10, for I perceive some major drawbacks here.
1. While believing in the God you describe, I also believe in One much much greater. 2. It taxes my health and strength to merely post here. 3. It is not my desire to beg any more than I have to in merely existing.
Nonetheless, thank you for the invitation!
|
|
|
Post by SharonArnold on Jul 28, 2015 18:06:45 GMT -5
SMILE! Thank you, Matt10. I believe in that God also. Great. Ive been wanting to start a new church for a while but couldn't find a fellow believer to start a recruitment drive. Let me know when you're ready for a spot of going forth into the highways and byways. You can bring two coats this time. And a purse ..... with a big wad of money in it hopefully. And you won't have to spoof if anyone asks you how this started. Matt10 There needs to be a "thumbs down" posting. Nevertheless, you started out great: [This is much easier. The god who makes the grass grow. Matt10 “Every blade of grass has its angel that bends over it and whispers, 'Grow, grow.'” ~ The Talmud Forget the highways and the byways. Concentrate on the ipods and majestic music in magnificent cathedrals...
|
|
|
Post by Roselyn T on Jul 28, 2015 20:24:00 GMT -5
DMG Perhaps if you read posts previous to the ones reposted it will be a little clearer to you. It was never my intent to divulge any items to any of you but rather to ask questions of yourselves and perhaps incite your senses enough to want to question what may not have been divulged! Elizabeth, After reading an excerpt from 'The Age', which had a couple of pics of you and a little about you and the 2x2's, written in 2013, and finding some of the 'facts' there not quite factual..........why would I read your book? Call it journalistic privilege if you wish, however when things aren't quite right many wrong conclusions can be drawn. When Doug Parker did his 'research', wasn't much of it done from old newspaper columns? I rest my case....... Howitis, what facts were not quite factual?
|
|
|
Post by Roselyn T on Jul 28, 2015 20:28:09 GMT -5
So sorry, appears there is some angst that I've not answered, especially Elizabeth, whom I suspect could well make an issue whether I answer or not, so here goes ......there's only one dead horse you're flogging.........I on the other hand am well and truly alive, and oh so glad of it and pleased to celebrate my life, my hope and joy, God has given me so, so much answered so many prayers, revealed Himself in so many ways that each day I rejoice in all He has given me.....yes even the bad bits because through them He was able to increase my faith!!! Yes my answer will be another question to you Why is itok for DP to have gone across to another country to check out what he'd heard about another man and his church and then draw his own conclusions, when its not ok for me to have travelled in my own country doing much the same? I expect you'll say he published what he found out and let people know, yet if I do this now I'd be speaking against one who gas passed this scene of life and cannot refute what I say and I would be condemned for that! Next question Why is it that you people don't know where to look? Has DP omitted to tell in his writing where this all happened? Where was that church in his parents home? Why then is that information not given? You see I was brought up knowing about this man, no one hid it........so obviously if you people felt the truth aas hid from you and DP didn't divulge certain items of the story..........shouldn't that immediately tell you.....'there's something not quite right here' Maybe its my psychologist brain or my lawyer one, but something tells me that anything I post would be condemned here......the workers et a bad wrap for having technological devices, yet if they are behind in current affairs (as suggested in the underdeveloped countries thread) they are condemned. If they have a bank account or insurance policy(of which they would need in some instances because of the law) oh dear they shouldn't because that's making them an organisation, but because they don't produce booklets on dealing with CSA or DV, then they're not fulfilling their obligations, however then they'd be labelled an organisation all over again. Lastly, Where is your joy?, Your thankfulness?, Your outpouring of annoitedness?.....remember you people have supposedly got it all right the 2x2's are all wrong!! So why shouldn't there be a booklet on dealing with CSA & DV ?
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Jul 28, 2015 21:03:38 GMT -5
My records show that Doug's father was the elder of the church at Padstow NSW.
Do your records agree with this?
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Jul 28, 2015 21:12:24 GMT -5
DMG Perhaps if you read posts previous to the ones reposted it will be a little clearer to you. It was never my intent to divulge any items to any of you but rather to ask questions of yourselves and perhaps incite your senses enough to want to question what may not have been divulged! I did read your previous posts, all of them. I have read all your posts from the beginning of this thread.
If it was never your intent to divulge anything about Doug Parker, but rather to ask questions why did your questions take on such a controversial content such as: "The point I was making is that was Doug Parkers motive to split the 2x2 church? What would have been his reason?"
Do you think that we can't question something unless "you incite our senses?" Why would we need to know where Parker's parents had meeting?
That was not the aim of his book. It wasn't about him, -it was about what he researched & found out!
I think that what we are seeing right now is that some people can't accept what Parker found out.
That is what we are seeing is the "blowback" from that and probably it should have been anticipated because that is the kind of behavior that often happens when someone's beliefs are challenged in any way.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 28, 2015 21:17:26 GMT -5
Quote Doug Parker "...the sooner it is dissolved the better." At least he was honest about it.
|
|
|
Post by elizabethcoleman on Jul 28, 2015 21:39:19 GMT -5
DMG Perhaps if you read posts previous to the ones reposted it will be a little clearer to you. It was never my intent to divulge any items to any of you but rather to ask questions of yourselves and perhaps incite your senses enough to want to question what may not have been divulged! Elizabeth, After reading an excerpt from 'The Age', which had a couple of pics of you and a little about you and the 2x2's, written in 2013, and finding some of the 'facts' there not quite factual..........why would I read your book? Call it journalistic privilege if you wish, however when things aren't quite right many wrong conclusions can be drawn. When Doug Parker did his 'research', wasn't much of it done from old newspaper columns? I rest my case....... You realise, I presume, that I didn't write the article? Chris is a respected journalist who wrote in the article in good faith with the best information he had at the time, and he used a number of sources. If your only opinion of someone is something you once read about them in one newspaper article (written by someone else), I guess that says a lot. Any technical errors do not change the substance of the article. As usual, you fail to provide any particulars. You seem to draw all your conclusions from suppositions and assumptions rather than first hand knowledge, so despite all the legal vernacular, I trust you never actually went into law. Of course, if you genuinely wanted to query anything 'not quite factual', you could go to the subject of the article and ask them specific questions to clarify what they said or what was said about them. I suspect you prefer to rest your case with your own limited version.
|
|
|
Post by fred on Jul 28, 2015 21:47:29 GMT -5
Quote Doug Parker "...the sooner it is dissolved the better." At least he was honest about it. I suspect he was talking about a 'belief'. Anyway, this is not a quote from his book.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 28, 2015 22:13:02 GMT -5
Of course it isn't a quote from his book! Would you find such a quote on the TLT or the TTT or "Has The Truth Set You Free"? These authors won't tell you the WHOLE TRUTH!
But it's a fact. You should know that.
|
|
|
Post by Roselyn T on Jul 29, 2015 1:25:07 GMT -5
Quote Doug Parker "...the sooner it is dissolved the better." At least he was honest about it. Bert, the thing is that a lot of people would have the same opinion considering things that have gone on and been covered up. Do you ever wonder how the girls that have been abused by so called "workers" feel about your church ?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2015 6:39:55 GMT -5
That's a change of subject. I wished to point out his motive. And again - he was at one point honest about it, but secret about it in "The Secret Sect"
All the other book and web authors openly deny their motives to those who don't know better.
|
|
|
Post by fred on Jul 29, 2015 6:52:09 GMT -5
Of course it isn't a quote from his book! Would you find such a quote on the TLT or the TTT or "Has The Truth Set You Free"? These authors won't tell you the WHOLE TRUTH!
But it's a fact. You should know that. With all the to-ing and fro-ing about the man Parker, here is my understanding of the facts: He was deeply committed to becoming a preacher in the fellowship, having sold all preparing to do so. It is my observation that the more deeply a person is committed the more deeply they are hurt when they realise they have been deceived. Add to the deception the subsequent very poor treatment of himself and his family and you see a picture of DP lashing out at those he perceives as being responsible, a perfectly understandable reaction. Years pass, but the hurt remains and he decides to put into print all that he has learned as a warning to others. This work is much more measured, thoughtful and factual - more like the work of a scholar. A work that in the ensuing half century has not really been refuted. In my understanding this is an overview of the timeline of events under discussion.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2015 7:26:06 GMT -5
I will do a thread on this sometime, in fact I am doing a whole web site on it.
... this business of being "deceived." I loved the Truth before I asked where it came from. I understood, and felt, something timeless about the Gospel I heard. Nothing contrived, modernized, amended,updated, politicized, rationalized or monetized.
There is no imitation. It's from the beginning - the real deal. This is what drives people to give up all, for life, and preach it.
What Parker suggests is that he found appeal in the "thought" there was an unbroken line of Workers to Jesus. No worker told me that. Doubt anyone told him.
In other words his appeal was the notion of Apostolic Succession (AS) He could have joined the Catholics if that was his REAL motive for joining and leaving. They will give you the list of Popes back to Peter.
But in my head here's the kicker - there's seems there was no other appeal, just AS.
There's this thing I call "differentiation" - differentiation is how one church tries to show it's "different" from the next. The Catholics main differentiation is AS.
Repeat - if I found proof of such a succession (like Nathan searches for) I would destroy it. We don't want differentiators. You love the Gospel we preach, or you don't.
If a gimmick will get you in, then all the devil needs is a gimmick to get you out again. And that's all that was needed to shift this man.
I take an elderly neighbor to her Anglican Church from time to time. I think about Parker as I observe the Minister, and wonder what he thought the first time they put their vesture on him. It's as if he's thinking to himself that nothing is from the beginning.
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Jul 29, 2015 7:39:04 GMT -5
And the gimmick the workers use to get people in and keep them in is Apostolic Succession which they began to preached around 1907...they have also excommunicated friends for not believing it. Click here to read how this happened...it wasn't always that way--not for the first 10 years after their start in 1897.
|
|
|
Post by matisse on Jul 29, 2015 7:54:25 GMT -5
.... I take an elderly neighbor to her Anglican Church from time to time. I think about Parker as I observe the Minister, and wonder what he thought the first time they put their vesture on him. It's as if he's thinking to himself that nothing is from the beginning. Perhaps he's thinking of the precedent for special priestly vestments given in Exodus: Exodus 28:6-14 King James Version (KJV) 6 And they shall make the ephod of gold, of blue, and of purple, of scarlet, and fine twined linen, with cunning work. 7 It shall have the two shoulderpieces thereof joined at the two edges thereof; and so it shall be joined together. 8 And the curious girdle of the ephod, which is upon it, shall be of the same, according to the work thereof; even of gold, of blue, and purple, and scarlet, and fine twined linen. 9 And thou shalt take two onyx stones, and grave on them the names of the children of Israel: 10 Six of their names on one stone, and the other six names of the rest on the other stone, according to their birth. 11 With the work of an engraver in stone, like the engravings of a signet, shalt thou engrave the two stones with the names of the children of Israel: thou shalt make them to be set in ouches of gold. 12 And thou shalt put the two stones upon the shoulders of the ephod for stones of memorial unto the children of Israel: and Aaron shall bear their names before the Lord upon his two shoulders for a memorial. 13 And thou shalt make ouches of gold; 14 And two chains of pure gold at the ends; of wreathen work shalt thou make them, and fasten the wreathen chains to the ouches.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2015 8:43:20 GMT -5
True. He has to rationalize it somehow. But it is implicit in the Gospels, and explicit in Romans and Hebrews, that the Priesthood, with its symbolic vesture, like the Temple itself - is done away with in Christ.
God gave these as 'shadows' of the Real.
|
|
|
Post by jondough on Jul 29, 2015 8:50:21 GMT -5
I will do a thread on this sometime, in fact I am doing a whole web site on it.
... this business of being "deceived." I loved the Truth before I asked where it came from. I understood, and felt, something timeless about the Gospel I heard. Nothing contrived, modernized, amended,updated, politicized, rationalized or monetized.
There is no imitation. It's from the beginning - the real deal. This is what drives people to give up all, for life, and preach it.
What Parker suggests is that he found appeal in the "thought" there was an unbroken line of Workers to Jesus. No worker told me that. Doubt anyone told him.
In other words his appeal was the notion of Apostolic Succession (AS) He could have joined the Catholics if that was his REAL motive for joining and leaving. They will give you the list of Popes back to Peter.
But in my head here's the kicker - there's seems there was no other appeal, just AS.
There's this thing I call "differentiation" - differentiation is how one church tries to show it's "different" from the next. The Catholics main differentiation is AS.
Repeat - if I found proof of such a succession (like Nathan searches for) I would destroy it. We don't want differentiators. You love the Gospel we preach, or you don't.
If a gimmick will get you in, then all the devil needs is a gimmick to get you out again. And that's all that was needed to shift this man.
I take an elderly neighbor to her Anglican Church from time to time. I think about Parker as I observe the Minister, and wonder what he thought the first time they put their vesture on him. It's as if he's thinking to himself that nothing is from the beginning. This to me is one of your better post. Unlike you, I am thankful for Cherie's research and documentation of our history. I've said many times that I embrace our history. I find Cherie's research very factual. In fact, she goes through great lengths to insure that it is. Its years of research and verification. The fact that we (all F&W) would know the truth about the "Truth" would make it a much better fellowship. I don't see all this as tools to destroy. I see it as something that would make our fellowship much much richer. Again, unlike you, I acknowledge that until recent years, I thought that we had Workers that went all the way back to the Apostles. I guess it could have been assumption on our parts somewhat. I think that because of the secrecy of the actual history, and the fact that we were taught that we were the ONLY Way, that it caused this assumption that maybe fed on itself. I'm just guessing. I'm sure you've heard this before - I have many times: "if they have an honest heart, they will be led to Truth" (meaning our fellowship). Never the less, its best that we know the facts, then decide for ourselves. I agree with you, we have a great fellowship that is a result of what Christ taught. Like all other fellowships - right or wrong, we are NOT perfect. But we are mostly made up of imperfect, honest, good hearted people really wanting to do what they think, and are moved to do, that is right. We have our tares - but that does not define us.
|
|
|
Post by slowtosee on Jul 29, 2015 9:01:16 GMT -5
By defending and hiding tares or wrong , it paints a far worse picture, than just clearly admitting we are just as human and subject to failure as anyone else. It reminds me of the saying "he's a liar, he lies, even when not necessary " lol Let's correct what we can and actually follow up on our "testimony " we hear so often " I want to do better in coming days ". Alvin
|
|
|
Post by Jesse_Lackman on Jul 29, 2015 9:14:14 GMT -5
You realise, I presume, that I didn't write the article? Chris is a respected journalist who wrote in the article in good faith with the best information he had at the time, and he used a number of sources. If your only opinion of someone is something you once read about them in one newspaper article (written by someone else), I guess that says a lot. Any technical errors do not change the substance of the article. As usual, you fail to provide any particulars. You seem to draw all your conclusions from suppositions and assumptions rather than first hand knowledge, so despite all the legal vernacular, I trust you never actually went into law. Of course, if you genuinely wanted to query anything 'not quite factual', you could go to the subject of the article and ask them specific questions to clarify what they said or what was said about them. I suspect you prefer to rest your case with your own limited version. Did Chris actually go to meetings or interview currently professing people, or did he go by what only activist exes wrote and said? The problem with what's written and published by activist exes about the fellowship is it often strays far from the moorings of the reality for the majority of those in the fellowship: that they are happy, satisfied, assured, and at peace with being in the fellowship. Practically everything activist exes write gets very selectively broad brushed to the point of absolute doom and gloom - very little of what's positive ever gets told by activist exes. Thus what avtivist exes write and publish are a very limited version of the fellowship, often so vituperative people who know the reality of the fellowship see though it. The truth of what I'm saying here is clearly illustrated by this post from the now defunct TLT proboard; A co-worker in my office pointed me here...he had found the site [TheLyingTruth] after a comment I made during a brief discussion with him about my beliefs. He mentioned that as he read, he wondered what in the world I'd gotten myself into. But the more he read, and reflected on what he knew of me, the less he could take the writings seriously. There's an obvious mismatch between what is said about the Truth and what he knows from observing my life. See that? The outside observer read TLT; wondered what his professing coworker was into; then realized TLT presented a very limited version of the fellowship and a view that did NOT match what he observed in his professing co-workers life.
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Jul 29, 2015 10:37:21 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Jesse_Lackman on Jul 29, 2015 11:53:47 GMT -5
That's one tree in the forest Cherie, NOT the whole forest.
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Jul 29, 2015 12:05:02 GMT -5
That's one tree in the forest Cherie, NOT the whole forest. It's the majority of the forest...whether you admit to it or not.
|
|