|
|
Post by MsMarie on Jul 23, 2008 12:17:12 GMT -5
My husband recently found this book in England and phoned me about it today while I am here in USA. He was amazed by it and said I had to buy and read it. It is by an author called Reid and describes a widespread home meeting fellowship in Canada apparently running parallel at the same time as the 2x2 fellowship. It was/is organised identically.
Has anyone read this? Is is truth or fiction? Did these people have anything contact with The Truth ministry? Any comments?
|
|
|
|
Post by charlene on Jul 23, 2008 12:30:01 GMT -5
As far as I understand it is a truthful account of different things that happened. When you do read the book--or your husband will remember this section:
When 2 workers were kicked out of a small town and a small school house (Aredale or Dumont, Iowa) it was my grandpa who stepped up and publicly invited them to have meetings in his home. Which they did. My grandparents never publicly "stood to their feet" and professed, however, my dad and his brother did, and are still in this way of living.
Charlene
|
|
|
|
Post by recentarriver on Jul 23, 2008 19:10:40 GMT -5
www.thegateseldomfound.com/author.html The preceeding link is Raymond Reid's website promoting his book. Raymond is Canadian. Yes I read it. It is fiction and has realistic accounts of actual events (with a few details altered) of the early days of the 2x2 fellowship. RA
|
|
|
|
Post by MsMarie on Jul 25, 2008 20:36:03 GMT -5
Thank you for these explanations. I had a feeling it was a work of fiction but my husband insisted it is not and thought it was an entirely separate group which arose spontaneously. I think he will be a little disappointed...
|
|
|
|
Post by Rob O on Jul 25, 2008 20:42:49 GMT -5
I felt it was, well, naive, but not in a negative way. I thought maybe Raymond wanted the history to be like he depicts. The picture he paints is, IMO, a very romanticised image. Nothing wrong with that as long as it is understood as fiction.
Disclaimer: However, I only read it the once and that was probably 7-8 years ago so I may be mis-remembering.
|
|
|
|
Post by recentarriver on Jul 26, 2008 14:13:10 GMT -5
I felt it was, well, naive, but not in a negative way. I thought maybe Raymond wanted the history to be like he depicts. The picture he paints is, IMO, a very romanticised image. Nothing wrong with that as long as it is understood as fiction. Disclaimer: However, I only read it the once and that was probably 7-8 years ago so I may be mis-remembering. Rob your description seems accurate IMO too. I see it as Raymond's way of wishful thinking the history of the "Truth" fellowship. It is a sugarcoated way to look at things - even tho there are some tragic details in the book. I read 2 rough drafts (2nd one skimmed through), then read one of the "final" copies but haven't read the most recent "final" copy. A publisher made requests for some changes and I haven't read that version. At the time this book was circulating among the friends in my area the workers were warning them to not read it. RA |
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jul 26, 2008 16:21:48 GMT -5
Disclaimer: However, I only read it the once and that was probably 7-8 years ago so I may be mis-remembering. You can't admit this. Memories, especially when they support out point of view, are inerrant. Memories of others, even those of trauma from 40-40 years ago, are accurate and should be accepted without question. You big troublemaker. |
|
|
|
Post by ilylo on Jul 26, 2008 18:25:46 GMT -5
rational,
I'm sorry to see that you are behaving just like Jason Landless on this issue.
|
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jul 26, 2008 19:41:52 GMT -5
rational, I'm sorry to see that you are behaving just like Jason Landless on this issue. I wonder if that is because I joked about Rob and his memory or if because I am realistic about the frailties of human memory. |
|
|
|
Post by Rob O on Jul 26, 2008 22:04:54 GMT -5
It's a pointed joke and is more relevant to highly literate, individualised cultures where memory is not developed. It's also self-defeating because human memory is the basis of our reality. Without memory none of us could function. It's also non-conversant with cutting edge studies of orally dominant cultures. Sorry to spoil the joke.
|
|
|
|
Post by ilylo on Jul 26, 2008 22:54:13 GMT -5
rational, I'm sorry to see that you are behaving just like Jason Landless on this issue. I wonder if that is because I joked about Rob and his memory or if because I am realistic about the frailties of human memory. It's your behavior. You figure it out. |
|
shushy
Royal Member
Warning
50%
Posts: 8,009
|
Post by shushy on Jul 27, 2008 4:12:43 GMT -5
The boxing ring is over there guys>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Want me to ref?
|
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jul 27, 2008 8:29:06 GMT -5
I wonder if that is because I joked about Rob and his memory or if because I am realistic about the frailties of human memory. It's your behavior. You figure it out. I know what I wrote and why I did it. It was your particular judgment of my comments I was asking about. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 27, 2008 8:42:45 GMT -5
Thank you for these explanations. I had a feeling it was a work of fiction but my husband insisted it is not and thought it was an entirely separate group which arose spontaneously. I think he will be a little disappointed... Actually, your husband shouldn't be entirely disappointed. While the book is technically fiction, and the overall story is fiction, almost all of the situations and substories are based on true stories. I would characterize the book as fiction based on an amalgam of true stories. I believe RR used a lot of old letters as well as handed down stories to put this together. I've spoken to RR and this is the way I understood the book to be put together. For anyone who hasn't read the latest edition, I understand it is much more readable than the first edition. RR's new publisher (self-published in the first edition), asked him to rewrite it and I understand the latest version is more story-oriented, more entertaining. I suspect that RR was trying to present an idealized view of the fellowship. I don't doubt for a minute that he is under any illusion that real life then or now was quite like that. |
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jul 27, 2008 8:56:10 GMT -5
It's also self-defeating because human memory is the basis of our reality. Without memory none of us could function. Which makes its study so interesting. Personally I recently was searching for a location with my daughter and although we both had been there in the past we held widely divergent memories of the area. Location of docks, houses, and a large rock that was actually the object of our search. We were both amazed when we finally located the site at the variance from reality of both of our memories and actually wondered how the human species had survived as long as it has! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 27, 2008 9:41:11 GMT -5
Probably just an indication that minute details don't mean much in the big picture of survival.
|
|
outsidein
Junior Member
Don't know much...
Posts: 167
|
Post by outsidein on Sept 17, 2008 7:40:27 GMT -5
It's interesting... I emailed Raymond Reid courtesy of his publisher asking him if this was a "2x2" based book. He denied it .
|
|
|
|
Post by kiwi on Oct 9, 2008 0:44:25 GMT -5
It's interesting... I emailed Raymond Reid courtesy of his publisher asking him if this was a "2x2" based book. He denied it . Maybe if you asked if it was a fellowship based book you may have got a different answer  |
|
