|
Post by sacerdotal on Jun 21, 2013 9:31:34 GMT -5
Mr. Grey,
Are you personally offended that one can be a preacher in the 2x2 by simply answering a call from God to go forth and preach? Are you offended that they do not honor Theology degrees or even the field of study called "Theology"? Are you offended that they preach only the Bible and do not go into all of the mumbo jumbo of theology? Are you offended that they preach AGAINST any that draw a salary for preaching as only being like a hireling that do not care for the laity?
It seems to me that by labeling the group a "dangerous cult", you are really saying that they are a "dangerous cult to those of us who enrich ourselves off the word of the Lord."
|
|
|
Post by sharingtheriches on Jun 21, 2013 11:29:09 GMT -5
Sac! In reality I must remind you of something and that is the workers are NOT non-paid employees!~ They receive unknown amounts of money in handshakes and letters, they're given whole estates for their use at whatever they decide, and then we cannot even begin to "dollarize" all the laptop computers, most of them being top of the trade, cellphones, used to have the "email machines" then went totally to computers with email and now some are given these highdollar phones or tablets to where they can email and surf the web as they sit supposedly visiting with some of the friends. There are few of the workers who can enter a person's house and stay with visiting this person, they're always checking their email, and now they're so busy looking things up on their tablets and iPhones,etc.....
All of these things cost money, SAC and they ARE considered part of the workers' wages....they also have top of the line clothing, they're almost always given the best bed in the house....room and board are NOT cheap commodities these days! So again the workers are salaried much like I was when I lived with a hundred year old lady...I was paid a handshake check each month and my room and board WAS part of my wages...I had to dollarize them for the IRS.
That said, also you are forgetting that Irvine has literally gone out on faith lines to work in Kilifi, Africa and I think he's done that about 3 if not 4 times by now....so he isn't ignorant of the "going out in faith lines"....and not netting a dollared salary for his efforts.
Let's try to be personally kind with our questions of his book.....I think if people feel as strongly adverse to his wording, then I think you and anyone else that feels that "bad" about his book, should read it and read it over again to understand where he is coming from......maybe the 2x2 eyes will begin to see more then they've seen for a long time, eh?
|
|
|
Post by irvinegrey on Jun 21, 2013 11:46:37 GMT -5
Mr. Grey, Are you personally offended that one can be a preacher in the 2x2 by simply answering a call from God to go forth and preach? Are you offended that they do not honor Theology degrees or even the field of study called "Theology"? Are you offended that they preach only the Bible and do not go into all of the mumbo jumbo of theology? Are you offended that they preach AGAINST any that draw a salary for preaching as only being like a hireling that do not care for the laity? It seems to me that by labeling the group a "dangerous cult", you are really saying that they are a "dangerous cult to those of us who enrich ourselves off the word of the Lord." I have no intention of being drawn into answering questions from those who have not read my book that shows the context and evidence that led to my conclusions.
|
|
|
Post by sacerdotal on Jun 21, 2013 12:17:48 GMT -5
Mr. Grey, Are you personally offended that one can be a preacher in the 2x2 by simply answering a call from God to go forth and preach? Are you offended that they do not honor Theology degrees or even the field of study called "Theology"? Are you offended that they preach only the Bible and do not go into all of the mumbo jumbo of theology? Are you offended that they preach AGAINST any that draw a salary for preaching as only being like a hireling that do not care for the laity? It seems to me that by labeling the group a "dangerous cult", you are really saying that they are a "dangerous cult to those of us who enrich ourselves off the word of the Lord." I have no intention of being drawn into answering questions from those who have not read my book that shows the context and evidence that led to my conclusions. This is exactly what many of workers say when they are asked "uncomfortable" questions. But, to reply to your "context" comment- a pig in any context is still a pig- whether the pig be in a fence or a palace. I think that you knowingly used the words "dangerous cult" meaning for it to mean "dangerous cult."
|
|
|
Post by Persona non grata on Jun 21, 2013 12:21:55 GMT -5
Mr. Grey, Are you personally offended that one can be a preacher in the 2x2 by simply answering a call from God to go forth and preach? Are you offended that they do not honor Theology degrees or even the field of study called "Theology"? Are you offended that they preach only the Bible and do not go into all of the mumbo jumbo of theology? Are you offended that they preach AGAINST any that draw a salary for preaching as only being like a hireling that do not care for the laity? It seems to me that by labeling the group a "dangerous cult", you are really saying that they are a "dangerous cult to those of us who enrich ourselves off the word of the Lord." I have no intention of being drawn into answering questions from those who have not read my book that shows the context and evidence that led to my conclusions. So Mr Grey, you feel that making comments and/raising questions based only on limited exposure to your book is unacceptable and yet its perfectly acceptable for you to write the entire book based only on very limited exposure to the fellowship?
|
|
|
Post by Persona non grata on Jun 21, 2013 12:49:31 GMT -5
I have a couple more questions for you Mr Grey:
Given that your purpose for the book is "to glorify God and lead to the extension of His kingdom" by saving souls from the perils of this "cult", who then are your target audience?
Are they potential converts to the movement or are they current members of the movement?
In the case of potential converts you say "Their missions are usually advertised in local papers as non-denominational Bible Talks or Gospel Messages but outsiders seldom venture in to these events."
In the case of current members you say "His conclusions will not receive universal acclaim, especially from those within the movement."
By your own admission then, and by your refusal to engage in discussion here, I would say that leaves very little hope for your book contributing much at all to the extension of God's kingdom and one could well argue that your time and efforts would have been better spent on alternative evangelistic methods.
|
|
|
Post by Happy Feet on Jun 21, 2013 17:41:25 GMT -5
I would say the book speaks for itself. I am sure it has a conclusion and is of benefit to those who want to know more about the group.
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Jun 21, 2013 20:41:57 GMT -5
I have no intention of being drawn into answering questions from those who have not read my book that shows the context and evidence that led to my conclusions. Personally, I understand Irvine's sentiment above and have felt and replied the same at times. Like Irvine, I have also written a book and sometimes people have demanded support for statements in it that they have cherry picked without reading the whole book. When the answers are in the book...it's not my practice to spend MY time spoonfeeding those who are demanding and yet can read for themselves--but don't--for whatever reason. My advice is to read the book before getting bent out of shape...see what led up to the conclusions. Condemnation without investigation is ignorance.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 21, 2013 21:27:03 GMT -5
I have no intention of being drawn into answering questions from those who have not read my book that shows the context and evidence that led to my conclusions. Personally, I understand Irvine's sentiment above and have felt and replied the same at times. Like Irvine, I have also written a book and sometimes people have demanded support for statements in it that they have cherry picked without reading the whole book. When the answers are in the book...it's not my practice to spend MY time spoonfeeding those who are demanding and yet can read for themselves--but don't--for whatever reason. My advice is to read the book before getting bent out of shape...see what led up to the conclusions. Condemnation without investigation is ignorance.
The OP listed questions which were not directly related to the book. Mr.Grey doesn't seem interested in engaging in any discussion, book related or not. I have asked non-book related questions and got silence. The book doesn't seem easy to get so it becomes a moot point to say "oh read the book first". Are there any guarantees that Mr.Grey will answer my questions if I excise a piece of my life to read the whole book? I suppose I am asking the wind here, but why is there not an electronic version of this book available? Amazon would jump on it. "If you are a publisher or author and hold the digital rights to a book, you can sell a digital version of it in our Kindle Store." Here is how: kdp.amazon.com/self-publishing/signin?ie=UTF8&language=en_US A new book can be available through Amazon within 24 hours and buyers can receive it in minutes. There is also a 70% royalty available for UK clients so there would be more cash available for Mr.Grey's God-glorifying activities.
|
|
|
Post by irvinegrey on Jun 22, 2013 2:05:30 GMT -5
If there is any difficulty getting my book you can order directly from my website, www.irvinegrey.com. For those outside the UK can click on the UK button and buy at the UK price and I will pay the extra postage costs.
|
|
|
Post by lazarus66 on Jun 22, 2013 5:16:25 GMT -5
Sac, you stated this, and I quote, " Are you offended that they preach only the Bible". You are implying that the workers "sermons" are accurate and bible based. I find that the workers, if they were only to use the bible and not talk about the "rules and boundaries" that the original workers and others that have come down the pike since, they would not be able to speak at all. It they were held to a standard of preaching ALL of the principals in the bible and not leave out volumes of things that they do not practice, there would be no preaching again. The workers do not preach the bible or follow it's practices as they should, and they omit, and lie about many things. As I have stated, I asked many that were with William Irvine from the beginning, where this all started, and was told it started with Jesus and the old "shores of Galilee" spiel. They focus on outward appearance and do not have backing from the bible to back up what they preach,regarding dress, hair and other things, and they make up things to make it appear that they are following the bible when in fact they skirt many important issues and have their own little "rabbit trails" (Everett Swanson's words)and they avoid real teachings on the bible, so I don't see how you can even bring that up as a valid point. I have not read Irvine's book, but have corresponded with him in numerous emails, and find him to be an honest and much more spiritual man than most workers I have known or heard from. i feel like he has a very good grip on what the 2x2's are really all about, and would take his "written word" on the 2x2's far above the "unwritten prattlings" of the workers that I have encountered in my lifetime. i have seen the workers turn 180 degrees on so many subjects and can continue to do wo as they will not put in writing what certain ones believe on certain given days or subjects. Let the workers put their thoughts in writing, then have all agree and put their stamp of approval on the "doctrine" and then we can discuss what is really the workers way of looking at the bible. I think you will find that few workers really agree enough to put their thoughts in writing and then to have them all "think alike" would really be a boost. I might even consider that worth reading , but it will never happen as they do not agree from state to state, province to province and country to country.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 22, 2013 6:08:46 GMT -5
So Mr Grey, you feel that making comments and/raising questions based only on limited exposure to your book is unacceptable and yet its perfectly acceptable for you to write the entire book based only on very limited exposure to the fellowship? Mr Grey’s maternal grandparents professed as did many of his relatives. He grew up in County Fermanagh on the periphery of the 2x2 movement during which time he attended Fermanagh Convention and Sunday morning meetings. He also met Edward Cooney. Missions were also held on his father's farm. So closely was he associated with the fellowship that his grandmother commented 'you would make a great worker'. During his research he interviewed a number of 2x2 workers, including Tommy Gamble, overseer of Ireland and senior leader in Europe and perhaps beyond. He undertook a literature review of all the books, newspapers, websites etc. currently available on the 2x2 church and engaged directly with some of the authors. He was a member of the TMB for almost 5 years during which time he actively followed many of the threads and engaged directly with members and ex-members from across the world on various topics. Through the TMB and his own website he invited members and ex members from across the world to contribute to his research, some of whom did through written contributions. He also met with many people associated with the 2x2 movement, including me. I spent over an hour with Mr Grey one fine spring day discussing aspects of the 2x2 church and my experience. He also spent many hours attending missions and conventions both in Ireland and Sweden as part of his research and would likely have spent time at Sunday morning meetings had he been allowed. That said, can you tell me how you came to the conclusion that Mr Grey had “ only very limited exposure to the fellowship”? Matt10
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Jun 22, 2013 7:27:06 GMT -5
That said, can you tell me how you came to the conclusion that Mr Grey had “ only very limited exposure to the fellowship”? Matt10 IG's work reveals the extent of his knowledge of the fellowship.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Jun 22, 2013 11:06:20 GMT -5
Actually, we all have our own perceptions of the same thing. In this case the 2x2 group. His perceptions and what he saw will be very different from what I would see for eg. Especially being in a different country and a country where the group began. There has to be different dynamics involved. Maybe instead of getting upset by 'his perception', we can just view it as that. Some one else's view and experience that has been put into print. We do it here daily actually, only difference is we aren't being published.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 22, 2013 11:50:39 GMT -5
Actually, we all have our own perceptions of the same thing. In this case the 2x2 group. His perceptions and what he saw will be very different from what I would see for eg. Especially being in a different country and a country where the group began. There has to be different dynamics involved. Maybe instead of getting upset by 'his perception', we can just view it as that. Some one else's view and experience that has been put into print. We do it here daily actually, only difference is we aren't being published. The problem is not in Mr.Grey's personal perception. The problem is that his perception is contained in a Queen's University-endorsed thesis considered as credible workmanship. It's not the QUB is endorsing his conclusions, but their backing as a valid thesis lends a level of authority to the writing that is not contained in any layman's writing. There are numerous books out there on the 2x2 subject. None will get the credibility that this one will because of its QUB connection. That is the reason for concern and scrutiny. Had Mr.Grey written it as "citizen Mr.Grey", I probably would not have even commented on it. People do have their perceptions which vary greatly and they are welcome to them, and they can publish them to their heart's content. However, this is something that is considered a somewhat authoritative document which has condemned a whole group of people to the label of "dangerous cult". That in itself is both dangerous and irresponsible.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 22, 2013 12:15:20 GMT -5
Actually, we all have our own perceptions of the same thing. In this case the 2x2 group. His perceptions and what he saw will be very different from what I would see for eg. Especially being in a different country and a country where the group began. There has to be different dynamics involved. Maybe instead of getting upset by 'his perception', we can just view it as that. Some one else's view and experience that has been put into print. We do it here daily actually, only difference is we aren't being published. The problem is not in Mr.Grey's personal perception. The problem is that his perception is contained in a Queen's University-endorsed thesis considered as credible workmanship. It's not the QUB is endorsing his conclusions, but their backing as a valid thesis lends a level of authority to the writing that is not contained in any layman's writing. There are numerous books out there on the 2x2 subject. None will get the credibility that this one will because of its QUB connection. That is the reason for concern and scrutiny. Had Mr.Grey written it as "citizen Mr.Grey", I probably would not have even commented on it. People do have their perceptions which vary greatly and they are welcome to them, and they can publish them to their heart's content. However, this is something that is considered a somewhat authoritative document which has condemned a whole group of people to the label of "dangerous cult". That in itself is both dangerous and irresponsible. This is why I sought clarification for Mr Grey's use of the "dangerous." It has been justified by several other posters, including myself. However, like the cult definition, Mr Grey's understanding may well differ greatly from my own (and other peoples'). Personally I would probably (for my understanding) have used something akin to: "People should beware that although this is a sincere and well intended sect, having at its heart many Godly principles, there does exist many adverse cultic influences that could be seriously damaging to the unwary or vulnerable."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 22, 2013 12:47:07 GMT -5
The problem is not in Mr.Grey's personal perception. The problem is that his perception is contained in a Queen's University-endorsed thesis considered as credible workmanship. It's not the QUB is endorsing his conclusions, but their backing as a valid thesis lends a level of authority to the writing that is not contained in any layman's writing. There are numerous books out there on the 2x2 subject. None will get the credibility that this one will because of its QUB connection. That is the reason for concern and scrutiny. Had Mr.Grey written it as "citizen Mr.Grey", I probably would not have even commented on it. People do have their perceptions which vary greatly and they are welcome to them, and they can publish them to their heart's content. However, this is something that is considered a somewhat authoritative document which has condemned a whole group of people to the label of "dangerous cult". That in itself is both dangerous and irresponsible. This is why I sought clarification for Mr Grey's use of the "dangerous." It has been justified a several other posters, including myself. However, like the cult definition, Mr Grey's understanding may well differ greatly from my own (and other peoples'). Personally I would probably (for my understanding) have used something akin to: "People should beware that although this is a sincere and well intended sect, having at its heart many Godly principles, there does exist many adverse cultic influences that could be seriously damaging to the unwary or vulnerable."Something like that would definitely be an improvement ram although it still begs further explanation of the potential damages. This of course should be a simple and easy matter for anyone who has studied the 2x2's.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Jun 22, 2013 14:17:48 GMT -5
Actually, we all have our own perceptions of the same thing. In this case the 2x2 group. His perceptions and what he saw will be very different from what I would see for eg. Especially being in a different country and a country where the group began. There has to be different dynamics involved. Maybe instead of getting upset by 'his perception', we can just view it as that. Some one else's view and experience that has been put into print. We do it here daily actually, only difference is we aren't being published. The problem is not in Mr.Grey's personal perception. The problem is that his perception is contained in a Queen's University-endorsed thesis considered as credible workmanship. It's not the QUB is endorsing his conclusions, but their backing as a valid thesis lends a level of authority to the writing that is not contained in any layman's writing. There are numerous books out there on the 2x2 subject. None will get the credibility that this one will because of its QUB connection. That is the reason for concern and scrutiny. Had Mr.Grey written it as "citizen Mr.Grey", I probably would not have even commented on it. People do have their perceptions which vary greatly and they are welcome to them, and they can publish them to their heart's content. However, this is something that is considered a somewhat authoritative document which has condemned a whole group of people to the label of "dangerous cult". That in itself is both dangerous and irresponsible. Yes, that is true CD. This one will possibly have more 'clout' and that may be unfortunate. I have not read the book so I don't feel qualified to comment on the repercussions of his wording. I do feel it is very unfortunate that he has labelled the group as a 'dangerous cult'.
|
|
|
Post by findingtruth on Jun 23, 2013 0:24:43 GMT -5
Please explain how IG is guilty of documenting his conclusions of the fellowship based on limited experience. Have members of the 2x2 system been any less guilty for the last 100+ years of presenting anyone outside of their fellowship as lost or without understanding of Truth? I can state without question that the majority of 2x2 members have very little if any real understanding of those who follow Christ outside of their fellowship. Is this not like the pot calling the kettle black? Isn't it time for some honesty here?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2013 0:36:30 GMT -5
Please explain how IG is guilty of documenting his conclusions of the fellowship based on limited experience. Have members of the 2x2 system been any less guilty for the last 100+ years of presenting anyone outside of their fellowship as lost or without understanding of Truth? I can state without question that the majority of 2x2 members have very little if any real understanding of those who follow Christ outside of their fellowship. Is this not like the pot calling the kettle black? Isn't it time for some honesty here? You can't justify IG's poor behaviour by pointing out someone else's poor behaviour. They are two separate issues.
|
|
|
Post by quizzer on Jun 23, 2013 5:49:46 GMT -5
i have seen the workers turn 180 degrees on so many subjects and can continue to do wo as they will not put in writing what certain ones believe on certain given days or subjects. Let the workers put their thoughts in writing, then have all agree and put their stamp of approval on the "doctrine" and then we can discuss what is really the workers way of looking at the bible. I think you will find that few workers really agree enough to put their thoughts in writing and then to have them all "think alike" would really be a boost. I might even consider that worth reading , but it will never happen as they do not agree from state to state, province to province and country to country. I agree with your post, but my thoughts are that the workers wouldn't sign such a document for other reasons. Workers don't want to confined in any way, and they don't want to have to deal with issues in any prescribed manner. However they deal with a problem (lashing out, insults, walking away, whatever), they want ascribed to the Holy Spirit. This way, they can feel that they've done the "right thing - what God wanted," rather than deal with the issue itself. Not exactly problem-solving in any way, but, boyoboy, is it all about authority without responsibility.
|
|
|
Post by findingtruth on Jun 23, 2013 9:13:59 GMT -5
Please explain how IG is guilty of documenting his conclusions of the fellowship based on limited experience. Have members of the 2x2 system been any less guilty for the last 100+ years of presenting anyone outside of their fellowship as lost or without understanding of Truth? I can state without question that the majority of 2x2 members have very little if any real understanding of those who follow Christ outside of their fellowship. Is this not like the pot calling the kettle black? Isn't it time for some honesty here? You can't justify IG's poor behaviour by pointing out someone else's poor behaviour. They are two separate issues. As a matter of fact, no they are not. You, among others, have accused IG of presenting twisted facts about the 2x2 fellowship based on his limited understanding. Basically you have accused him of presenting lies. What he has presented is a result of his exposure to those who have been closely associated with the group. I believe IG has as much, if not more validation for his conclusions than those in the 2x2 fellowship who have regularly presented all other churches as "false" and all other "preachers" as false because they do not line up with their own point of view. Most of them have never even attended churches services. So how are these 2 separate issues?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2013 10:25:00 GMT -5
You can't justify IG's poor behaviour by pointing out someone else's poor behaviour. They are two separate issues. As a matter of fact, no they are not. You, among others, have accused IG of presenting twisted facts about the 2x2 fellowship based on his limited understanding. Basically you have accused him of presenting lies. What he has presented is a result of his exposure to those who have been closely associated with the group. I believe IG has as much, if not more validation for his conclusions than those in the 2x2 fellowship who have regularly presented all other churches as "false" and all other "preachers" as false because they do not line up with their own point of view. Most of them have never even attended churches services. So how are these 2 separate issues? They are separate issues because Mr.Grey alone is responsible for his poor behaviour, while the others you accuse of bad behaviour are responsible for theirs. No matter how poor the behaviour is of the F&Ws whom you seem to despise, it does not make Mr.Grey any better.
|
|
|
Post by findingtruth on Jun 23, 2013 10:44:47 GMT -5
As a matter of fact, no they are not. You, among others, have accused IG of presenting twisted facts about the 2x2 fellowship based on his limited understanding. Basically you have accused him of presenting lies. What he has presented is a result of his exposure to those who have been closely associated with the group. I believe IG has as much, if not more validation for his conclusions than those in the 2x2 fellowship who have regularly presented all other churches as "false" and all other "preachers" as false because they do not line up with their own point of view. Most of them have never even attended churches services. So how are these 2 separate issues? They are separate issues because Mr.Grey alone is responsible for his poor behaviour, while the others you accuse of bad behaviour are responsible for theirs. No matter how poor the behaviour is of the F&Ws whom you seem to despise, it does not make Mr.Grey any better. Your comment that I "despise" the friends and workers is not true at all and I have never indicated such. On the contrary I love those in the fellowship. I don't support poor behavior, whether it's on my part or anyone else's. But if you want to point out the poor behavior of IG you might wish to consider the fact that you might be guilty of the same behavior. The point I'm trying to make, and you seem to have a difficult time understanding or accepting, is that you are pointing out "bad behavior" in IG when you obviously wish to ignore the fact that the very same behavior you condemn is common in the 2x2 fellowship. In fact, the 2x2 fellowship is not a bit different in its tendency to condemn others than any other religious group.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2013 11:07:23 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by findingtruth on Jun 23, 2013 12:26:42 GMT -5
CD, of course I'm well aware of your many posts. I've agreed with many of them and for the most part believe you are open and honest with your feelings. But I fail to see, regardless of how many times you attempt to point it out, why IG's comments about the fellowship are worse than the comments you make. Please clarify WHAT claims IG is making that you find so off track. Is it the label "dangerous cult" that is so offensive to you? As so many have stated here that's a pretty harsh label. You seem to be terribly offended by his book. I'm not certain I understand why. Evidentally you've read it. I haven't so I am simply forming conclusions from comments made here on TMB which may not be a good idea.
|
|
|
Post by Persona non grata on Jun 23, 2013 13:44:19 GMT -5
So Mr Grey, you feel that making comments and/raising questions based only on limited exposure to your book is unacceptable and yet its perfectly acceptable for you to write the entire book based only on very limited exposure to the fellowship? Mr Grey’s maternal grandparents professed as did many of his relatives. He grew up in County Fermanagh on the periphery of the 2x2 movement during which time he attended Fermanagh Convention and Sunday morning meetings. He also met Edward Cooney. Missions were also held on his father's farm. So closely was he associated with the fellowship that his grandmother commented 'you would make a great worker'. During his research he interviewed a number of 2x2 workers, including Tommy Gamble, overseer of Ireland and senior leader in Europe and perhaps beyond. He undertook a literature review of all the books, newspapers, websites etc. currently available on the 2x2 church and engaged directly with some of the authors. He was a member of the TMB for almost 5 years during which time he actively followed many of the threads and engaged directly with members and ex-members from across the world on various topics. Through the TMB and his own website he invited members and ex members from across the world to contribute to his research, some of whom did through written contributions. He also met with many people associated with the 2x2 movement, including me. I spent over an hour with Mr Grey one fine spring day discussing aspects of the 2x2 church and my experience. He also spent many hours attending missions and conventions both in Ireland and Sweden as part of his research and would likely have spent time at Sunday morning meetings had he been allowed. That said, can you tell me how you came to the conclusion that Mr Grey had “ only very limited exposure to the fellowship”? Matt10 Hi Matt10, Firstly, let me start by answering your question: I based my conclusion upon the fact that his exposure has always been limited to that of an "outsider". By Mr Grey's own admission he has never been a member although he has always had an 'awareness' of the fellowship. Secondly, let me thank you for taking the time to list the extent of Mr Grey's exposure to the fellowship. I have never called into question Mr Grey's evident intelligence, which I appreciate, nor do I rebuke his right to investigate the movement and to publish the book. In fact, as a firm believer in the right of free speech I even support him in this. Mr Grey and myself share a lot in common, not least of which is an Irish Methodist heritage. What can not be denied is the fact that he does not have the 'inside' exposure to the movement that others (such as Cherie Kropp, Clearday, Sacerdotal, you, me and others) have experienced and I have simply drawn a parallel between this and the instance where some of us (including yourself) questioned the book based on our limited exposure to it. Mr Grey's attitude seems to be "buy the book first, then I'll answer your questions." (In which case, it must be awfully quiet at his book signings. ) This attitude is akin to that of the movement which he criticises. You see, herein lies my dilemma - I think I may be a potential customer for the book, however based upon reviews featured here (and your own chief amongst them Matt10), I have questions about its relevance to me. Mr Grey's reluctance to engage in discussion about the book doesn't alleviate any of those questions so in the mean time I'm forced to classify the book as a religious tract rather than as an objective historical account. Does the book have value as a persuasive religious tract? Probably. Merit as an objective historical account? Not so much. As is my practice regarding religious tracts, whether it be the Jehovah's Witnesses, the Mormons, the Christian Scientists, the Brethren, or the Baptists, I gladly accept them when offered and promise to read them thoroughly. I'm not inclined to offer monetary payment in exchange as I feel that the 'Gospel' should be offered on a "freely received, freely give" basis. An objective, historically accurate account of the movement however would be of interest to me and well worth the few pounds expenditure. Png
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2013 14:24:25 GMT -5
PNG put forward:
An objective, historically accurate account of the movement however would be of interest to me and well worth the few pounds expenditure.
Sometimes it pays to look at what we are inclined to consider as a negative factor, from a more positive standpoint.
I really don't know whether or not Mr Grey was ever a member of the F&W's sect, but if it is the case that he wasn't and you seem to be considering same from a negative viewpoint, this factor might actually turn out to be positive one. Less likelihood of bias in assembling results, either for or against. The potential for an objectively fair, and bias free account obviously varies from person to person, but I would contend there is at least as good a chance of getting the standards you require from an outsider, where there is less risk of an axe to grind or an agenda to work to.
|
|