|
Post by dmmichgood on Dec 31, 2013 15:14:23 GMT -5
What is the allegation made about us in general? That we focus upon the Workers and not upon Jesus? Would you say that Workers get quoted a hundred times more than Jesus on this board? Not even WE do that. Bert. Not all are gullible and there are actually some that walk and sit beside you that have witnessed the things you say you have never seen. Perhaps a bit of head turning and observing may be in order. I hope you are not following the workers all that close because if one stops too soon, your head may become lodged in a darker place........ Me thinks Bert's head is already lodged in that darker place!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 31, 2013 15:35:46 GMT -5
David Leitch has also made it harder for the overseers to claim that "we have no authority" and are a system "of equals" defense/facade that Jerome Frandle and his lawyer tried to use. This overseer has made it plain that he is the boss and that he can "fire" workers. It is quite comical and sad. To David's credit, at least he didn't try to deny his role or position within the organization. Mr. Leitch appears to be a loose cannon, and fairly transparent as a result. If nothing else, he is exposing how things really work at the top, all while claiming that there is "no organization".
|
|
|
Post by snow on Dec 31, 2013 17:29:27 GMT -5
Well if he is exposing how it is at the top, that's a good thing. He can't be faulted for keeping it a secret...
|
|
|
Post by quizzer on Jan 1, 2014 0:21:13 GMT -5
As a professing person, I need to ask: have you lost your ever-loving mind?!? Quizzer, why asketh thee? One cannot lose that which one has not gained! Sorry, my mistake. Did you inhale some of the Flavor-Aid fumes?
|
|
|
Post by sacerdotal on Jan 1, 2014 2:32:08 GMT -5
Well if he is exposing how it is at the top, that's a good thing. He can't be faulted for keeping it a secret... I agree. At least we all know that he was being honest... while Mr. Frandle's defense was FAR from it. I also applaud Lyle for stating plainly that one MUST believe in the living witness doctrine- in a preacher without a home and the church in the home. As my grandfather used to say... say what you mean and mean what you say. I do not agree with either overseer, Mr. Leich or Mr. Schoeber- but I do respect their honesty and conviction and faith in what they believe in.
|
|
|
Post by sacerdotal on Jan 1, 2014 2:52:19 GMT -5
As far as wisdom goes, the reason why his guidelines have flaws is for the same mistake that Irvine Grey succumbed to in writing his flawed book about the 2x2's: he failed to seek the input of those who are the most likely to be able to see the flaws. What did you mean by this comment about Irvine Grey and his book? What did you find flawed about it? Perhaps that should be in a new thread. Thanks!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 1, 2014 8:30:23 GMT -5
As far as wisdom goes, the reason why his guidelines have flaws is for the same mistake that Irvine Grey succumbed to in writing his flawed book about the 2x2's: he failed to seek the input of those who are the most likely to be able to see the flaws. What did you mean by this comment about Irvine Grey and his book? What did you find flawed about it? Perhaps that should be in a new thread. Thanks! NO, NO, NO..........DON'T GO THERE!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 1, 2014 8:32:52 GMT -5
As far as wisdom goes, the reason why his guidelines have flaws is for the same mistake that Irvine Grey succumbed to in writing his flawed book about the 2x2's: he failed to seek the input of those who are the most likely to be able to see the flaws. What did you mean by this comment about Irvine Grey and his book? Thanks! I meant simply that Mr. Grey failed to engage those who could provide more accurate information (such as CherieK) or from those who might challenge his prejudiced viewpoint. Had Mr. Schultz done the same, he would have emerged with some good CSA guidelines. Instead he got junk. There are already a couple of long threads about it. Here are some reviews (not mine) for your consideration: sites.google.com/site/2x2history/the-shape-of-a-shapeless-movementdocs.google.com/file/d/0B_-U6V16edsjZjBRcmlvMS1OZzg/editprofessing.proboards.com/thread/21463/shape-shapeless-movement-critique-thread?page=1 (opening post has a file) Any one of the above critics would probably have been happy to critique the book before publishing. They are all regular readers or participants here so if nothing else, a call to review an early manuscript would have been a valuable exercise and a better product.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Jan 1, 2014 11:54:50 GMT -5
Well if he is exposing how it is at the top, that's a good thing. He can't be faulted for keeping it a secret... I agree. At least we all know that he was being honest... while Mr. Frandle's defense was FAR from it. I also applaud Lyle for stating plainly that one MUST believe in the living witness doctrine- in a preacher without a home and the church in the home. As my grandfather used to say... say what you mean and mean what you say. I do not agree with either overseer, Mr. Leich or Mr. Schoeber- but I do respect their honesty and conviction and faith in what they believe in. Yes, then a person can make an informed decision of whether or not they want to be part of what these men stand for. Always good to know.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 4, 2014 13:50:44 GMT -5
You don't know him as well as you think you do. Sure, he is one of the better ones but believe me, he has had to be repeatedly prompted to do the right thing. As far as wisdom goes, the reason why his guidelines have flaws is for the same mistake that Irvine Grey succumbed to in writing his flawed book about the 2x2's: he failed to seek the input of those who are the most likely to be able to see the flaws. Clearday I find your complete aversion to Irvine Greys book rather interesting. When at the same time you so clearly associate yourself with 2x2ism thats top policy has so clearly (and officially) broken pretty much every Christian and moral principle possible -- From clear dishonesty, and hiding CSA -- inhumane treatment of their own membership - undeniable hypocrisy and self-righteousness - to the most ugly of power grabbing as possible. (see the Vietnam thread!) Why is Irvine Greys book such a thorn in your eye -- His opinions are not necessarily identical with either mine or yours -- but why are you so anxious to discredit him, when you frantically proclaim your purpose to continue your association (and support) with the 2x2 organization in spite of its proven aversion to basic Christianity.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 4, 2014 14:32:53 GMT -5
You don't know him as well as you think you do. Sure, he is one of the better ones but believe me, he has had to be repeatedly prompted to do the right thing. As far as wisdom goes, the reason why his guidelines have flaws is for the same mistake that Irvine Grey succumbed to in writing his flawed book about the 2x2's: he failed to seek the input of those who are the most likely to be able to see the flaws. Clearday I find your complete aversion to Irvine Greys book rather interesting. When at the same time you so clearly associate yourself with 2x2ism thats top policy has so clearly (and officially) broken pretty much every Christian and moral principle possible -- From clear dishonesty, and hiding CSA -- inhumane treatment of their own membership - undeniable hypocrisy and self-righteousness - to the most ugly of power grabbing as possible. (see the Vietnam thread!) Why is Irvine Greys book such a thorn in your eye -- His opinions are not necessarily identical with either mine or yours -- but why are you so anxious to discredit him, when you frantically proclaim your purpose to continue your association (and support) with the 2x2 organization in spite of its proven aversion to basic Christianity. I guess after that long swerving diatribe, your question is "why do you give negative reviews on Irvine Grey's book?" The answer: because it deserves negative reviews. Nothing more, nothing less. That should be an easy concept to grasp. Ask me this: "why do you give the workers such a negative reviews on how they handled Vietnam and CSA issues?" Because they deserve the negative reviews. Nothing more and nothing less. Simple isn't it?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 4, 2014 14:47:41 GMT -5
Clearday I find your complete aversion to Irvine Greys book rather interesting. When at the same time you so clearly associate yourself with 2x2ism thats top policy has so clearly (and officially) broken pretty much every Christian and moral principle possible -- From clear dishonesty, and hiding CSA -- inhumane treatment of their own membership - undeniable hypocrisy and self-righteousness - to the most ugly of power grabbing as possible. (see the Vietnam thread!) Why is Irvine Greys book such a thorn in your eye -- His opinions are not necessarily identical with either mine or yours -- but why are you so anxious to discredit him, when you frantically proclaim your purpose to continue your association (and support) with the 2x2 organization in spite of its proven aversion to basic Christianity. I guess after that long swerving diatribe, your question is "why do you give negative reviews on Irvine Grey's book?" The answer: because it deserves negative reviews. Nothing more, nothing less. Ok Clearday -- you may be right or wrong on Irvine Greys book. I can understand difference of opinion on that. However nit-picking on the different doctrinal perspectives in his book, doesn't explain your proclaimed purpose to continue your association (and support) of the 2x2 organization in spite of its proven aversion to basic Christianity in so many well documented examples. Such as the 2x2 top policy that has so clearly (and officially) broken pretty much every Christian and moral principle possible -- From clear dishonesty, and hiding CSA -- inhumane treatment of their own membership - undeniable hypocrisy and self-righteousness - to the most ugly of power grabbing as possible. (see the Vietnam thread!) I am not talking about individual people or workers ... but about clear 2x2 policy -- or doctrine if you wish to use that word. Sorry Clearday, but somehow this apparent clear interest in association with so much uncontestably proven anti-christian policy seems so 'out of character' for you.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 4, 2014 14:56:05 GMT -5
I guess after that long swerving diatribe, your question is "why do you give negative reviews on Irvine Grey's book?" The answer: because it deserves negative reviews. Nothing more, nothing less. Ok Clearday -- you may be right or wrong on Irvine Greys book. I can understand difference of opinion on that. However nit-picking on the different doctrinal perspectives in his book, doesn't explain your proclaimed purpose to continue your association (and support) of the 2x2 organization in spite of its proven aversion to basic Christianity in so many well documented examples. Such as the 2x2 top policy that has so clearly (and officially) broken pretty much every Christian and moral principle possible -- From clear dishonesty, and hiding CSA -- inhumane treatment of their own membership - undeniable hypocrisy and self-righteousness - to the most ugly of power grabbing as possible. (see the Vietnam thread!) I am not talking about individual people or workers ... but about clear 2x2 policy -- or doctrine if you wish to use that word. Sorry Clearday, but somehow this apparent clear interest in association with so much uncontestably proven anti-christian policy seems so 'out of character' for you.I think this is what probably unsettles me most about CD's (in my view very OTT) aversion to Irvine Grey's book. It seems so adversely out of character to the CD I had perceived?
|
|
|
Post by snow on Jan 4, 2014 15:11:26 GMT -5
Ok Clearday -- you may be right or wrong on Irvine Greys book. I can understand difference of opinion on that. However nit-picking on the different doctrinal perspectives in his book, doesn't explain your proclaimed purpose to continue your association (and support) of the 2x2 organization in spite of its proven aversion to basic Christianity in so many well documented examples. Such as the 2x2 top policy that has so clearly (and officially) broken pretty much every Christian and moral principle possible -- From clear dishonesty, and hiding CSA -- inhumane treatment of their own membership - undeniable hypocrisy and self-righteousness - to the most ugly of power grabbing as possible. (see the Vietnam thread!) I am not talking about individual people or workers ... but about clear 2x2 policy -- or doctrine if you wish to use that word. Sorry Clearday, but somehow this apparent clear interest in association with so much uncontestably proven anti-christian policy seems so 'out of character' for you.I think this is what probably unsettles me most about CD's (in my view very OTT) aversion to Irvine Grey's book. It seems so adversely out of character to the CD I had perceived? Maybe so, but even as a non Christian or person of any religion, I felt aversion to his book. It came across as so self righteous, stating that his version of Christianity was the only right one and that anyone who didn't believe/worship/understand the way he did was a dangerous cult. That's just baloney imo. He has no better grasp on God than anyone else in this world yet he clearly thinks he does and condemns those he thinks do not.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 4, 2014 15:24:17 GMT -5
I guess after that long swerving diatribe, your question is "why do you give negative reviews on Irvine Grey's book?" The answer: because it deserves negative reviews. Nothing more, nothing less. Ok Clearday -- you may be right or wrong on Irvine Greys book. I can understand difference of opinion on that. However nit-picking on the different doctrinal perspectives in his book, doesn't explain your proclaimed purpose to continue your association (and support) of the 2x2 organization in spite of its proven aversion to basic Christianity in so many well documented examples. Such as the 2x2 top policy that has so clearly (and officially) broken pretty much every Christian and moral principle possible -- From clear dishonesty, and hiding CSA -- inhumane treatment of their own membership - undeniable hypocrisy and self-righteousness - to the most ugly of power grabbing as possible. (see the Vietnam thread!) I am not talking about individual people or workers ... but about clear 2x2 policy -- or doctrine if you wish to use that word. Sorry Clearday, but somehow this apparent clear interest in association with so much uncontestably proven anti-christian policy seems so 'out of character' for you. So now your question is this: "why don't you quit?" ? That's simple too. I feel I can do more good in than out. Jesus didn't run from the sinners, the publicans or the Pharisees. I think that's a good example to follow.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 4, 2014 15:26:47 GMT -5
Ok Clearday -- you may be right or wrong on Irvine Greys book. I can understand difference of opinion on that. However nit-picking on the different doctrinal perspectives in his book, doesn't explain your proclaimed purpose to continue your association (and support) of the 2x2 organization in spite of its proven aversion to basic Christianity in so many well documented examples. Such as the 2x2 top policy that has so clearly (and officially) broken pretty much every Christian and moral principle possible -- From clear dishonesty, and hiding CSA -- inhumane treatment of their own membership - undeniable hypocrisy and self-righteousness - to the most ugly of power grabbing as possible. (see the Vietnam thread!) I am not talking about individual people or workers ... but about clear 2x2 policy -- or doctrine if you wish to use that word. Sorry Clearday, but somehow this apparent clear interest in association with so much uncontestably proven anti-christian policy seems so 'out of character' for you.I think this is what probably unsettles me most about CD's (in my view very OTT) aversion to Irvine Grey's book. It seems so adversely out of character to the CD I had perceived? I think I have explained my position on that book many times in many different ways, hoping that you and two or three others might understand. Most others seem to understand. Shall I try again or it is hopeless?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 4, 2014 15:28:18 GMT -5
I think this is what probably unsettles me most about CD's (in my view very OTT) aversion to Irvine Grey's book. It seems so adversely out of character to the CD I had perceived? Maybe so, but even as a non Christian or person of any religion, I felt aversion to his book. It came across as so self righteous, stating that his version of Christianity was the only right one and that anyone who didn't believe/worship/understand the way he did was a dangerous cult. That's just baloney imo. He has no better grasp on God than anyone else in this world yet he clearly thinks he does and condemns those he thinks do not. Tell me, what is wrong with Mr Grey being normal?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 4, 2014 15:32:03 GMT -5
I think this is what probably unsettles me most about CD's (in my view very OTT) aversion to Irvine Grey's book. It seems so adversely out of character to the CD I had perceived? I think I have explained my position on that book many times in many different ways, hoping that you and two or three others might understand. Most others seem to understand. Shall I try again or it is hopeless? No please don't try. I don't think you could improve on what you have stated in the past. I mean you no ill will, just the opposite in fact. It just seems way over the top for what I and a number of others see as a storm in a tea cup. Your continuous reaction to the book seems so unlike you? I just felt moved to share Edgar's "out of character" observation of you. No harm meant.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Jan 4, 2014 18:01:54 GMT -5
Maybe so, but even as a non Christian or person of any religion, I felt aversion to his book. It came across as so self righteous, stating that his version of Christianity was the only right one and that anyone who didn't believe/worship/understand the way he did was a dangerous cult. That's just baloney imo. He has no better grasp on God than anyone else in this world yet he clearly thinks he does and condemns those he thinks do not. Tell me, what is wrong with Mr Grey being normal? That's normal? Well that's kind of sad really. People should be trying to unite the world shouldn't they? His book seems to have divided it even more. Saw something today that I liked. "Don't fit in, Stand out!'
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 4, 2014 19:13:24 GMT -5
I think I have explained my position on that book many times in many different ways, hoping that you and two or three others might understand. Most others seem to understand. Shall I try again or it is hopeless? No please don't try. I don't think you could improve on what you have stated in the past. I mean you no ill will, just the opposite in fact. It just seems way over the top for what I and a number of others see as a storm in a tea cup. Your continuous reaction to the book seems so unlike you? I just felt moved to share Edgar's "out of character" observation of you. No harm meant. No problem. It does seem odd that no one seems to think that it is "out of character" to criticize the 2x2 system, but criticism of something that is anti-2x2 becomes "out of character." To me, that would be an indicator of balance and objectivity which I would like to think is "in character".
|
|
|
Post by sharingtheriches on Jan 4, 2014 23:03:28 GMT -5
That which is in darkness will be brought to the light....but it may take 15-20 years!! I agree Edgar. I have every confidence that if the "allegations" brought to this head worker by an underling, are indeed genuine, then this matter will come back to haunt this head worker in time! If not in this life on this side of the grave, for certain in the next!
|
|
|
Post by sharingtheriches on Jan 4, 2014 23:10:18 GMT -5
Well if he is exposing how it is at the top, that's a good thing. He can't be faulted for keeping it a secret... I agree. At least we all know that he was being honest... while Mr. Frandle's defense was FAR from it. I also applaud Lyle for stating plainly that one MUST believe in the living witness doctrine- in a preacher without a home and the church in the home. As my grandfather used to say... say what you mean and mean what you say. I do not agree with either overseer, Mr. Leich or Mr. Schoeber- but I do respect their honesty and conviction and faith in what they believe in. Sacerdotal? You're putting all of those things into the "living witness doctrine"...which they don't have to be in the Living Witness doctrine. Actually the 2x2 itinerant ministry was brought about BEFORE the Living Witness doctrine was known....also the mtgs. in the home also were already a known thing. The Living Witness doctrine came in by a very young worker who had his elders all caught up in some kind of grandeur in that only the workers can deliver that which brings salvation to the penitient one! I have no argument with the workers if they want to continue the 2x2 itinerant ministry...not one thing wrong with that NOR do I have a grudge against them over their home mtgs. Those kind of mtgs. are great.....but I sure do hold it against them for saying that everybody that is going to be saved has to get it from a worker! That NO one in the world can come to salvation through some other person or avenue....They've forgotten that God is going to draw those whom God feels or knows will be glad to hear the gospel of Jesus Christ......Jesus said that no man can come any other way...but that the FAther draw them!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2014 10:10:49 GMT -5
Ok Clearday -- you may be right or wrong on Irvine Greys book. I can understand difference of opinion on that. However nit-picking on the different doctrinal perspectives in his book, doesn't explain your proclaimed purpose to continue your association (and support) of the 2x2 organization in spite of its proven aversion to basic Christianity in so many well documented examples. Such as the 2x2 top policy that has so clearly (and officially) broken pretty much every Christian and moral principle possible -- From clear dishonesty, and hiding CSA -- inhumane treatment of their own membership - undeniable hypocrisy and self-righteousness - to the most ugly of power grabbing as possible. (see the Vietnam thread!) I am not talking about individual people or workers ... but about clear 2x2 policy -- or doctrine if you wish to use that word. Sorry Clearday, but somehow this apparent clear interest in association with so much uncontestably proven anti-christian policy seems so 'out of character' for you. So now your question is this: "why don't you quit?" ? That's simple too. I feel I can do more good in than out. Jesus didn't run from the sinners, the publicans or the Pharisees. I think that's a good example to follow. Jesus didn't run from the sinners, publicans or Pharisees --- but he didn't chose to run with them either. But OK Clearday, I hear your justification -- but just remember -- 'doing good' is hardly reserved for those on the 'inside of 2x2ism'. I have hardly left 2x2ers behind me either -- but I think I have been clear that I do not wish to be associated with the dishonesty and guile that has become a major part of 2x2 policy and practice.
|
|
|
Post by sacerdotal on Jan 5, 2014 10:35:44 GMT -5
So now your question is this: "why don't you quit?" ? That's simple too. I feel I can do more good in than out. Jesus didn't run from the sinners, the publicans or the Pharisees. I think that's a good example to follow. Jesus didn't run from the sinners, publicans or Pharisees --- but he didn't chose to run with them either. But OK Clearday, I hear your justification -- but just remember -- 'doing good' is hardly reserved for those on the 'inside of 2x2ism'. I have hardly left 2x2ers behind me either -- but I think I have been clear that I do not wish to be associated with the dishonesty and guile that has become a major part of 2x2 policy and practice. Hi Edgar... and that is why I admire you. You and your family have seen the uglier side of 2x2ism and worker insecurity. Quite a few people have seen that side of the workers- myself and my family included. Clearday has seen it, and I admire Clearday as well for his continued efforts at pointing out the truth about 2x2ism. I have read at least 4 books on Scientology. The workers maintain control in almost the exact same way as Scientology- via intimidation, punishment, claiming salvation alone, claiming to be a special "people" who alone know the truth- while all outsiders are doomed to hell, and most interestingly- the demonization of ANY that ask questions that cast the belief system in a negative light. I too, have issues, with Mr. Grey's book. But, then again, I am too lazy to write a book, so I applaud him for at least doing something. My opinion of his book is this... mostly true... self serving.... poorly organized.... poorly researched.... poorly edited.... needlessly opinionated. Perhaps Mr. Grey will write another book about the fellowship, he has a good rough draft to start with now. But, I have far greater issues with some of the review sites that Clearday listed for me to check out. Whoa- the first site that I checked out was apologetic, misleading, and mean spirited. In short, just what I have grown accustomed to seeing in regards to the insecurity and the ill temper that manifests itself whenever the truth is exposed.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2014 10:37:28 GMT -5
So now your question is this: "why don't you quit?" ? That's simple too. I feel I can do more good in than out. Jesus didn't run from the sinners, the publicans or the Pharisees. I think that's a good example to follow. Jesus didn't run from the sinners, publicans or Pharisees --- but he didn't chose to run with them either. But OK Clearday, I hear your justification -- but just remember -- 'doing good' is hardly reserved for those on the 'inside of 2x2ism'. I have hardly left 2x2ers behind me either -- but I think I have been clear that I do not wish to be associated with the dishonesty and guile that has become a major part of 2x2 policy and practice. Yes, clear and understandable. Your last sentence indicates that it is all about you. That's not necessarily a bad thing and it's a common practice as no one wants to experience "guilt by association". Let's just hope you don't try to make others feel guilty by association. People do what they do for a reason, whether you admire it or think it is foolish. Personally, I don't disrespect anyone's decision to leave or to stay, everyone has their own path in life which doesn't have to look like yours or anyone else's.
|
|
|
Post by sharingtheriches on Jan 5, 2014 11:48:22 GMT -5
What did you mean by this comment about Irvine Grey and his book? What did you find flawed about it? Perhaps that should be in a new thread. Thanks! NO, NO, NO..........DON'T GO THERE!
Ram! How is your vocal cords today? That was some big screaming! lol BTW, I have to agree. One thing CD needs to remember about Irvine Grey's book...it was a Master's thesis.....and I'm not certain but the thesis I've seen written by those seeking the denomination required for certain level of education, that these thesis are not written particularly in a fashion that we would find most other books in! I've read a "research" book my bil wrote about the migratory birds on the eastern coastline.....it was difficult for me to get into his writing myself but his doctorate was given him on that thesis/book though he'd sent us a copy of his thesis bookl....my husband didn't try to read it, he just told me when I figured the book out I could tell him and that way if Tom came visiting ever again, then he would have an inkling of what Tom was talking about! Tom was great on talking and was a very educated man...he tried to get me to go to Law School years ago....saying he'd help finance my fees and books....I already had my RN so I said, I needed to work a bit and get that paid for and out of our hair! So in short, I think perhaps a major portion of thesis writings are not typically what the everyday person wants to read about or can really get into that reading of that thesis! So please cut Irvine a bit of slack there, Clearday! None of us are perfect. BTW, I can say that he stuck to what he knew to compare the 2x2 church with.....in order to come up with some kind of summary about the 2x2 fellowship.....and we know he is typically a Baptist....and if we were to write a thesis about the Baptist, we likely would write a very similar thesis because we are only fully cognizant of the religion we are members of! See my point?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2014 12:05:02 GMT -5
Sorry Shaz, the volume of my butting in was influenced by my desire to butt this subject out of further discussion. I will shout louder next time!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2014 12:28:32 GMT -5
Let's just hope you don't try to make others feel guilty by association. People do what they do for a reason, whether you admire it or think it is foolish. Personally, I don't disrespect anyone's decision to leave or to stay, everyone has their own path in life which doesn't have to look like yours or anyone else's. You are right Clearday that guilt by association with people is a flimsy fence -- but often used by 2x2ism in attempt to hinder people from having contact with other people. A recent example in the Vietnam thread where sisters were encouraged to keep away from each other because of the 'bad influence' the 'bad one' might have on the 'good one'. When we were expelled the workers went through the country having meetings with the friends simply to warn them of the danger of association with me, my wife and our 6 children . Clearday, you know as well as I do how many of the Alberta excommunications where because folks refused the break association with the excommunicated. --- This was the first given reason for Margs excommunication from the work. She had stopped in to visit a couple who previously had been excommunicated by the Alberta excommunication patrol sent out by WP. 2x2isms prime tool in difficult situations is condemnation by association.Sorry if I implied that I left the impression I was questioning your association with 2x2 membership -- My question, and it wasn't for the purpose of quilt .. but of curiousity of your continued membership (proffessing status) with a organization/doctrine that as become most famous for its enormous public and leadership initiated dishonesty -- as well as its track record on hidding CSA issues, its clear hypocrisy and self-righteousness on so many fronts, and its obvious enormous hunger for power and place (ex. the Vietnam thread). Clearday, it certainly didn't mean to suggest that shunning 2x2 membership or leaving them to their fate would be any kind of a Christian attitude. Many of us exes have as an extensive of a contact net with 2x2ism, as 2x2ism will allow. The quilt by association is what 2x2ism uses to hinder this.
|
|