|
Post by emy on Jul 25, 2015 16:01:00 GMT -5
If she denies having anything to do with it again, I will retract it. Maybe I should put the year more like '85.
|
|
|
Post by slowtosee on Jul 25, 2015 16:29:10 GMT -5
I know Cherie as being careful about facts and to tell the truth- period.
It sounds like it was an "offense" to send a book to a relative of yours, emy. I surmise it was not the deed of someone sending the book but the information ,in the book was offensive? Did you or your relative already know all about William Irvine before reading the book? I was never able to openly and honestly communicate about William, to this day, with workers without noticeable anxiety and tension in the conversation, so did not know any details other than he "got big in himself," bla blah blah. The history of the church is interesting, took some strong characters and could and should be openly talked about and celebrated. Or at least appreciated. Of course, when things are kinda hidden, forbidden and mysterious, most inquisitive people are spurred on to check things out more, Also with lack of honesty and forth rightness, all kinds of conspiracy and inaccurate stories are believed by those who don't know the facts. E.g.- 2x2 worship Satan, reminds me of neighbour going to return a borrowed piece of equipment from one of the friends. He had heard they were "holy rollers" sure enuf, he goes on a Wednesday evening, knocks on their door and there they were, all getting up from kneeling to pray as they used to do, and the falsehood was confirmed to him -. They were rolling on the floor -. He had caught them....hmmmmalvin
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Jul 25, 2015 16:53:22 GMT -5
Quote - "Jesse_Lackman Avatar Jul 22, 2015 at 3:19am Jesse_Lackman said: I've talked to workers about Irvine, overseers too, and never got the impression it wasn't open for discussion. I've actually been surprised by the topics workers have been more than willing to discuss. Quote - " Or were you just agreeing with Jesse, to make it sound good ?" It all depends who you ask, and importantly, who is doing the asking - and why. There are many nuances to this question. Remember, facts aint truth.
People who scream "fact" are often ideological people with agendas. And agenda people (as you should know by now) give you THEIR selective "facts." I have never in my life, when asked "who started your church", said "Jesus"
But I should say that, really, shouldn't I?
If asked "when did it start?" I qualify the answer in two parts -
1 - "Irish preachers started going out in the 18th Century... 2 - ... living and worshiping as Jesus, his church and other churches in other centuries lived and worshiped because Truth doesn't change.
Bert, you are doing nothing but welching out of telling us what the Workers actually told you! There are NO nuances to this question.
You won't tell us either because you NEVER ask the workers to start with, or you would have to admit what they actually told you!
What they actually told you was probably the same mealy-mouthed, abstractive substance that was told to many of us: " We do out like the apostles did in the beginning."
Such may be true but isn't all of the truth and does NOT give the FACT (and there are some things that are FACTS) of when those early workers in Ireland started going out like that!
Answer the question! Tell us what they told you, not what you would answer.
|
|
|
Post by Mary on Jul 25, 2015 17:14:25 GMT -5
It's not correct. They don't go out like the early apostles.
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Jul 25, 2015 17:43:46 GMT -5
It doesn't seem like you are looking for replies from the general public, but wanted to "catch" some who said they have known. But I'll answer anyway. I heard of Irvine somewhere around 1980 when Cherie sent the Secret Sect to one of my relatives (although CK claims she did not). I did not get a copy of the Secret Sect to read until 1989. Tell me the name of your friend and I'll see if I can recall sending them a copy. I only sent books to those who asked me for them, or indicated they would like to read it. Are the M*** your relatives? (name edited out by Cherie) If so, they were very good friends of mine, and its possible I sent them a copy. We discussed the book, Irvine, and what she heard Garrett Hughes preaching from the platform -- about it starting near the turn of the century, etc. Same as Greg Lee heard.
|
|
|
Post by Roselyn T on Jul 25, 2015 19:01:26 GMT -5
Quote - "Jesse_Lackman Avatar Jul 22, 2015 at 3:19am Jesse_Lackman said: I've talked to workers about Irvine, overseers too, and never got the impression it wasn't open for discussion. I've actually been surprised by the topics workers have been more than willing to discuss. Quote - " Or were you just agreeing with Jesse, to make it sound good ?" It all depends who you ask, and importantly, who is doing the asking - and why. There are many nuances to this question. Remember, facts aint truth.
People who scream "fact" are often ideological people with agendas. And agenda people (as you should know by now) give you THEIR selective "facts." I have never in my life, when asked "who started your church", said "Jesus"
But I should say that, really, shouldn't I?
If asked "when did it start?" I qualify the answer in two parts -
1 - "Irish preachers started going out in the 18th Century... 2 - ... living and worshiping as Jesus, his church and other churches in other centuries lived and worshiped because Truth doesn't change.
Bert,
Of course he won't answer dmmg ! But you have to admit it sounded good in his reply to Jesse ! you are doing nothing but welching out of telling us what the Workers actually told you! There are NO nuances to this question.
You won't tell us either because you NEVER ask the workers to start with, or you would have to admit what they actually told you!
What they actually told you was probably the same mealy-mouthed, abstractive substance that was told to many of us: " We do out like the apostles did in the beginning."
Such may be true but isn't all of the truth and does NOT give the FACT (and there are some things that are FACTS) of when those early workers in Ireland started going out like that!
Answer the question! Tell us what they told you, not what you would answer. Of course he won't answer Dmmg ! But you have to admit it sounded good in his reply to Jesse !
|
|
|
Post by emy on Jul 25, 2015 20:22:16 GMT -5
It doesn't seem like you are looking for replies from the general public, but wanted to "catch" some who said they have known. But I'll answer anyway. I heard of Irvine somewhere around 1980 when Cherie sent the Secret Sect to one of my relatives (although CK claims she did not). I did not get a copy of the Secret Sect to read until 1989. Tell me the name of your friend and I'll see if I can recall sending them a copy. I only sent books to those who asked me for them. Are the Myers of Fargo ND your relatives? If so, they were very good friends of mine, and its possible I sent them a copy. We discussed the book, Irvine, and what she heard Garrett Hughes preaching from the platform -- about it starting near the turn of the century, etc. Same as Greg Lee heard. I don't know any M**** in Fargo. (I think you broke a TMB rule by disclosing what my name might be. Do you mind editing it?) Do you by any chance mean Meyer?
|
|
|
Post by Mary on Jul 25, 2015 20:41:42 GMT -5
How did you think the fellowship started before hearing about Irvine, emy?
|
|
|
Post by Roselyn T on Jul 25, 2015 20:42:24 GMT -5
Bert, thank you for the invite, so if I did go along to the Gospel Service on Sunday, and decided I was going to keep going, I wonder how long it would be before I had a visit from the workers in regard to my relationship with my partner of 9 years ? Don't know your situation. Certainly we don't like the idea of "partners" instead of married couples. But if you are coming as an outsider then who are they to say anything? I have invited people to the missions and when they ask "What shall I wear?" I say "Whatever you like. You aren't claiming to be one of us!"Thank you Bert for that reply, you have confirmed for me that not much has really changed in the last 6 years in the Fellowship. "Certainly we don't like the idea of "partners" " who are "we" ? I wonder what Jesus would think ? Also what exactly are "one of us" ? Sounds like the them & us way of thinking hasn't changed either !
|
|
|
Post by emy on Jul 25, 2015 20:43:58 GMT -5
I know Cherie as being careful about facts and to tell the truth- period. It sounds like it was an "offense" to send a book to a relative of yours, emy. I surmise it was not the deed of someone sending the book but the information ,in the book was offensive? Did you or your relative already know all about William Irvine before reading the book? I was never able to openly and honestly communicate about William, to this day, with workers without noticeable anxiety and tension in the conversation, so did not know any details other than he "got big in himself," bla blah blah. The history of the church is interesting, took some strong characters and could and should be openly talked about and celebrated. Or at least appreciated. Of course, when things are kinda hidden, forbidden and mysterious, most inquisitive people are spurred on to check things out more, Also with lack of honesty and forth rightness, all kinds of conspiracy and inaccurate stories are believed by those who don't know the facts. E.g.- 2x2 worship Satan, reminds me of neighbour going to return a borrowed piece of equipment from one of the friends. He had heard they were "holy rollers" sure enuf, he goes on a Wednesday evening, knocks on their door and there they were, all getting up from kneeling to pray as they used to do, and the falsehood was confirmed to him -. They were rolling on the floor -. He had caught them....hmmmmalvin Did you read carefully? The question was when and what were you told about WI? That was my answer. I'm in the process of finding out if CK did actually send the book to my relative. I didn't know before and my guess is that she didn't. Hidden forbidden and mysterious... how about inconsequential or protective of a friend's change of heart? I'm not inclined to speak to others about someone who has left the fellowship unless i am questioned. So some people have questioned, but did they ask any people who might know? Probably not, because the book wasn't out until almost all those people were dead. The earlier expose went mostly to the workers. Would they have been inclined to share the "venom" of the quotes shared here?
|
|
|
Post by emy on Jul 25, 2015 20:49:04 GMT -5
How did you think the fellowship started before hearing about Irvine, emy? Honestly? I didn't give it a lot of thought. From what I heard and read, it seemed to fit into scripture. One time I was in a hospital and a RC priest made his rounds visiting. He asked, "Can you trace your church back to Christ?" I thought it was a strange question. Why would we need to? I hadn't yet been indoctrinated with the LWD. Still haven't.
|
|
|
Post by Mary on Jul 25, 2015 21:02:00 GMT -5
So did you think it came from Christ? Hard to sit through a meeting and not hear this or something similar to this.
You've never heard that someone can only be saved by professing through a worker?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2015 21:06:24 GMT -5
If asked such a question, I would ask for clarification, "religion or denomination?"
My religion (belief basis) does go right to The Christ Himself, not built upon anyone or anything else. When asked, I respond; "I belong to the world wide fellowship of believers in The Christ known only to God." Then, asserting that, I merely add, "are you one of us?" If "yes," wonderful. If "no," I let it go at that.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2015 21:08:17 GMT -5
Quote - "Thank you Bert for that reply, you have confirmed for me that not much has really changed in the last 6 years in the Fellowship.
"Certainly we don't like the idea of "partners" " who are "we" ? I wonder what Jesus would think ?
Also what exactly are "one of us" ? Sounds like the them & us way of thinking hasn't changed either !"
We all claim Jesus as our own, it seems. Seems the "modern Jesus" is a gay loving guy with studs and tats and who joined the Hells Angels. Jesus' morality was far higher than that of the Old Testament, and He expected the same of his followers. He didn't have to spell anything out - you get the picture from reading the Gospels and the letters written by his Apostles.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2015 21:13:14 GMT -5
Quote - "I know Cherie as being careful about facts and to tell the truth- period."
I am a bit wary of people "careful about facts" Reminds me of politicians who are being interviewed, and weighing every reply. And people coming out of court houses and their lawyers are shooing journos away, or answering the questions for their client.
Facts alone don't make "truth." Google "fact truth"
|
|
|
Post by Roselyn T on Jul 25, 2015 21:15:58 GMT -5
Quote - "Thank you Bert for that reply, you have confirmed for me that not much has really changed in the last 6 years in the Fellowship. "Certainly we don't like the idea of "partners" " who are "we" ? I wonder what Jesus would think ? Also what exactly are "one of us" ? Sounds like the them & us way of thinking hasn't changed either !" We all claim Jesus as our own, it seems. Seems the "modern Jesus" is a gay loving guy with studs and tats and who joined the Hells Angels. Jesus' morality was far higher than that of the Old Testament, and He expected the same of his followers. He didn't have to spell anything out - you get the picture from reading the Gospels and the letters written by his Apostles."We", is any Christian that believes Jesus died for them Bert, not just a group of people who claim they are "The only right way". Well the difference that I see is this, Jesus sees all, things are not always black & white. Men think they see all and judge accordingly.
|
|
hberry
Senior Member
Posts: 743
|
Post by hberry on Jul 25, 2015 21:16:02 GMT -5
No one in the fellowship has ever even mentioned Wm I to me. We found a newspaper clipping about WI in my in law's papers, but they never told us either. My hubby's aunt did tell me to not ever believe that we were "Cooneyites," but that's all she would say. She came from KY; not sure if there were any of Cooney's followers there or not. At any rate, the one worker I mentioned WI name to, said "we don't know that it doesn't go all the way back to Christ" and wouldn't discuss it further.
|
|
|
Post by slowtosee on Jul 25, 2015 21:16:38 GMT -5
Emy, thanks for your reply and I'll take opportunity, to give you credit for staying here on this board. You are somewhat outnumbered, as far as meeting goers, I think, and not soooo sooooo many "friends" here to support your views, so that takes some courage etc. Thanks . I just got off the phone on a looooooong conversation with a dear ex-worker "friend", and had some challenging talk, but mostly just good times friendly talk, and he told me quite a bit about what he heard at convention and shared lots of "stuff' going on in the church, lots good and some not so good. Anyhow, appreciate all those who still communicate, including you and the other "friends" on this site. Cheers Oh, I didn't answer your question- no , I didn't and often don't read very carefully......... Friend said quite a bit spoken about separating custom from doctrine at convention. Black stockings, color of clothes, neckties, etc. etc. was ALL just custom. Hair done up for women, well, not so easy , custom or doctrine.... hey im off on a tangent again, I didn't know anything about Irvine, except he had gone wrong, and stay off the subject. Alvin
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2015 21:22:24 GMT -5
People say "where did Jesus say......?" and sometimes they are right. Jesus might not have said anything at all. But you can discern what he was thinking:
Recall the "woman of Samaria" - "you have had five husbands and he who you have now is not your husband" Censure? I believe so.
And this "He who is without sin let him first cast the stone at her." And people think you are a stone thrower for not accepting non-marital sex. What did He think of the adulterous woman? "Go and sin no more."
|
|
|
Post by slowtosee on Jul 25, 2015 21:26:57 GMT -5
Quote - "I know Cherie as being careful about facts and to tell the truth- period." I am a bit wary of people "careful about facts" Reminds me of politicians who are being interviewed, and weighing every reply. And people coming out of court houses and their lawyers are shooing journos away, or answering the questions for their client.
Facts alone don't make "truth." Google "fact truth" Here's a few facts about facts that I could take lessons from.... Prejudice is a great time saver. You can form opinions without having to get the facts. E. B. White People will generally accept facts as truth only if the facts agree with what they already believe. Andy Rooney
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2015 21:32:22 GMT -5
It's not correct. They don't go out like the early apostles. How do they differ in ways that are significant? What churches do a more faithful job?
|
|
|
Post by Roselyn T on Jul 25, 2015 21:58:02 GMT -5
Quote - "Thank you Bert for that reply, you have confirmed for me that not much has really changed in the last 6 years in the Fellowship. "Certainly we don't like the idea of "partners" " who are "we" ? I wonder what Jesus would think ? Also what exactly are "one of us" ? Sounds like the them & us way of thinking hasn't changed either !" We all claim Jesus as our own, it seems. Seems the "modern Jesus" is a gay loving guy with studs and tats and who joined the Hells Angels. Jesus' morality was far higher than that of the Old Testament, and He expected the same of his followers. He didn't have to spell anything out - you get the picture from reading the Gospels and the letters written by his Apostles."We", is any Christian that believes Jesus died for them Bert, not just a group of people who claim they are "The only right way". Well the difference that I see is this, Jesus sees all, things are not always black & white. Men think they see all and judge accordingly.
|
|
|
Post by Roselyn T on Jul 25, 2015 22:03:49 GMT -5
People say "where did Jesus say......?" and sometimes they are right. Jesus might not have said anything at all. But you can discern what he was thinking:
Recall the "woman of Samaria" - "you have had five husbands and he who you have now is not your husband" Censure? I believe so.
And this "He who is without sin let him first cast the stone at her." And people think you are a stone thrower for not accepting non-marital sex. What did He think of the adulterous woman? "Go and sin no more." Bert, how can we discern what Jesus was thinking ? If you are going to use the Bible to back that up, which Bible ? Jesus is way more than a Bible written by men ! By the way what has non-marital sex got to do with anything we are talking about ?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2015 22:08:33 GMT -5
Non-marital sex is involved in both cases I mentioned. The penalty for non-marital sex in olden times (and recent times too) was DEATH.
|
|
|
Post by Mary on Jul 25, 2015 22:10:31 GMT -5
Bert the apostles did not have preassigned areas where they were told where to go and stay with existing followers. They were more like roaming evangelists who went from place to place preaching the Gospel occasionally stopping with the church if there are as one there. They were to take the Gospel into all the world.
The workers are more like pastors over the existing flock except they change over every year or two.
Do you really think that someone in a western country could even remotely have any idea or be able to copy something that took place 2,000 years ago in a country like Israel.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2015 22:21:20 GMT -5
Bert the apostles did not have preassigned areas where they were told where to go and stay with existing followers. They were more like roaming evangelists who went from place to place preaching the Gospel occasionally stopping with the church if there are as one there. They were to take the Gospel into all the world. The workers are more like pastors over the existing flock except they change over every year or two. Do you really think that someone in a western country could even remotely have any idea or be able to copy something that took place 2,000 years ago in a country like Israel. not the seventy they were sent to specific cities and places that Jesus would go to...in other words preassigned
|
|
|
Post by Roselyn T on Jul 25, 2015 22:22:29 GMT -5
Non-marital sex is involved in both cases I mentioned. The penalty for non-marital sex in olden times (and recent times too) was DEATH. So you believe non-marital sex in that clear cut Bert ?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2015 22:25:31 GMT -5
Bert the apostles did not have preassigned areas where they were told where to go and stay with existing followers. They were more like roaming evangelists who went from place to place preaching the Gospel occasionally stopping with the church if there are as one there. They were to take the Gospel into all the world. The workers are more like pastors over the existing flock except they change over every year or two. Do you really think that someone in a western country could even remotely have any idea or be able to copy something that took place 2,000 years ago in a country like Israel. I suppose if we had a bunch of itinerant preachers (about a thousand I figured) who all just went as they reckoned the spirit was leading them, then a lot would have made it to the sunny Greek isles in the Aegean. Somebody organized all that. We don't know who but we can guess - Apollos, Paul, Peter, James etc.. Lots of logistics and money involved too. And I am sure it's HERE that the spirit led this church.
This business of Jesus et al being spontaneous is a bit like the story of Jesus helping the materially poor - unsubstantiated and poorly thought through.
In answer to the question of the 2,000 years. One Worker said he was on a train, sitting next to a man of the cloth. This minister asked the Worker about his life and he said he went around like Jesus did, preaching (note - didn't say he went back to Jesus in an unbroken line!) and the minister said "Oh, but that's impossible!" "Well, I'm doing it!" replied the Worker.
|
|