The key point here is that the issue, in terms of being a problem, is not beliefs – it is when a group develops a level of undue influence that causes a person harm (whether financial, societal, mental or otherwise). Bringing theology into this doesn’t address this dynamic.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two_by_Twos
http://www.workersect.org/2×201.html
http://www.workersect.org/2x205a.html
http://www.thetwobytwos.com/Home_Page.html
http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_2x2.htm
http://www.forthefainthearted.com/2010/09/23/not-standing-at-the-churchyard-gate/
http://mmoutreachinc.com/cult_groups/2×2.html
http://www.rickross.com/groups/twobytwos.html
http://www.votisalive.com/content/two-faces-two-twos-0
http://religiouschildabuse.blogspot.com/2010/12/cult-with-no-name.html
http://www.culthelp.info/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=194&Itemid=8
http://www.puritanboard.com/f34/cooneyites-go-preachers-two-twos-41249/
http://www.workersect.org/2x204_sites.html
http://www.apologeticsindex.org/t17.html
Filed under: Christian, Two by Twos |
Dialogue Ireland 
As I’ve just said on the other thread, nowhere have I used the term “cult” in this discussion. It might be an idea to carefully re-examine what I actually posted, John.
LikeLike
dialogueireland: appreciate your reasoned and sensible post
Andrew Tucker: I could counter answer each of the points you mention, your experience and perception of the group is very different to mine.
However as dialogueireland needfully and correctly posts…. the focus of this blog is cultism.
I wonder if you in fact know and understand the psychological and sociological characteristics that are commonly understood to be evidence of cultism? Your posts to date wouldn’t seem to indicate such.
Many make use of the pejorative term ‘cult’ in an emotional way having little or no understanding of psychological and sociological characteristics that must be present for the ‘label’ to be used in a correct and meaningful way.
LikeLike
My understanding is John has made himself known before, however we protect any person’s anonymity. Deal with the arguments put forward rather than the personality of the person making the comment.
Also you seem to be focusing on the heresy of the 2×2 rather than the focus of this blog cultism.
LikeLike
If John is so confident about his church he should leave his real full name and embrace the concept of accountability which is so foreign to the overseers and workers. Repentance is preached by the workers but it has a different meaning. The workers expect their converts to “repent” from mainstream Christianity and certain other things I mentioned in the previous post. If the workers really believed that salvation was through Christ alone they wouldn’t preach damnation to any who dares to quit their church, or insist on re-baptising converts who have already been baptised at an ordinary church. The workers will deceptively quote scripture at people to infer they agree with standard Christian doctrine but privately know it has a different meaning within their group. Lying by omission is their mantra. Furthermore, if the workers were so confident that their message had any degree of truth they wouldn’t try so hard to cover up the late Victorian origins of the church. Anyone with a brain can view historic proof that the 2×2 church was founded by a false prophet who was so deluded he believed himself to be one of the two end time prophets from the book of Revelation. We are of course discussing William Irvine here who declared the whole thing a “great experiment” after the workers booted him out and stole the power base for themselves.
LikeLike
Andrew’s experience is VERY different to mine.
I am a worker/missionary with this group. Repentance is a foundation truth and essential part of my ministry. It was a foundation truth that was part of the gospel that brought me salvation decades ago.
Eph 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
Eph 2:9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.
Eph 2:10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.
LikeLike
Are the 2x2s a dangerous group? It all depends on how one chooses to define the actual term “dangerous”. The 2×2 religion has an extremely innocent and harmless public face. Butter wouldn’t melt in the mouths of many members and the “friends”, nine times out of ten, are friendly and always ready to help one out in a crisis. Dig below the surface however and the more perceptive individual will begin to detect a subtle “undercurrent” or agenda. It soon becomes clear that they believe in a “salvation plus works” kind of gospel, which on closer inspection isn’t actually a gospel at all. Furthermore, many basic Biblical terms and precepts have radically different definitions within the 2×2 church. For example the “works” they believe that need to be maintained in order to secure salvation are a bunch of man made restrictions on certain “worldly” issues such as wearing jewellery, hair dye, make up, no TV/radio, not going to the cinema etc etc. Sin also has a non biblical definition within this church. Sin according to the workers is disobeying them or attending a different church. Repentance doesn’t feature anywhere in the workers’ preaching. If a missionary doesn’t preach repentance from Biblically defined sin and the need to trust in the atoning sacrifice of Jesus Christ ONLY for salvation, they are leading the listener astray. Any convert to the 2×2 system is not getting saved. They are submitting to the earthly bondage of men and believing in a different Jesus and a different “gospel”. They are forced to give up quite a bit of personal freedom in return for eternal damnation. And all that is delivered to the captive under a sweet and innocent cheap facade. If that isn’t dangerous then what is?
LikeLike
I am new to this website and having just read this conversation, I have to say I agree wholeheartedly with the comment from Wyatt Hatt “With regard to the negative criticism, it’s rather a different thing for those who were children in the group, and for whom leaving means eternal damnation.” I was raised in the group and left at 18 years old. I have been struggling for the past 19 years to undo the psychological damage that resulted from being raised in the group. Unfortunately, my psychological issues are deemed by my family (and by myself – as a core belief) as being the result of having chosen the “world” over the “way”. My logical brain knows this is hogwash, however, it is difficult to change core beliefs. I still maintain an honorable, honest and healthy lifestyle and I still do not have a t.v. I seek to believe in a loving God, but try as I might, I continue to be afraid of an angry God who will send me to eternal damnation for wearing make up and trousers and not going to “meetings”. Good grief!
LikeLike
Wyatt, your post sounded as though it was excusing the group’s behaviour and that is why I quoted you. I meant no offense.
You say “those harmed are those at the margins” and that’s sad because the very people who Jesus received out to was those very people at the margins.
LikeLike
“On leaving a church, rejection should not be a normal experience.”
I agree. Please stop taking my posts as somehow excusing the church in every respect. I merely commented on the OP’s implication that there are extensive harms inside the church. Those harmed are those at the margins.
LikeLike
On leaving a church, rejection should not be a normal experience.
LikeLike
Incidentally, I have also posted in the past as to the reasons why our ‘exit experience’ has been less negative than some others. I fully accept the difficulties some ex’s have had, and some continue to have. However, most of the web material I read is far tilted to the negative side of the scale, so counter-balance is generally required on the positive side.
LikeLike
We used to say that if you give an engineer a screwdriver the whole word turns into a screw, and the same must be said of the counter-cult mindset. Here is a perfect case in point. Some of you, read my first post again and break down for me the “cult mindset”. Next Google “tilting at windmills”.
LikeLike
Just now catching up here. My comment at the top of this list was meant to be quite neutral, and I was in no way making out those in the group to be better than those out. I realize that there are many who continue their spiritual journey after leaving the friends fellowship and I am one of them.
I just thought it would be self-evident that those leaving would experience ‘rejection’ and those not leaving would continue to experience ‘acceptance’. How can you argue with that?
LikeLike
Hello Everest,
Yes, I agree that there are others, like Wyatt, who had a more positive experience of the meetings. I do not deny that for some the meetings was a nice group to be a part of. I just wish those people would accept those with less positive experiences of the group.
LikeLike
proof reading correction
Your perception and understanding OF Wyatt is different to that which I have.
Do you accept what HE writes as valid,accurate and true according to his experience as a member and now as an ex member of the group?
LikeLike
‘never returning to meetings’
Appreciate your reply and glad you have read some of Wyatt’s writings.
I have had some personal written communication with him.
Your perception and understanding Wyatt is different to that which I have.
His experience as a member of the fellowship seems to be different to yours?
Do you accept what writes as valid,accurate and true according to his experience as a member and now as an ex member of the group?
I’ll paste here the first part of the post of which you quote above.
LikeLike
Hi everest,
Yes, I have read Wyatt’s other comments. It’s clear from his comments that although he has left, a part of him still remains wrapped up in the workers’ teachings. For an example: Wyatt refers to exs who leave for a Christian church and speak out against the issues in the meetings as ” ‘anal’ Christians” but then admits:
“If it just happens that this is not the group for you, and you were born into it, there is no simple exit strategy. Your family will think you are “lost”. So .. a great group for many, not so great for some.”
LikeLike
“never returning to the meetings”
Have you read Wyatt’s other writings? .
He wrote
“In the end things went wrong because the group is unaccepting of other Christians, and our own spiritual growth took us in another direction.”
Is this an exclusivist mindset?
LikeLike
Hi everest,
Yes, I am aware that Wyatt is an ex. It seems to me that exs need but out of the meetings a good while before their exclusivist mindset fades. Wyatt is probably out just a short while, not long enough for the “evil” world versus “holy” us mindset to fade.
LikeLike
“never returning to the meetings”
are you aware that wyatt is an ex not current member of the group?
LikeLike
“… the group come to no harm. It’s those who leave the group…”
Another thing: the workers often preach that those who leave the meetings will come to a tragic end. That’s not true!
LikeLike
“Actually people ‘in’ the group come to no harm. It’s those who leave the group, who have trouble with the rejection. In no way excusing this issue, but most of those in the group are well adjusted, satisfied adults who do very well in life and in society.”
To those in the meetings, it is never the meetings with the problems but the exes. Wyatt has just given a perfect example of this mindset. This kind of mindset is typically found in controlling, exclusivist groups (aka- cults)
LikeLike
Actually people “in” the group come to no harm. It’s those who leave the group, who have trouble with the rejection. In no way excusing this issue, but most of those in the group are well adjusted, satisfied adults who do very well in life and in society.
LikeLike