|
FOUNDER
Feb 11, 2009 22:35:47 GMT -5
Post by Dubious Disciple (xdc) on Feb 11, 2009 22:35:47 GMT -5
Exes will fight to the death to define Irvine's role in a way that does not allow for divine inspiration. After all, they MUST in order to justify their beliefs.
Exclusivist f&w's will fight to the death to define Irvine's role in a way that implies God's involvement and favor. After all, they MUST.
The reasonable middle ground seems to be the practicing, nonexclusive f&w's. GO CLEARDAY! YAY SHARON! GET 'EM, LIN!
|
|
|
FOUNDER
Feb 11, 2009 22:36:09 GMT -5
Post by ilylo on Feb 11, 2009 22:36:09 GMT -5
Someone should crunch some numbers and do a bar graph on this. Dietcoke would be just the man. It would finally give him something constructive and relevant to do.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
FOUNDER
Feb 11, 2009 22:42:02 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Feb 11, 2009 22:42:02 GMT -5
Bad idea ilylo, then we would have to come up with something constructive for you to do.
Really, a graph chart of the growth of workers between 1899 and 1905 would be very unusual.
|
|
|
FOUNDER
Feb 11, 2009 22:45:32 GMT -5
Post by ilylo on Feb 11, 2009 22:45:32 GMT -5
You would? Dang. I thought I was entitled to wallow around slinging mud and making random bodily noises like my good friend DC.
|
|
|
FOUNDER
Feb 11, 2009 22:54:11 GMT -5
Post by Sharon on Feb 11, 2009 22:54:11 GMT -5
Exes will fight to the death to define Irvine's role in a way that does not allow for divine inspiration. After all, they MUST in order to justify their beliefs. Exclusivist f&w's will fight to the death to define Irvine's role in a way that implies God's involvement and favor. After all, they MUST. The reasonable middle ground seems to be the practicing, nonexclusive f&w's. GO CLEARDAY! YAY SHARON! GET 'EM, LIN! dc, when it's all said and done...it isn't going to matter too much what any of us come up to as far as what history or founder means....do you think..... I'm not so sure anymore it'll please the exes if we shout from the housetop that WI founded whatever! It does trouble me greatly though that a goup of seemingly average or better intellectual people could be so taken up with someone so evidently abnormal as WI.....course that's sometimes the veneer of an entertainer even in this day and age...they have such charisma that it takes a lot of getting to know who really they are beneath all that veneer. Come to find out a lot of entertainers, preachers, musicians, etc. tend to have such mental challenges from genetic disposals. I also do think that about the time that WI was realized to who he really was, that some of the workers were really into the spiritual reality of the personal relationship with God....in no way can I not grant that to some of them! And as it's been said, when you look at the sheer poverty of the whole thing it is amazing at the growth it had.....then compare it to now, the growth is typically stunted because for some reason a majority has lost the initial vision/revelation! When it all comes down to form as the doctrine then culture of the day will over rule in a large percentage of the cases considered.
|
|
|
FOUNDER
Feb 11, 2009 22:59:01 GMT -5
Post by CherieKropp on Feb 11, 2009 22:59:01 GMT -5
I spoon fed the numbers to someone on a new thread...it should be pretty easy to use them and show whatever someone wants...that is, if you're a "number person," which I am not!
|
|
|
FOUNDER
Feb 11, 2009 23:13:19 GMT -5
Post by JO on Feb 11, 2009 23:13:19 GMT -5
I was thinking tonight about this great debate that is raging about WI.I think the debate is very murky and the reason is, there are two sides to a church. There is the natural side or the human side. This side of the church has an originator here on earth. It has organization,structure,and a body. We could say this is where WI and those early men fit in. They brought origin. The organization,structure and body has changed many times through the years. This can be documented and explained with history. That's not all bad.Then there is the spiritual side of the church. This is what the church brings into the lives of the people. A relationship with God. This is a separate subject and is not as much documented because it is a personal subject. Each persons experience is different. This also is an indication of the effectiveness of the church This is how I see it too Lin. We are a body of people who endeavor to follow Jesus who is the truth, the way, and the life. Sadly many folks seem to see the group as the way, the truth and the life. William Irvine started the mission Wilson McClung, George Walker, Jack Carrol etc worked in. From William Irvine's mission an organization evolved over time - Sunday AM meetings, a convention and special meetings system, overseers, workers' lists etc. That doesn't mean William Irvine started the way, the truth and the life. That doesn't mean God was not involved in what William Irvine, Wilson McClung, George Walker, Jack Carrol etc were doing. That doesn't mean we should lift William Irvine up and make a hero out of him. Nor does it mean we should be ashamed of him. History is what it is, so let's see it for what it is. My concern is that still today many people continue to support the rewriting of history to exclude William Irvine's role as the man who started the mission.
|
|
|
FOUNDER
Feb 11, 2009 23:24:29 GMT -5
Post by ilylo on Feb 11, 2009 23:24:29 GMT -5
Really, a graph chart of the growth of workers between 1899 and 1905 would be very unusual. Unusual in what way?
|
|
|
FOUNDER
Feb 11, 2009 23:30:46 GMT -5
Post by Happy Feet on Feb 11, 2009 23:30:46 GMT -5
Starting a church like many have done does not mean that they were not divinely inspired to do so. It is not an either or - starting a church or being divinely inspired - it can be both.
Irvine may have been divinely inspired to start a group, the same as Wesley, Luther or any other many of God was. All men trying to get back to the Bible. Many probably did not intend to start a group, but as supporters and those of like mind grew a group formed around them.
|
|
|
FOUNDER
Feb 11, 2009 23:41:01 GMT -5
Post by JO on Feb 11, 2009 23:41:01 GMT -5
~~~ So, where do you think John Kelly fits into the picture according to the 1905 worker list?
John Kelly was one of the people who chose to work in the mission William Irvine started. My concern is that still today many people continue to support the rewriting of history to exclude William Irvine's role as the man who started the mission.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
FOUNDER
Feb 12, 2009 0:06:49 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Feb 12, 2009 0:06:49 GMT -5
Really, a graph chart of the growth of workers between 1899 and 1905 would be very unusual. Unusual in what way? Simple. I read charts all the time and it is rare to see anything like this that is not driven by capital (money).
|
|
|
FOUNDER
Feb 12, 2009 0:26:20 GMT -5
Post by ilylo on Feb 12, 2009 0:26:20 GMT -5
Then it's not unusual, is it?
|
|
|
FOUNDER
Feb 12, 2009 1:01:54 GMT -5
Post by selah on Feb 12, 2009 1:01:54 GMT -5
I have never thought of it like that at all. The distinction I make between "founder" and "finder" is that a founder starts something, and a finder simply finds something that was already in existance. William Irvine started a church, while unique in many ways, it is nevertheless a church like others in that it seeks to bring people closer to God, AND that it has a founder.
The issue in titles for William Irvine is there because the reality of a "founder" has been denied for so long, and now it's time to get the record straight. Trying to change a "founder" into a "finder" simply avoids true acknowledgement.
Using that label allows the other misconception to remain...that is...that the church of which WI is the "finder" is the same one as the one in the NT. It isn't. The one recorded in the NT was the 1st century church...it was not the Baptist church or the Pentecostal church or the f&w church. It was the 1st century church.
The "faith once delivered to the saints," the TRUST in CHRIST and the story of redemption, is still the SAME in every believer, just as it was in the 1st century, and it has continued unbroken in the hearts of those who welcome Him in.
THAT is what will never change, and what we cling to. WI may have been a "finder" of that, but when he became the "founder" of the f&w fellowship, he allowed other things to get in the way of what he had discovered in the first place.
Blessings, Linda
|
|
|
FOUNDER
Feb 12, 2009 2:42:36 GMT -5
Post by JO on Feb 12, 2009 2:42:36 GMT -5
John Kelly was one of the people who chose to work in the mission William Irvine started. My concern is that still today many people continue to support the rewriting of history to exclude William Irvine's role as the man who started the mission. ~~~ How do you know it wasn't John Kelly who instigated the 2x2 movement to WI while they were Faith Mission workers in 1896? Do you know anything about John Kelly?That's a simple question to answer Nathan. It amazes me that you have so little knowledge of the history of the mission William Irvine started. I recommend John Long's Diary and Goodhand Pattison's account to start with.
|
|
|
FOUNDER
Feb 12, 2009 7:43:19 GMT -5
Post by CherieKropp on Feb 12, 2009 7:43:19 GMT -5
CD wrote: Also dont forget that in 1901 WmI left FM and began working full time on FAITH LINES and Todd's Mission folded, and some of his workers came over to WmI's band of workers. Perhaps capital did have a part in it The farm and inheritance Willie Gill gave up was not too shabby! Nor was the amount of savings Cooney had accumulated. As others gave up their situations (a couple married couples gave up their farms' Elliotts and Bettys) who knows what they did with the money? I figure it financed some of the way to get workers to pioneer other countries. Also, might take a look at what was going on "at home." What professions were out there for these untrained young men/women? What was life like in Ireland and the UK at the time? What did these folks have to look forward to in the way of jobs?? CONDITIONS IN IRELAND AT THE TURN OF THE 20th CENTURY: Chap 6 of WmI Book www.tellingthetruth.info/founder_book/06wmibook.php#conditionsThe group expanded very rapidly in the first ten or so years, mainly in the small country towns. Education became mandatory in 1880, and 1900, the small towns were full of frustrated young men looking for something more out of life than a 70-hour week as a farm laborer or working behind a counter. Irvine's initial success was a likely product of fortunate timing and place. His style of preaching appealed to those who had an anti-clerical attitude, and most of the early converts were from the north of Ireland, which is not known for its religious tolerance. It has been said: "It is empirically well established that sects proliferate in periods of social unrest." (D. Thompson, England in the Nineteenth Century, Penguin, Middlesex, 1950, p 195). The Secret Sect sets out the state of affairs found in the United Kingdom at the time Irvine's movement began: "William Irvine's sectarian ideas took root at the turn of the century in social and economic conditions that favoured acceptance by many who heard his message. The nineteenth century in Britain was a period of great change in economic and social life when, through the effects of the Industrial Revolution, in which she pioneered the way, changes in the balance between agriculture and industry necessitated the urbanization of large areas, and involved population upheavals…'much of the labor drawn away from the countryside was unemployed. The spread of elementary education (made compulsory in 1880) made them [laborers] more discontented with their lot* so that the 'manual working classes of the new urban society became more conscious of the deprivations and developed institutionalized forms through which they would express them'. Although the churches were finding a great indifference to organized religion among the working people there were, concurrent with the rising status of the working man, greater opportunities for lay evangelism, and there was a growth of movements that depended upon the efforts of lay people: Plymouth Brethren, Mormons, Christadelphians, the Salvation Army, Jehovah's Witnesses, the Student Volunteer Movement, the Irish Workers Christian Union and the Faith Mission all arose during the nineteenth century. Revivalism on an intensive scale, from the Primitive Methodists to the great campaigns of Finney, Moody, Pearsall Smith and Torrey had made the earnest lay leader an increasingly common phenomenon. Irvine's teaching excited the imagination of young Christians in the country districts of Ireland, and also appealed to men and women 'living in a drab existence of routine in the towns and suburbs.' " "Young converts eagerly abandoned their strictly limited environments to capture the opportunity that Irvine offered to become preachers, and they were excited by the promise of God's care for them if they were to give up everything…Some felt deeply disappointed in their churches and longed to be free…Converts saw themselves as sincere in their desire to be Good Christians, and claimed to be bringing light into darkness. The beliefs and the type of response made by converts bear witness both to the sectarian character of the movement and to the time of historical origin of the nameless sect when William Irvine raised his voice to protest against the religious beliefs and practice, social conditions and values of the late Victorian period in Britain." (page 5, The Secret Sect)
|
|
|
FOUNDER
Feb 12, 2009 10:32:10 GMT -5
Post by Dubious Disciple (xdc) on Feb 12, 2009 10:32:10 GMT -5
I have never thought of it like that at all. The distinction I make between "founder" and "finder" is that a founder starts something, and a finder simply finds something that was already in existance. William Irvine started a church, while unique in many ways, it is nevertheless a church like others in that it seeks to bring people closer to God, AND that it has a founder. The issue in titles for William Irvine is there because the reality of a "founder" has been denied for so long, and now it's time to get the record straight. Trying to change a "founder" into a "finder" simply avoids true acknowledgement. Using that label allows the other misconception to remain...that is...that the church of which WI is the "finder" is the same one as the one in the NT. It isn't. The one recorded in the NT was the 1st century church...it was not the Baptist church or the Pentecostal church or the f&w church. It was the 1st century church. The "faith once delivered to the saints," the TRUST in CHRIST and the story of redemption, is still the SAME in every believer, just as it was in the 1st century, and it has continued unbroken in the hearts of those who welcome Him in. THAT is what will never change, and what we cling to. WI may have been a "finder" of that, but when he became the "founder" of the f&w fellowship, he allowed other things to get in the way of what he had discovered in the first place. Blessings, Linda um, Linda, you are proving my point. How do you KNOW Irvine started something new, rather than receiving a divine vision of something old? You don't. You BELIEVE. You want to believe because you don't like Irvine's results; you'd rather think the Bible teaches something else. Then, you take your beliefs and pretend they are facts. You select the title FOUNDER because it fits what you believe are the facts. Are YOU able to prove, Linda, that no such divine vision occurred, and therefore, nobody worshipped the Irvine way before him? You fall into the same trap as Cherie et. al. "Irvine was nobody special, therefore he was only a founder, therefore he was nobody special."
|
|
|
FOUNDER
Feb 12, 2009 10:46:52 GMT -5
Post by degem on Feb 12, 2009 10:46:52 GMT -5
Jesus the author and finisher of our faith.
|
|
|
FOUNDER
Feb 12, 2009 11:38:22 GMT -5
Post by Dubious Disciple (xdc) on Feb 12, 2009 11:38:22 GMT -5
sorry, Gem, I do not mean to imply that the f&w's here subscribe to the "Irvine as finder/prophet/visionary" theory. But some do, a sort of last gasp to hold on to exclusivism, I imagine. I do not condone exclusivism, but neither do I condone its dismissal on the basis of "fact", as least, not from a group of people that believe in virgin births, resurrections, and turning water into wine. Such people are not exactly credible witnesses to discuss "fact" vs "fiction," and the argument always boils down to the same tired common denominator: "God is on my side, not yours."
|
|
|
FOUNDER
Feb 12, 2009 12:00:01 GMT -5
Post by Dubious Disciple (xdc) on Feb 12, 2009 12:00:01 GMT -5
ok, ignore that post, my frustration with people trying to merge fact with faith is again peeking through.
|
|
|
FOUNDER
Feb 12, 2009 13:17:48 GMT -5
Post by JO on Feb 12, 2009 13:17:48 GMT -5
Jesus the author and finisher of our faith. Good point Gem. How can we help folks whose faith is in the mission William Irvine started instead of in Jesus who is the way, the truth and the life?
|
|
|
FOUNDER
Feb 12, 2009 13:30:43 GMT -5
Post by Dubious Disciple (xdc) on Feb 12, 2009 13:30:43 GMT -5
Jesus the author and finisher of our faith. Good point Gem. How can we help folks whose faith is in the mission William Irvine started instead of in Jesus who is the way, the truth and the life? The trick appears to be to carefully study the facts just far enough to drop the exclusivism of Irvinism, but not study them enough to drop the exclusivism of Christianity. We must carefully choose which impossibilities to ridicule and which to keep. It's a tightrope, and I caution you, it's very easy to get wrapped up in the search for historical truth and learn too much.
|
|
|
FOUNDER
Feb 12, 2009 13:59:37 GMT -5
Post by selah on Feb 12, 2009 13:59:37 GMT -5
Hi dietcoke,
I read your response to me too, and this other quote of yours kind of sums up what you were saying to me I think.
I hear what you're saying and understand. The one thing that makes a difference for me is the actual tangible presence of the indwelling Spirit of God. It isn't just about what I BELIEVE. It isn't just in my head...in fact some of what I experience with the Spirit bypasses my head altogether! I'm sure that is obvious to you! ;D (I'm hearing the theme of the Twilight Zone in my mind right now. LOL!)
Anyway, it's true. I cannot PROVE that WI vision of the structure and functional behaviors of the f&w fellowship did NOT come from God. Even using scriptural references will not convince people who have their own interpretations. So, if you are going to choose what to believe, you need to investigate, and the more you investigate, the more you discover, and the more you discover, the more challenging it all becomes. However, when you are led by the indwelling Spirit, none of the challenges take away that intimacy.
If I had never been taught of Christianity, would I experience that profound relationship with the Divine? Perhaps I would and perhaps not, but for me, I'm just grateful that I do, and none of the other intellectual measuring really changes that reality. I participate in these discussions, because they are interesting and stimulating AND because somehow I keep thinking I'm moving closer to the truth. Of course that will be a never-ending pursuit.
Blessings, Linda
|
|
|
FOUNDER
Feb 12, 2009 14:10:08 GMT -5
Post by Dubious Disciple (xdc) on Feb 12, 2009 14:10:08 GMT -5
Very nice post, Linda, thank you! I think, now, we are getting to the bottom of religion's purpose. It's about personal experience.
Just as the "God" experience of many proves to them that Christianity is the one true way, so the "God" experience of the f&w's proves to them that the Truth is the one true way. After all, it WORKS.
Again, the tightrope: Open up the minds of these people so they can fellowship with other Christians, but be careful not to open them any further. They might start calling Jews brethren, or maybe even accept heathens like me.
|
|
|
FOUNDER
Feb 12, 2009 14:37:29 GMT -5
Post by Scott Ross on Feb 12, 2009 14:37:29 GMT -5
They might start calling Jews brethren, or maybe even accept heathens like me. I don't klnow about that you heathen you..... Scott
|
|
|
FOUNDER
Feb 12, 2009 15:51:06 GMT -5
Post by JO on Feb 12, 2009 15:51:06 GMT -5
Very nice post, Linda, thank you! I think, now, we are getting to the bottom of religion's purpose. It's about personal experience. Yes, you're on to it. What motivated Abraham? He had a living relationship with his creator, "the conscious guidance of God's hand".
|
|
|
FOUNDER
Feb 12, 2009 17:14:33 GMT -5
Post by Sharon on Feb 12, 2009 17:14:33 GMT -5
Good point Gem. How can we help folks whose faith is in the mission William Irvine started instead of in Jesus who is the way, the truth and the life? The trick appears to be to carefully study the facts just far enough to drop the exclusivism of Irvinism, but not study them enough to drop the exclusivism of Christianity. We must carefully choose which impossibilities to ridicule and which to keep. It's a tightrope, and I caution you, it's very easy to get wrapped up in the search for historical truth and learn too much. dc! I think perhaps that danger has already been done but not totally realized! Fact is decimating faith in all of this!
|
|
|
FOUNDER
Feb 12, 2009 19:31:28 GMT -5
Post by Sharon on Feb 12, 2009 19:31:28 GMT -5
Good point Gem. How can we help folks whose faith is in the mission William Irvine started instead of in Jesus who is the way, the truth and the life? The trick appears to be to carefully study the facts just far enough to drop the exclusivism of Irvinism, but not study them enough to drop the exclusivism of Christianity. We must carefully choose which impossibilities to ridicule and which to keep. It's a tightrope, and I caution you, it's very easy to get wrapped up in the search for historical truth and learn too much. As you so well say it, Christianity is exclusive as well! The articles I've mentioned before said something along this line...that the teachings of Jesus are exclusive! The teachings of other lines of religion are exclusive....on and on! It can boggle the mind, that exclusivity within a certain sect of religion would be a problem when Christianity itself is exclusive....though I can understand those who dislike the lack of love and mercy when some push exclusivity!
|
|
|
FOUNDER
Feb 12, 2009 19:33:41 GMT -5
Post by Sharon on Feb 12, 2009 19:33:41 GMT -5
Very nice post, Linda, thank you! I think, now, we are getting to the bottom of religion's purpose. It's about personal experience. Just as the "God" experience of many proves to them that Christianity is the one true way, so the "God" experience of the f&w's proves to them that the Truth is the one true way. After all, it WORKS. Again, the tightrope: Open up the minds of these people so they can fellowship with other Christians, but be careful not to open them any further. They might start calling Jews brethren, or maybe even accept heathens like me. dc! I'm under the impression that the majority of the workers have taught the idea that the Jews are God's chosen people and the Gentiles that believe in Christ Jesus are the Jews' adopted brethren!
|
|