Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 12, 2012 17:42:28 GMT -5
Just like to point out that the dates for when WmI left the Faith Mission are somewhat confusing: 1898, Sept: Irvine wrote : “In September, 1898, I was put out of the Faith Mission for not being willing to conform to all their piccadilly discipline, etc.” October 13, 1920 Letter to Dunbars However, the Faith Mission did not drop Irvine’s name from their Staff of Workers Lists until January 1901. However, beginning September, 1898, Irvine began to act on “independent lines,” which did not go unnoticed by Faith Mission. Cherie, although we have no way of knowing, it seems from what you have quoted above, that Irvine was approached/cautioned about his behaviour in some way and told something along the lines of if he didn't mend his ways then he would lose his position with the FM. Very probably this was done orally and the FM continued to give him a chance to conform to their standards. Irvine has about that time decided not to conform and has gone out on independent lines and was later dropped as being a FM worker? It seems the claims that Irvine resigned from the FM are erroneous?
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Feb 12, 2012 18:02:33 GMT -5
I really can't say if he did or didn't. I just quote the various info that turns up. Parker wrote: "In 1901, Irvine resigned officially from the Faith mission. George Walker and Matthew Wilson witnessed his formal resignation."
Maybe Parker got this from MW, as he personally interviewed Matt Wilson, who is on the 1905 Workers List. Like you, I figured maybe they gave him a grace period between the years...but I just don't know what happened. FM doesnt have his resignation --I asked.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 13, 2012 4:53:23 GMT -5
I really can't say if he did or didn't. I just quote the various info that turns up. Parker wrote: "In 1901, Irvine resigned officially from the Faith mission. George Walker and Matthew Wilson witnessed his formal resignation."Maybe Parker got this from MW, as he personally interviewed Matt Wilson, who is on the 1905 Workers List. Like you, I figured maybe they gave him a grace period between the years...but I just don't know what happened. FM doesnt have his resignation --I asked. Since Irvine is reported to have been "dropped" by the FM in 1901, perhaps he then officially resigned to make the clean break and give the impression that he resigned rather than was outed? It is rather strange for someone to have officially resigned to be recorded as having been merely dropped?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 13, 2012 7:52:11 GMT -5
I really can't say if he did or didn't. I just quote the various info that turns up. Parker wrote: "In 1901, Irvine resigned officially from the Faith mission. George Walker and Matthew Wilson witnessed his formal resignation."Maybe Parker got this from MW, as he personally interviewed Matt Wilson, who is on the 1905 Workers List. Like you, I figured maybe they gave him a grace period between the years...but I just don't know what happened. FM doesnt have his resignation --I asked. Since Irvine is reported to have been "dropped" by the FM in 1901, perhaps he then officially resigned to make the clean break and give the impression that he resigned rather than was outed? It is rather strange for someone to have officially resigned to be recorded as having been merely dropped? As in many relationships, business or personal, there is usually a period of estrangement before an official break. It would appear that this is the case with Irvine. The process of estrangement could have merely indicated that neither Irvine nor Govan really knew what to do with each other until it became perfectly clear that an official resignation was in order. John Long reports Irvine's uncertainty right up to the end when he finally make the decision to drop one and "go fully into the other".
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 13, 2012 12:28:06 GMT -5
Since Irvine is reported to have been "dropped" by the FM in 1901, perhaps he then officially resigned to make the clean break and give the impression that he resigned rather than was outed? It is rather strange for someone to have officially resigned to be recorded as having been merely dropped? As in many relationships, business or personal, there is usually a period of estrangement before an official break. It would appear that this is the case with Irvine. The process of estrangement could have merely indicated that neither Irvine nor Govan really knew what to do with each other until it became perfectly clear that an official resignation was in order. John Long reports Irvine's uncertainty right up to the end when he finally make the decision to drop one and "go fully into the other". Personally I see Irvine's behaviour during his Faith Mission times actually corroborating his behaviour during his years with the F&W's. He was uncontrollable in the FM and also with his fellow workers later. In both cases he was outed quietly and without a formal parting, until after it had happened. Perhaps he became an embarrassment to both?
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Feb 13, 2012 12:38:07 GMT -5
I recall friends in the southern USA calling the Wed. night meeting: "Prayer Meeting."
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on Feb 13, 2012 19:59:17 GMT -5
I recall friends in the southern USA calling the Wed. night meeting: "Prayer Meeting." They did, I remember that as well. And most of the older workers in those days did so as well. It didn't become "bible study" until about the time that the 3rd generation of workers became the older companions.....
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Feb 14, 2012 22:43:12 GMT -5
Some interesting points being made here. Sorry, I don't have time to comment on all of them.
|
|
|
Post by Linford Bledsoe on Feb 15, 2012 11:34:29 GMT -5
I recall friends in the southern USA calling the Wed. night meeting: "Prayer Meeting." They did, I remember that as well. And most of the older workers in those days did so as well. It didn't become "bible study" until about the time that the 3rd generation of workers became the older companions..... this has been a part of our lives since the 40s and never heard it called anything but bible study. I have been in other areas where it was called prayer meeting. Maybe it was a territory thing.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 15, 2012 11:42:38 GMT -5
They did, I remember that as well. And most of the older workers in those days did so as well. It didn't become "bible study" until about the time that the 3rd generation of workers became the older companions..... this has been a part of our lives since the 40s and never heard it called anything but bible study. I have been in other areas where it was called prayer meeting. Maybe it was a territory thing. First time I heard of it myself. It's very interesting though as it suggests another link back the the FM Prayer Union Meetings. It may also help explain why our "bible studies" are testimony meetings just like Sun am mtgs except everyone is testifying from the same chapter or subject. All of our meetings: bible study, Sun am mtgs and Union mtgs are all much the same.....which might suggest a link to their original source: the Prayer Union Meeting of the FM. I would still like to get description of an actual PU Mtg of the FM from 100 years ago.
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Feb 15, 2012 12:56:13 GMT -5
CD: A suggestion: Just email and ask them...they have always responded to my questions.
|
|
|
Post by StAnne on Feb 15, 2012 13:01:52 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Feb 15, 2012 13:23:01 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by StAnne on Feb 15, 2012 13:29:22 GMT -5
That's convenient. Would they have access to the history too?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 15, 2012 13:37:58 GMT -5
CD: A suggestion: Just email and ask them...they have always responded to my questions. Thanks, good idea. Will do!
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Feb 15, 2012 17:22:27 GMT -5
That's convenient. Would they have access to the history too? I don't know, but it's an interesting site all the same.
|
|
|
Post by StAnne on Feb 15, 2012 17:33:23 GMT -5
That's convenient. Would they have access to the history too? I don't know, but it's an interesting site all the same. Yes it is. It has a Statement of Doctrine. It lists two conference centers - ON and BC.
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Sept 23, 2017 15:08:09 GMT -5
Nate's much quoted ORIGINAL statement by What Hat hat about the Holiness Movement is on this thread at: professing.proboards.com/post/451625Nate has recently quoted 3 times this statement on his thread : Bookmark Nathan time line, Wm Irvine Founder in 1897? +much much more at: professing.proboards.com/thread/25658/nathan-time-line-irvine-founder?page=1Nate do you retype all your quotes? If you do, you need to learn how to copy and paste, and you won't have so many errors in your quotes. I wanted to be sure you had typed What Hat's quote correctly, and found numerous errors. Following is Nate's version with the omissions shown in other red, and strikeouts of his additions.
Note to Nate: when you want to add your comments to a direct quote, they go in [brackets]--that way readers know they were added by you and were not part of the original quote.Whathat wrote: "Interestingly, there is a picture of ALL the Faith Mission pilgrims/preachers as of 1892, standing in four rows like a the 2x2 worker s picture, and at their feet is a banner that says "holiness to the lord". "The Holiness" movement is simply the idea that you are redeemed when you are born again in Christ, but you are NOT sanctified at that point; you are NOT yet holy. William Irvine was steeped in it, because he attended Keswick Convention which is seen as a the center of the Holiness Movement. Nate inserted into What hat's quote: Diagram of the Holiness movement (John Wesley founder).... www.swartzentrover.com/cotor/E-Books/holiness/Holiness%20Movement.gifAnyway, the pedigree is actually from the Moravian Church which dates back to 1457. John Wesley, the founder of the Methodis ism, but who was actually an Anglican, was the first to spread the Holiness doctrine widely in his sermons and later in his book titled "Christians P perfection." "Christian Perfection" is the same idea as Holiness Nate omits part of a paragraph here. (Note to Nate: An ellipsis (punctuation mark) consists of three dots. [ … ] You use an ellipsis when omitting a word, phrase, line, paragraph, or more from a quoted passage. Ellipses save space or remove material that is less relevant.)
that you are "born again" once but then become perfected in Christ over time. I have read Wesley's book, but his distinction between perfected Christians who don't sin, but do make mistakes, versus unperfected Christians who aren't quite there yet, is quite a fine line if you ask me. But the essential idea of spiritual progress throughout life is a compelling one, all the same.So, this is from Wiki---- It was on the voyage to the colonies that the Wesleys first came into contact with Moravian settlers . Wesley was influenced by their deep faith and spirituality rooted in Pietism. At one point in . During the voyage a storm came up and broke the mast of the ship. While the English panicked, the Moravians calmly sang hymns and prayed. This experienced led Wesley to believe that the Moravians possessed inner strength which he lacked. The deeply personal religion that the Moravian pietists practiced heavily influence Wesley's theology of Method ism. And then the Moravian church was an offshoot of Catholicism, but almost a pre-Reformation one. However, some people believe the Moravian s church, I will quote wiki, "is reputed to have received the Apostolic Succession through the Waldensian s (1170 A.D.) Church, but the historicity of this is disputed." Nate Added link: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holiness_movement. I personally doubt that, but most ideas in Christianity, like that of holiness, have very deep roots.Anyway, potentially the lineage is: Jesus Christ the Founder of the New Testament 2x2 apostolic ministry and Church (33 A.D) >>> Paul the Apostle (68 A.D.) ...... the Vaudois (400 A.D.) ...... the Waldensians ( 1170 A.D.) ...... Albigeneses ( 1300 A.D.) ...... Moravians (1400 A.D.) ...... John Wesley (1700 A.D) ...... Holiness movement (1800 A.D.) ..... the Faith Mission ( 1886 A.D.) ...... Friends & workers 2x2 Workers and Friends ...... (1898/1900------>> Jesus 2nd coming!)
However, I would exercise extreme caution before making that leap. The problem is that the Waldensians (and the Cathars) always seem to be focal points for groups or historians that wish to find a way around lineage through the Catholic church. But the lineage from Moravian forward is historically documented. Note - it's just a lineage of ideas that is being consideredTwo additional paragraph were added to Nate's often quoted statement of What hat, which were not posted by What Hat on this thread. Discussed below.
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Sept 23, 2017 15:41:42 GMT -5
Nate usually adds this paragraph as though it were a part of the above quote of What Hat:From: Credibility of the "1905 Workers List" dated Feb 11, 2013 at: professing.proboards.com/post/514524NOTE: Nate left out the red, and added the strikeouts. I would have voted for 1897 William Irvine Founder date UNTIL a) I read John Long's Journal b) learned more on the socio-historical background that information informed the decision making of Irvine and the other preachers. That background included information on the Faith Mission, the Awakening in Scotland, various independent preaching movement s, as well as the Holiness doctrine. and Before that I could NOT couldn't see the forest before for the trees. Now, I see William Irvine, John Long and the other first 2x2 workers as having separated from a much larger preaching movement that was going on in Scotland in the late 19th Century, one which culminated in schism because the main denomination s would NOT accept the Holiness doctrine. Nate Omitted What hat's last sentence and list: The f&w were not the only ones going through this transformation. Here is a list of other Holiness denominations in the UK and America that began during or around that time. Similar conditions lead to similar results.
Brunstad Christian Church, also known by some as "Smith's Friends"[9] Christian and Missionary Alliance Christ's Sanctified Holy Church Church of Christ (Holiness) U.S.A. Church of Daniel's Band Church of God (Anderson, Indiana) Church of God (Holiness) Church of the Nazarene Bible Missionary Church Churches of Christ in Christian Union Evangelical Methodist Church Free Methodist Church The Salvation Army Wesleyan Church Wesleyan Methodist Church (Allegheny Conference) World Gospel Mission Wesleyan Holiness Alliance (Bartlesville, Oklahoma) Original Church of God or Sanctified Church I have been unable to find this quote Nate purports to have come from What Hat, but it wasn't on the same thread as the OP:As a "late date" fan at the present time, that would certainly make William Irvine the FIRST leader/overseer/head worker of the 2x2 movement. Founder? I have just NEVER liked calling William Irvine the Founder of the 2x2 movement. Nathan's selection of Edward Cooney quotes to Impartial Reporter in 1909 in the early days, and shed quite a bit of light on the early days of the movement, in my opinion. John Wesley's the Methodist worked and preaching on Christians perfection and his ideas in that area were strongly influenced in that area of Moravian Church, which is the Vaudois, and the Waldensians.
|
|
|
Post by nathan on Sept 23, 2017 19:31:30 GMT -5
Nate usually adds this paragraph as though it were a part of the above quote of What Hat:From: Credibility of the "1905 Workers List" dated Feb 11, 2013 at: professing.proboards.com/post/514524NOTE: Nate left out the red, and added the strikeouts. I would have voted for 1897 William Irvine Founder date UNTIL a) I read John Long's Journal b) learned more on the socio-historical background that information informed the decision making of Irvine and the other preachers. That background included information on the Faith Mission, the Awakening in Scotland, various independent preaching movement s, as well as the Holiness doctrine. and Before that I could NOT couldn't see the forest before for the trees. Now, I see William Irvine, John Long and the other first 2x2 workers as having separated from a much larger preaching movement that was going on in Scotland in the late 19th Century, one which culminated in schism because the main denomination s would NOT accept the Holiness doctrine. Nate Omitted What hat's last sentence and list: The f&w were not the only ones going through this transformation. Here is a list of other Holiness denominations in the UK and America that began during or around that time. Similar conditions lead to similar results.
Brunstad Christian Church, also known by some as "Smith's Friends"[9] Christian and Missionary Alliance Christ's Sanctified Holy Church Church of Christ (Holiness) U.S.A. Church of Daniel's Band Church of God (Anderson, Indiana) Church of God (Holiness) Church of the Nazarene Bible Missionary Church Churches of Christ in Christian Union Evangelical Methodist Church Free Methodist Church The Salvation Army Wesleyan Church Wesleyan Methodist Church (Allegheny Conference) World Gospel Mission Wesleyan Holiness Alliance (Bartlesville, Oklahoma) Original Church of God or Sanctified Church I have been unable to find this quote Nate purports to have come from What Hat, but it wasn't on the same thread as the OP:As a "late date" fan at the present time, that would certainly make William Irvine the FIRST leader/overseer/head worker of the 2x2 movement. Founder? I have just NEVER liked calling William Irvine the Founder of the 2x2 movement. Nathan's selection of Edward Cooney quotes to Impartial Reporter in 1909 in the early days, and shed quite a bit of light on the early days of the movement, in my opinion. John Wesley's the Methodist worked and preaching on Christians perfection and his ideas in that area were strongly influenced in that area of Moravian Church, which is the Vaudois, and the Waldensians. *** I answered this same questiOn in another post of William Irvine thread. Back in 2014 what hat posted many posts on similar threads, but many good thoughts were here and there... So, I took all the good and interesting parts and put into one post... And I added the diagram of the holiness movement to show many groups came forth or had great influence from that group including the faith mission, keswick convention, and the 2x2 ... The vaudois had great influence on John westly and holiness movemeon.... And I showed the vaudois teaching, belief on page to back up what hat wrote were TRUE.
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Sept 23, 2017 19:55:27 GMT -5
You need to work on how to quote...You're shooting yourself in the foot, Nate, with the methods you're using.
Combining comments like you did isn't correct or proper way to quote sources - and what about all your additions and deletions? You don't have the right to combine quotes - unless the writer gave permission. Or add to them you own thoughts--without indicating they came from you, such as using brackets.
You need to indicate when you switch from the words of the persons you're quoting TO your own words and BACK again. red-blue-black doesn't work. You need to plainly state the change in writer before quoting or commenting.
When you want to add YOUR comments to a direct quote, they go in [brackets]--that way readers know they were added by you and were not part of the original quote.
An ellipsis (punctuation mark) consists of three dots. (…) You use an ellipsis when omitting a word, phrase, line, paragraph, or more from a quoted passage. Ellipses save space or remove material that is less relevant.
If you want your 25 years of work to be viewed as credible, you need to observe these rules of punctuation when you quote words of others.
|
|
|
Post by nathan on Sept 23, 2017 21:33:43 GMT -5
You need to work on how to quote...You're shooting yourself in the foot, Nate, with the methods you're using. Combining comments like you did isn't correct or proper way to quote sources - and what about all your additions and deletions? You don't have the right to combine quotes - unless the writer gave permission. Or add to them you own thoughts--without indicating they came from you, such as using brackets. You need to indicate when you switch from the words of the persons you're quoting TO your own words and BACK again. red-blue-black doesn't work. You need to plainly state the change in writer before quoting or commenting. That is if you want your 25 years of work to be viewed as credible. *** Thanks, I will keep that in mind and will try to improve it so it makes thing clearer and less confusion.
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Sept 23, 2017 22:18:52 GMT -5
Your efforts will be appreciated.
Do you know how to "copy and paste"?
|
|
|
Post by Greg on Sept 24, 2017 2:15:56 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Roselyn T on Feb 2, 2018 4:18:55 GMT -5
Nate's much quoted ORIGINAL statement by What Hat hat about the Holiness Movement is on this thread at: professing.proboards.com/post/451625Nate has recently quoted 3 times this statement on his thread : Bookmark Nathan time line, Wm Irvine Founder in 1897? +much much more at: professing.proboards.com/thread/25658/nathan-time-line-irvine-founder?page=1Nate do you retype all your quotes? If you do, you need to learn how to copy and paste, and you won't have so many errors in your quotes. I wanted to be sure you had typed What Hat's quote correctly, and found numerous errors. Following is Nate's version with the omissions shown in other red, and strikeouts of his additions.
Note to Nate: when you want to add your comments to a direct quote, they go in [brackets]--that way readers know they were added by you and were not part of the original quote.Whathat wrote: "Interestingly, there is a picture of ALL the Faith Mission pilgrims/preachers as of 1892, standing in four rows like a the 2x2 worker s picture, and at their feet is a banner that says "holiness to the lord". "The Holiness" movement is simply the idea that you are redeemed when you are born again in Christ, but you are NOT sanctified at that point; you are NOT yet holy. William Irvine was steeped in it, because he attended Keswick Convention which is seen as a the center of the Holiness Movement. Nate inserted into What hat's quote: Diagram of the Holiness movement (John Wesley founder).... www.swartzentrover.com/cotor/E-Books/holiness/Holiness%20Movement.gifAnyway, the pedigree is actually from the Moravian Church which dates back to 1457. John Wesley, the founder of the Methodis ism, but who was actually an Anglican, was the first to spread the Holiness doctrine widely in his sermons and later in his book titled "Christians P perfection." "Christian Perfection" is the same idea as Holiness Nate omits part of a paragraph here. (Note to Nate: An ellipsis (punctuation mark) consists of three dots. [ … ] You use an ellipsis when omitting a word, phrase, line, paragraph, or more from a quoted passage. Ellipses save space or remove material that is less relevant.)
that you are "born again" once but then become perfected in Christ over time. I have read Wesley's book, but his distinction between perfected Christians who don't sin, but do make mistakes, versus unperfected Christians who aren't quite there yet, is quite a fine line if you ask me. But the essential idea of spiritual progress throughout life is a compelling one, all the same.So, this is from Wiki---- It was on the voyage to the colonies that the Wesleys first came into contact with Moravian settlers . Wesley was influenced by their deep faith and spirituality rooted in Pietism. At one point in . During the voyage a storm came up and broke the mast of the ship. While the English panicked, the Moravians calmly sang hymns and prayed. This experienced led Wesley to believe that the Moravians possessed inner strength which he lacked. The deeply personal religion that the Moravian pietists practiced heavily influence Wesley's theology of Method ism. And then the Moravian church was an offshoot of Catholicism, but almost a pre-Reformation one. However, some people believe the Moravian s church, I will quote wiki, "is reputed to have received the Apostolic Succession through the Waldensian s (1170 A.D.) Church, but the historicity of this is disputed." Nate Added link: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holiness_movement. I personally doubt that, but most ideas in Christianity, like that of holiness, have very deep roots.Anyway, potentially the lineage is: Jesus Christ the Founder of the New Testament 2x2 apostolic ministry and Church (33 A.D) >>> Paul the Apostle (68 A.D.) ...... the Vaudois (400 A.D.) ...... the Waldensians ( 1170 A.D.) ...... Albigeneses ( 1300 A.D.) ...... Moravians (1400 A.D.) ...... John Wesley (1700 A.D) ...... Holiness movement (1800 A.D.) ..... the Faith Mission ( 1886 A.D.) ...... Friends & workers 2x2 Workers and Friends ...... (1898/1900------>> Jesus 2nd coming!)
However, I would exercise extreme caution before making that leap. The problem is that the Waldensians (and the Cathars) always seem to be focal points for groups or historians that wish to find a way around lineage through the Catholic church. But the lineage from Moravian forward is historically documented. Note - it's just a lineage of ideas that is being consideredTwo additional paragraph were added to Nate's often quoted statement of What hat, which were not posted by What Hat on this thread. Discussed below. Maybe you need to re-read this post by CherieKropp, nathan !
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Feb 3, 2018 11:56:43 GMT -5
At what point could Irvine not be distinguished from a Faith Mission worker? As late as December 1899 Irvine was still preaching alongside other travelling Faith Mission workers that came through (see Goodhand Pattison's letter). From TTT, Irvine was "listed as superintendent of the Faith Mission work in southern Ireland until December, 1900." Anyway, in 1901, according to Pattison, Irvine had a falling out with Govan, or vice versa, for not sending in his expense reports or the like (just kidding about the reason, but it might not be far off). Bright Words said in September 1901, "During the year several have dropped out of our list of workers. Pilgrim Irvine has been working on independent lines in Ireland, then quite recently Pilgrim Kelly has resigned and also aligned himself with these independent workers." So, clearly Irvine was superintendent of the Faith Mission workers in southern Ireland. Irvine and Kelly were FM Pilgrims. It's not clear how FM regarded "these independent workers". Did Irvine join the "independent workers" or was he their leader? The weight of evidence favours the latter. Faith Mission seems to have been very open to other denominations, with their pilgrims preaching alongside other independents, and also alongside various clergy. *** Whathat, I have been reading your 2012 old thread again, you have a good understand of Willam Irvine early days... Great job, my friend. RE above statement: "in 1901, according to Pattison"Not so. Pattison doesnt give a date for this event. The footnotes and paragraph headings in the Pattison Account were added by others many years later. The account contained the extraneous material when I received my first copy.
|
|
|
Post by nathan on Feb 3, 2018 12:39:04 GMT -5
At what point could Irvine not be distinguished from a Faith Mission worker? As late as December 1899 Irvine was still preaching alongside other travelling Faith Mission workers that came through (see Goodhand Pattison's letter). From TTT, Irvine was "listed as superintendent of the Faith Mission work in southern Ireland until December, 1900." Anyway, in 1901, according to Pattison, Irvine had a falling out with Govan, or vice versa, for not sending in his expense reports or the like (just kidding about the reason, but it might not be far off). Bright Words said in September 1901, "During the year several have dropped out of our list of workers. Pilgrim Irvine has been working on independent lines in Ireland, then quite recently Pilgrim Kelly has resigned and also aligned himself with these independent workers." So, clearly Irvine was superintendent of the Faith Mission workers in southern Ireland. Irvine and Kelly were FM Pilgrims. It's not clear how FM regarded "these independent workers". Did Irvine join the "independent workers" or was he their leader? The weight of evidence favours the latter. Faith Mission seems to have been very open to other denominations, with their pilgrims preaching alongside other independents, and also alongside various clergy. *** Whathat, I have been reading your 2012 old thread again, you have a good understand of Willam Irvine early days... Great job, my friend.
It seemed what hat doesn't believe the starting date of 2x2 was in 1897 or was the Founder either.... One of the leaders, yes. William Irvine did NOT brainstorm anything. He copied the 2x2 FAITH Mission apostolic ministry. The Sunday morning perhaps came from Edward Cooney own home gathering meetings with the combination of Faih Mission Prayer Union meetings format, conventions, special meetings, wed nights bible studied, using many of the FAITH mission terminologies and so on.
|
|
|
Post by nathan on Feb 6, 2018 9:05:43 GMT -5
To try to pin an employment fraud on Irvine is not only baseless, but probably impossible. The FM is a non-denominational group. For them to co-operate with other Christian ministries would have been seen to be desirable within the organization, not wrong. Their mission was to preach to gospel and direct people to various local churches. For Irvine to be connected to a few independent missionaries would probably not even raise Govan's eyebrows. Their mission was to get people converted and into churches. The independent workers were doing the same and connections with Irvine would have been welcomed, expecting that he would be able to recruit more workers, and obviously he tried with John Long, who turned him down. They didn't separate their converts until after Irvine had fully resigned from the FM. Had Govan and Irvine been able to come to an agreement on Faith Lines, I expect that the FM would be a very different organization today.....probably worldwide and significant. Employment fraud is a red herring. Do you have any proof that WI's converts separated AFTER his firing from FM? Or maybe to be utterly tactful, AFTER WI was left off of FM's rolls? The converts that WI could keep, became his workers is what I've read and that was so for a little time maybe as much as the first 2 years, we know for a fact that the first workers' list that is available is 1905, there might have been one before that...so Clearday, it is clear that between 1897 and 1901 when it appears FM dropped WI from their rolls, that there had been some private-on-going-workers gathered by WI while he was considerably still FM pilgrim. Do you think that IF you were an executive in a company that was doing fairly good business and while you were supposedly doing executive business for them, you took part of your executive business and put it into your own business....how do you think they're going to feel, eh? Do you think they'd have grounds to fire you and even sue you for that business you've claimed for your own? The only reason WI got by with this is because the FM was not into building their own denominational churches....they were only in it to convert people to Christianity plus educate some of those already called Christians into what Christianity is all about or to "revive" them! I think WI got off fairly easy myself!... he was lucky in that only ONE FM Pilgrim left the FM to go with WI. None other of those beginnign workers would join FM with WI....and I suppose we can speculate that would have been the reason WI left FM or was trying to get things going so he could leave FM.....I don't think he understood exactly what he was doing....I think that he perhaps said it as it was all to him and that it was a "great experiement." There were more than ONE Faith Mission Pilgrim/preacher left to join with William Irvine, I believe it was 4 Faith Mission preachers. Dora Holland, was one of Faith Mission converts of William Irvine in 1896 and she became a 2x2 preacher in 1902.
William Irvine Knew exactly what he was doing! It was no great experiment... William Irvine was doing the same thing as he was a Faith Mission preacher, very little had changed... Sunday morning meetings were added and baptizing their converts, and NOT sending their converts to join the churches of their choices.
|
|