|
Post by CherieKropp on Feb 28, 2015 20:24:02 GMT -5
Nate - this one's especially for you! I received about 300 letters today written by Wm Irvine. This quote was in a July 2, 1937 letter Wm wrote to John Hardie. Page 3 of the letter is below: "No honest man who knows the facts can ever doubt that the Testimony was my work. No William, no Testimony, or 7 churches."
Irvine writing about what he did during the war 1914-1918 while he was in America... After spending a year in car all over the states, I spent a year alone in San Diego in a shack and there I got to see and taste much of the tenderness and love of God and Jesus which I could see was lacking in our interpretation of Jesus as the way, truth and life…Then I went amongst Testimony friends and workers to find the Devil and Satan had swamped them, and it was rather a painful experience but the only way I could have been convinced of their condition. And every bit of evidence that I had these past 21 years is but added proof of the terrible condition of every seed who would open their mouth against the man whom they owed everything under God the Trinity to. (Oct 20, 1935 Letter to Sandy Hinds, Australia)
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Mar 1, 2015 13:45:48 GMT -5
Nate - many times you have used the fact there was no documented evidence that claimed to be the founder as a reason for your not believing he was. So here Irvine is again claiming to be the founder--and you still don't believe him.
What does this make you, Nate, per Irvine's statement: "No honest man who knows the facts can ever doubt that the Testimony was my work. No William, no Testimony, or 7 churches."
Do you know what the "or 7 churches" statement refers to?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2015 19:58:37 GMT -5
Nate, So long as ex's continue to insist that "our church", your church, began with WI, we'll have to continue to insist that they just don't get it, and apparently never will. No, our church is and was from the beginning, from the shores of Galilee, from that day to this, or as some workers say, even further back, from the foundations of the world.
It's funny, but when I tell this to almost any born again Christian, they understand immediately! Of course they understand! No, we didn't start from Luther, nor from Peter, nor do they, our beginning is on the rock of revelation, no matter how much Cherie or anyone else may try and persuade you otherwise. Stick to your guns Nathan.
WHat's even funnier, is that if you ever acknowledge as they're trying to make you, they'll point out that of course a beginning of WI is interesting, but that's about all there is to it, as it is the foundation of Christ that is important, and you should be preaching, as you've been trying to tell them!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2015 21:07:24 GMT -5
Well Ross, as I said, you just don't want to get it for some reason... Sorry. No offense intended. I've known about "the beginnings" as you would say for a long time, and as you relate of others, I too don't understand all the fuss you ex's are making about it?? Well, actually, I think I do. The people for whom it seems to be a big deal, are those whose foundations and beginnings were not in Christ. And they figure everybody is just like them. Someone somewhere back complained that now that the F&W who made such a big deal of 'we've been doing like this since the beginning,' now say, 'Oh it's no big deal'. Well what you're talking about isn't. Obviously you and I are talking about 2 different things when we each talk about "beginnings" and "fellowship". What more can I say? you can keep preaching to us about what you think we aught to consider as important. I'll stick to what is.
|
|
|
Post by Mary on Mar 1, 2015 21:15:47 GMT -5
You have known about the beginning but then you don't believe it. It's a big deal because people like you still say that your church was started by Jesus. You have clearly just stated this and it is plainly not true. No we are not talking about 2 different things. We are talking about the beginning of your church fellowship not the beginning of Christianity or when the apostles went out preaching. We all know Christianity begun with Jesus but your church begun with Irvine. Every church claims Jesus was the beginning of Christianity but you claim not only did Jesus start Christianity but that unlike other church fellowships, He (Jesus) started your church fellowship which again is not true.
If it wasn't such a big deal to you then why try and twist the facts. Is seems as if it is you who doesn't get it but of course you get it, but you just try to make out you don't. As long as you say your church was started by Jesus, is as long as people will keep proving that it is not.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2015 21:27:34 GMT -5
Nate, So long as ex's continue to insist that "our church", your church, began with WI, we'll have to continue to insist that they just don't get it, and apparently never will. No, our church is and was from the beginning, from the shores of Galilee, from that day to this, or as some workers say, even further back, from the foundations of the world. It's funny, but when I tell this to almost any born again Christian, they understand immediately! Of course they understand! No, we didn't start from Luther, nor from Peter, nor do they, our beginning is on the rock of revelation, no matter how much Cherie or anyone else may try and persuade you otherwise. Stick to your guns Nathan. WHat's even funnier, is that if you ever acknowledge as they're trying to make you, they'll point out that of course a beginning of WI is interesting, but that's about all there is to it, as it is the foundation of Christ that is important, and you should be preaching, as you've been trying to tell them! All Christian Churches have the same foundation, that is why they are called Christians. It is not exclusive to 2x2's. If you were to attend other Churches, you would soon become aware of this. As for from the foundations of the World, same thing applies. It was all in the mind of God, who created everything. I think it is presumptuous for any human to think they know the mind of God.
|
|
|
Post by Mary on Mar 1, 2015 21:51:11 GMT -5
The Holy Spirit has revealed the truth to us Nathan. The truth is so clear that even those that do not claim to be Christians can see it. You talk about the William Irvine and John Long beginnings then you say it goes back to Jesus. It reinforces the need to get out of a fellowship that tries to twist the facts. It takes an honest soul to leave. Come out from among them, Jesus says.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2015 22:09:10 GMT -5
Nate, you have been a Worker for too long, hence your narrow minded point of view. Get out, live a bit, learn a bit. Then you will understand the work of God, instead of the work of man.
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Mar 1, 2015 22:18:55 GMT -5
Nope Nate - that wasnt what WmI meant when he wrote: "No honest man who knows the facts can ever doubt that the Testimony was my work. No William, no Testimony, or 7 churches."
From 1893 to 1914, William Irvine gave the last of what is called The Alpha Gospel, to the seven (7) churches of Revelation 2 and 3, which were churches in Paul and John's day and in ours. Jesus and the Apostles witnessed to the Eastern world.
William Irvine witnessed in the following places in the Western world. In 1914, Irvine went to Jerusalem, Palestine, and from 1918 to 1947, he gave The Jesus’ Omega Message by letter. He identified the seven churches in his letters dated September 3, 1930 and January 3, 1944 to Edwards as: NAME IN JESUS’ DAY - CHURCH NAME IN THE LAST DAYS of CHURCH EPHESUS - GREAT BRITAIN SMYRNA - EASTERN USA PERGAMOS - AUSTRALIA, AFRICA AND NEW ZEALAND THYATIRA - PACIFIC COAST (including California) SARDIS - WESTERN CANADA PHILADELPHIA - EASTERN CANADA AND NEW FOUNDLAND LAODICEA - GENERAL MESSAGE FOR THE WHOLE WORLD
Irvine was saying these churches in English speaking countries were HIS work.
|
|
|
Post by Greg on Mar 1, 2015 22:37:55 GMT -5
Nate, you have been a Worker for too long, hence your narrow minded point of view. Get out, live a bit, learn a bit. Then you will understand the work of God, instead of the work of man. I think NathanB having been a worker has little to do with his faith and his thinking.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Mar 1, 2015 23:11:50 GMT -5
Well Ross, as I said, you just don't want to get it for some reason... Sorry. No offense intended. I've known about "the beginnings" as you would say for a long time, and as you relate of others, I too don't understand all the fuss you ex's are making about it?? Well, actually, I think I do. The people for whom it seems to be a big deal, are those whose foundations and beginnings were not in Christ.
And they figure everybody is just like them. Someone somewhere back complained that now that the F&W who made such a big deal of 'we've been doing like this since the beginning,' now say, 'Oh it's no big deal'. Well what you're talking about isn't. Obviously you and I are talking about 2 different things when we each talk about "beginnings" and "fellowship". What more can I say? you can keep preaching to us about what you think we aught to consider as important. I'll stick to what is. We have often heard your statement, "The people for whom it seems to be a big deal, are those whose foundations and beginnings were not in Christ."
It is the same kind of rationalization that we have heard for years.
How else can you rationalize our being upset by the deception?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2015 23:21:15 GMT -5
Nate, you have been a Worker for too long, hence your narrow minded point of view. Get out, live a bit, learn a bit. Then you will understand the work of God, instead of the work of man. I think NathanB having been a worker has little to do with his faith and his thinking. Workers learn their profession from other Workers who have also been self taught. Thus their knowledge is purely 2x2 doctrine. Ministers of main stream Churches, go to University and study Theology. They get a much better understanding of the Christian faith, including history. They are better qualified to understand the profession. In my 60 years I have dealt with both, so do know which one is better qualified. All I say is you need to get out and meet them, otherwise you will never know.
|
|
|
Post by Greg on Mar 1, 2015 23:41:41 GMT -5
I think NathanB having been a worker has little to do with his faith and his thinking. Workers learn their profession from other Workers who have also been self taught. Thus their knowledge is purely 2x2 doctrine. Ministers of main stream Churches, go to University and study Theology. They get a much better understanding of the Christian faith, including history. They are better qualified to understand the profession. In my 60 years I have dealt with both, so do know which one is better qualified. All I say is you need to get out and meet them, otherwise you will never know. I understand that. I am just saying NathanB's faith and thinking is not because of his being a worker. Just an opinion.
|
|
|
Post by Mary on Mar 1, 2015 23:53:16 GMT -5
Ask yourself why there are so many denominations today, Nathan? Your church is just another one of those denominations. Why did Irvine and co. need to start another church when there were already plenty of them. Your church is just another one in the pool of 40,000. Most of us on this board have come out from your church, obeying the words to come out from among them. You seem desperate to hang onto something when there is nothing left to hang onto. ettu is just edging you on, reinforcing why we left such a dishonest fellowship.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 2, 2015 0:09:30 GMT -5
Thanks Greg, get what you mean. Sadly just the 2x2 thinking irrespective of whether you are a Worker or laity. Closed thinking.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 2, 2015 2:53:33 GMT -5
Ross, liked your comment "We are ignorant about other churches and what they believe?". Unless you are prepared to check it out with an unbiased mind, then you have no idea. I found it a great experience,and learnt a lot.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Mar 2, 2015 3:04:45 GMT -5
Nate - the Exclusive Brethren claim that they came out of Babylon and that they are the only true church. The JW's claim the same. No doubt the Mormons think they have the best brand of Christianity. And in the OT, the Pharisees were no doubt the ones that kept the law as perfectly as it could be kept. I wonder what God's view on the matter is - which is the only view that counts. God said "For I so loved the world, that I gave my one and only Son, that whoever believes in Him will not perish but will have eternal life". And there are other parts of the Bible where God says the same thing. Why does man want to prove that their particular denomination is the only right one and why do a small minority of followers in the world want to cling onto the hope that their church is the only right one? Why does man want to prove that there is a god, any god?
|
|
|
Post by Greg on Mar 2, 2015 6:32:07 GMT -5
Thousands, and thousands of different Protestant denominations believe they are the only true church of Christ... Time will tell which one is the true church of Jesus... Jesus said let the Tares and Wheat grow together and the angels will separate between the two at the harvest time. Jesus warned about building on the sand foundation so, let us be very wise with our choices. Do the Jews have more than one faith? Whatever it is, that likely was the church of Jesus.
|
|
|
Post by Greg on Mar 2, 2015 6:35:02 GMT -5
Why does man want to prove that there is a god, any god?
To explain where man came from. to explain why things happen, to have a measure of comfort in this world of suffering, to establish a final reward and punishment for the doings of man.
|
|
|
Post by maryhig on Mar 2, 2015 6:52:02 GMT -5
Nate - the Exclusive Brethren claim that they came out of Babylon and that they are the only true church. The JW's claim the same. No doubt the Mormons think they have the best brand of Christianity. And in the OT, the Pharisees were no doubt the ones that kept the law as perfectly as it could be kept. I wonder what God's view on the matter is - which is the only view that counts. God said "For I so loved the world, that I gave my one and only Son, that whoever believes in Him will not perish but will have eternal life". And there are other parts of the Bible where God says the same thing. Why does man want to prove that their particular denomination is the only right one and why do a small minority of followers in the world want to cling onto the hope that their church is the only right one? - Pride? - Jesus is not enough - we have to add to him? - We are insecure about our future? - We need or seek human approval? - We like regulations and laws? - We like to be controlled? - We are ignorant about the Bible? - We are ignorant about what other churches and what they believe? It's worth reading again what Paul said to the churches in Galatia when they moved on from trusting only in Jesus and insisted on the OT law. He called them "foolish Galatians..." Whatever Christian church we are in, we need to be careful that we don't fall into the same trap. Thousands, and thousands of different Protestant denominations believe they are the only true church of Christ... Time will tell which one is the true church of Jesus... Jesus said let the Tares and Wheat grow together and the angels will separate between the two at the harvest time. Jesus warned about building on the sand foundation so, let us be very wise with our choices.The true church of Jesus are those who love the lord their God with all their heart, their mind, soul and strength. And their neighbour a themselves! Jesus wasn't a religion. The Jews cast him out! Book of James 1:27 Pure religion and undefiled before God and father is this, to visit the fatherless and the widows in their affliction and to keep himself unspotted from the world! God is not a religion. Jesus said follow me! And Jesus did all of the above!
|
|
|
Post by maryhig on Mar 2, 2015 7:06:00 GMT -5
Jesus was a Jew in this manner
Roman's 2:29
But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.
He isn't a religion, he's love
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Mar 2, 2015 9:12:43 GMT -5
Nate, I thot you'd get quite a kick out of that! Quite a stretch, huh? He really believed it tho.
RE: And the end of the world in 1917 didn't come true either. ***In all his letters i've read (including 300 new ones in the last 2 days) I have never found where he gave a date for when the world would end...its true he was always thinking it was just round the corner, and reading various current events into Revelation predictions...but 1917? Nope. Where did you get that date?
RE: After leaving the 2x2 ministry in 1914 his mind was running wild with all kind of strange doctrines and nobody was there to correct him. ***Actually in 1914, he hadn't received his Omega "revelations." That didnt come until 1918. At that time he looked back and in hindsight decided "the Age of Grace" had ended in 1914...but he didnt realize it during 1914...he wrote this a lot.
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Mar 2, 2015 9:19:09 GMT -5
For the record...Dr. Jaenen retracted this information in a personal letter to me. These men didnt join forces with Irvine's movement. The following is from an unfinished Book Review of Dr. Jaenen's book:
DERRYGONNELLY GROUP:
Page 524: “In 1900 another group joined forces with them. Robert Hamilton and David Donaldson in Derrygonnelly became so dissatisfied with the ministry of Patrick O'Donavan in the Methodist church that they with¬drew and started their own meetings in the Hamilton home. Within three years of joining forces, their assembly produced six persons who sold their possessions and went into the ministry. At this time, some of the lay people, as well as the itinerants, did some evangelizing. Robert Parker of Springfield, for example, held a mission in Rosculton which resulted in a number of converts being won.”
COMMENT: Communication from Dr. Jaenen showed he was mistaken about this “group” joining forces with the others. The Derrygonnelly “group” was made up of only TWO men, Robert Hamilton and David Donaldson.
The Reviewer asked Dr. Jaenen to provide the source of this information.
Dr. Jaenen confirmed that this group had no connection with William Irvine in a letter dated April 4, 2010, in which he stated that “The Hamilton-Donaldson group were part of a Methodist restorationist movement” and that he does “not know the names of the six workers from that group, except that they were ordained apparently between 1901 and 1903…” He also stated that Robert Parker died young leaving a young wife and six children. He also regretted that he included the names of these men, since they were not a part of the Two-by-Two church movement at all, and were actually a part of the Wesleyan Methodist restorationists.
“The Hamilton-Donaldson group were part of a Methodist restorationist movement that met in homes and sent out itinerant ministers in pairs. Unfortunately, it was only after the publication of my book that I realized I should have included a section on these Wesleyan Methodist restorationists. Patrick O'Donavan, the minister, was a Methodist convert from Catholicism. I do not know the names of the six "workers" from that group, except that they were ordained apparently between 1901 and 1903.
“I have no reason to believe that R. Hamilton, a farmer, and D. Donaldson, a grocer, ever entered the full-time itinerant ministry. Robert Parker, it appears, did hold some home meetings in Springfield and Rosculton, and he died at a young age leaving a wife and six children. I think his great-grandson may be Alan Cooke, the "worker." It may be that Willie Donaldson in Australia was the son of David Donaldson. In any case, this group had no connection with William Irvine in coming into fellowship with other groups.”
Thus, it appears what Dr. Jaenen wrote in this book is not true: i.e., that “In 1900 another group joined forces with them.” What actually occurred is expressed in the last sentence of his quoted response above: “In any case, this group had no connection with William Irvine in coming into fellowship with other groups.”
Dr. Jaenen had been laying the groundwork for his theory that several groups joined together simultaneously to show that the new church was not founded by one man named William Irvine, but rather by groups of men coming together. Apparently, he regrets he included this particular group of men as part of the movement, since they were not a part of the Two-by-Two church movement at all, and were, instead, actually a part of the Wesleyan Methodist restorationists.
|
|
|
Post by slowtosee on Mar 2, 2015 10:59:20 GMT -5
Nate, So long as ex's continue to insist that "our church", your church, began with WI, we'll have to continue to insist that they just don't get it, and apparently never will. No, our church is and was from the beginning, from the shores of Galilee, from that day to this, or as some workers say, even further back, from the foundations of the world. It's funny, but when I tell this to almost any born again Christian, they understand immediately! Of course they understand! No, we didn't start from Luther, nor from Peter, nor do they, our beginning is on the rock of revelation, no matter how much Cherie or anyone else may try and persuade you otherwise. Stick to your guns Nathan. WHat's even funnier, is that if you ever acknowledge as they're trying to make you, they'll point out that of course a beginning of WI is interesting, but that's about all there is to it, as it is the foundation of Christ that is important, and you should be preaching, as you've been trying to tell them! If I understand correctly, you are saying ex's are not capable of understanding the difference between founders of particular church groups and the foundation these church groups are founded on. Interesting We could joke around about people who deny who their father or mother or grandfather is or was, when they repeatedly deny the historical records, and just say their Daddy and Mommy were Adam and Eve. Like, duh, how come you can't get that, My Daddy was Adam, and , well, those birth records and all that stuff, well, that's just some foolish ex's, who simply don't understand the difference, propaganda campaign to discredit what has been revealed to me, and Adam it is. Sure does make children feel foolish, disappointed etc later in life, when they find out that what their parents have taught them all their life is not true, and Adam and Eve are not really Daddy and Mommy, although in a sense they understand that to be true, but why didn't you tellus that you were our parents. There is surely no shame in telling people their history and background and where theycome from. It should be celebrated, really, even if it has some flaws Alvin
|
|
|
Post by withlove on Mar 2, 2015 12:35:05 GMT -5
My Dear Clyde, To cross him or disagree with him in the old days was fatal to a continuance of fellowship and to cross or disagree with him now means to be branded as Cain, Balaam, Korah, Dathan and Abiram, and all the unworthies of the old and new Testaments. To accept without question his revelations and follow blindly his leadership is the only way to have fellowship with him. He has been so discredited in so many different ways that to do this is now utterly impossible. We were simple enough to do this in the Old Days when there was some little evidence of the Lord’s anointing, but for a number of years, it was becoming more and more painfully evident that the Lord was not with him; and in the last two years this has been made very manifest both in his manner of life, letters and foolish wresting of the scriptures.
With love in Christ, Your brother in His service, Jack Carroll 1. This feels like it could be written about more than just WI, sadly. Who feels like they can relate to what Jack was feeling here? 2. But it's a little confusing because earlier (sorry I already deleted that part of the quote) in the letter, or maybe it was in the letter just above the one to Clyde), Carroll says that WI was honored by God maybe more than anyone...which is a huge thing to say. More than all the biblical characters? Or maybe just more than anyone in the new fellowship? 3. How did it go from Carroll writing a general letter to some of the friends (the one previous to Clyde's--was it to his field?) telling them about WI, to WI being completely wiped out of the oral history so that within a few years, the majority of the friends in the world had never heard of him?
4. Re-writing history doesn't solve anything, and only makes you less trust-worthy. Writers of the Bible might have left Judas entirely out of the story, but they didn't. Not assuming that other things weren't left out or added though.
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Mar 2, 2015 13:22:14 GMT -5
Info for Nate: When Did Irvine begin preaching his Omega Gospel?
RECEIVING THE OMEGA VISION. It was in November of 1918, when Wm. Irvine began to understand the Book of Revelation in a different light. He wrote:
"Revelation only began to open up in 1918 when the War finished." (November 26, 1945 Letter to Madeline Dunbar)
"In 1918, I began to see some of what was in Revelation and which has slowly opened as the years passed and fulfillment confirms the reading of Revelation." (June 18, 1945 Letter to Skerritts)
"I did not know we were in the days of Judgment till 4 months ago. The Lord opened up Revelation to me. It’s a Program for the End of the Age—covers 12 years, from the beginning of the war." (March 31, 1919 Letter to Edwards)
“…which helps to bring me back to the weeks before Armistice, when He opened Revelation to me" (February 26, 1929 Letter to Edwards) Armistice Day was November 11, 1918.
“It was all new and strange to me to find these things open up to my understanding, and ability to read what has long been hidden till the time of the end, and not till the end of the last war did I get any vision or understanding of Revelation and the whole truth for the Latter Days, tho I had looked for and listened to every man who had anything to say on the matter. ” (November 1, 1929 Letter to Wm. Potts) “Revelation only began to open up in 1918 when the War finished, and since then is very easy and simple so that any ordinary person can give it to any whom they meet, good or bad. All can hear it even if they are not willing to obey by giving it to others.” (November 26, 1945 Letter to Dunbars)
"...my message of destruction which I got in 1918 and gave on that same ground." (Los Angeles) March 3, 1394 Letter to Edwards*)
After Revelation opened up to him, Irvine began to view the entire Bible as prophecy regarding future events foretold in Revelation. In other words, from August 4, 1914 forward, the prophetic words of the prophets in the Bible no longer pointed to Jesus coming as Messiah, but were now applied as they related to Revelation and the Days of Judgment. The entire Bible opened up to him as prophecy, providing the detail for Revelation. He did not believe that the chapters in Revelation were assembled in the order they were written. While the words formerly applied to one dispensation, they began to apply to the Judgment Program, which began August 4, 1914. He reinterpreted all scripture to pertain to the events set out in the Book of Revelation. If one truly desires to understand Wm Irvine’s Omega teachings discussed in detail in the chapters that follow, it is essential that this concept be understood and grasped.
Eager to tell about his new insight regarding Revelation and his own personal role in future events, in late 1918, Irvine began to write letters to the workers and saints. His letters went as far as the United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, USA and South Africa. It's even possible that he wrote about the Omega Message to ALL the workers in his acquaintance. It would be an understatement to say that the leading workers were NOT PLEASED with Wm Irvine's new insight. His new revelations were not well received, and had all the success of a lead balloon. If "The New Thing" were implemented, it would be loaded with difficulties for the workers. Many of the workers like Jack Carroll and George Walker were practically idolized by the friends. The thought of leaving their pedestals and finding a job was not one that would appeal to the workers. If Irvine's new “Omega Message” was accepted by the group as a whole, the work as they knew it would be over. There would be no further need for the 2x2 ministry and meetings in the home. It would change their way of life drastically—there would be no need for workers. Their jobs would be banished. It would destroy their way of life. It would give Wm Irvine his position back as the leader, and the workers would go from being Princes to Nobodies Without a Profession! Naturally, the workers would hesitate to accept his “Omega Message.” They had tasted the freedom of being their own boss...
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Mar 2, 2015 13:37:33 GMT -5
Irvine writing about what he did during the war 1914-1918 while he was in America...
After spending a year in car all over the states, I spent a year alone in San Diego in a shack and there I got to see and taste much of the tenderness and love of God and Jesus which I could see was lacking in our interpretation of Jesus as the way, truth and life…Then I went amongst Testimony friends and workers to find the Devil and Satan had swamped them, and it was rather a painful experience but the only way I could have been convinced of their condition. And every bit of evidence that I had these past 21 years is but added proof of the terrible condition of every seed who would open their mouth against the man whom they owed everything under God the Trinity to. (Oct 20, 1935 Letter to Sandy Hinds, Australia)
|
|
|
Post by slowtosee on Mar 2, 2015 13:39:41 GMT -5
Thanks, Nathan . I think we actually both know and understand, the history of 2x2 church, fairly clearly, thanks to people like Cherie and others who have given us the information. It might have been a better plan for the church to have openly shared this information with all members. It seems like many many members do know about the history now, so yes ,that is good. It is possible it will even someday be openly spoken about in the meetings, instead of "in secret", Alvin
|
|