Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2014 11:51:09 GMT -5
I haven't been following this thread, but somehow the name "Dorothy Irvine" came to mind!
|
|
|
Post by Greg on Jan 27, 2014 12:06:40 GMT -5
I haven't been following this thread, but somehow the name "Dorothy Irvine" came to mind! And that reminds me of Dorothy Gale.
|
|
|
Post by sharingtheriches on Jan 27, 2014 12:32:01 GMT -5
So are the workers and their followers Christian or not? If they were they would accept other Christians and they are not Christians if they do not accept Christians. Note that Jesus only had one group of followers and they were called Christians to separate them from Judaism. The same as each Christian group uses a name to separate themselves from each other to avoid confusion. I have not heard a Christian church say they are not Christian. They are Christian denominations. They are still Christian, their religion has not changed. Their religion is Christian. Interesting is that those in meetings do not call themselves Christians, they say they are professing. They talk about professing and not as becoming a Christian. They only use the term Christian when talking to outsiders as a way out of having to give a name for their church. Christians are those worldly people who go to worldly churches. How many people in meetings do you hear say when they became a Christian? No, they say when I met the workers and when I professed. Jesus is hardly in it. Their language is not like that in the Bible. The Bible talks about the church in someones house, professing people talk about the meeting in someones house. They hardly identify with the word church and Christian as it is in the Bible but only use these terms to outsiders. Maybe I 'm a little naive when it comes to this, but I've always called myself a Christian, to other F&W, and even have said it in my testimony. I'm B&R, but who knows....you learn something new every day. JD, what I've witnessed amongst the friends and some of the underling workers is that they ARE Christians, they operate like true Christians, for they have in their mind that without Christ there would be no salvation. However those "few" in the 2x2 fellowship are perhaps almost out numbered by the clinger-on's to the worker's system which in no way can they claim to Christianity. They should call themselves "worker followers." I'm not casting anything negative about being a worker follower, other then those who live for the system and worship the system are NOT Christians....they have no idea that it is Jesus Christ whom they should be believing in......some learn though!
|
|
|
Post by sharingtheriches on Jan 27, 2014 12:38:41 GMT -5
I haven't been following this thread, but somehow the name "Dorothy Irvine" came to mind! As it seems tail-docking time is creeping upon us...Ram just go and find your post on Dorothy Irvine from a year or two ago!
|
|
|
Post by Mary on Jan 27, 2014 14:51:59 GMT -5
Maybe I 'm a little naive when it comes to this, but I've always called myself a Christian, to other F&W, and even have said it in my testimony. I'm B&R, but who knows....you learn something new every day. Appreciated these thoughts. It is also great to read in Acts 8 of where the church was persecuted and the believers, including the seven deacons just appointed, were scattered (except the Apostles who remained in Jerusalem. In Act 8:4 those that were scattered preached the word wherever they went. Philip went down to Samaria and proclaimed the Messiah there. I wonder why the Apostles remained in Jerusalem where I presume it was quite dangerous at the time - was God wanting to demonstrate that all believers would carry his message forward as per Jesus' great commission? And was he wanting to move focus away from the 12 (whose commission was initially to the Jews) to Paul who was to be God's apostle to the Gentiles? Of course, the term "Christian" which was first used at Antioch was very common in the early church. From a 2x2 perspective, the term "Church" was used commonly in Australia in meetings. I don't remember the word Christian used much within the fellowship but if you were asked by an outsider you would say that you were a Christian. In the national census every 3 or 4 years we always used to write down "non-denominational Christian". I understand from local South African folk were have left meetings but were in meetings for many years in South Africa that the use of the term "Christian" was very common there. I also heard a young professing guy at a recent wedding refer to the ministers in their church....never heard that before. This doesn't make sense. You say that the term Church was used commonly in Australia in meetings but then you keep calling them meetings and then say that you had never heard a professing person refer to them as ministers in their church. I agree they use the word Christian, church, and ministers when talking to outsiders but not when they are together. When among professing people and in testimonies it was always about when they professed not when they found the Lord. I still say they say meetings, professing and to add another workers when talking amongst themselves and only use church, Christian and minister when talking to outsiders. How often have you heard a professing person say to another I went to church this afternoon and heard our minister speak. NO they say they went to meeting today and heard the worker speak. And it was when they professed, not when they found the Lord, except when talking to outsiders.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2014 14:58:45 GMT -5
I haven't been following this thread, but somehow the name "Dorothy Irvine" came to mind! And that reminds me of Dorothy Gale. I was so tempted to say that myself and so glad you did!
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Jan 27, 2014 15:44:19 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by jondough on Jan 27, 2014 16:17:37 GMT -5
I guess the biggest problem I have with Nate's theories are that he is ready to stake his claim on ANY homeless ministry he reads or hears about, and claims that as the history to the F&W of today. Not one name of even one worker prior to William Irvine. Just some chairs sitting around some room.
I could start a new TMB name right now, and post that I talked to worker A, and he told me about some meeting prior to William Irvine in another country. Nate would use this as fact. He would cut & paste it from now till this subject is finally put to rest.
A good example of how he does this is how he uses you-tube videos as fact that there are underground aliens living under us right now.
Until I get some verifiable facts, I will go with the years of research that has been done and verified on TTT.
BTW; I personally have no problem with our history other than the denial of it. I have embraced it. I have not embraced lying or denying it. Why is it that some many want to deny it? Could it have anything to do with exlusivity?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2014 17:17:28 GMT -5
I haven't been following this thread, but somehow the name "Dorothy Irvine" came to mind! As it seems tail-docking time is creeping upon us...Ram just go and find your post on Dorothy Irvine from a year or two ago! I would if I could but I cannae!
|
|
|
Post by blandie on Jan 27, 2014 17:50:10 GMT -5
According to the Bible there are other Jesuses and other Spirits and other gospels and false Christs and probably other Christians. So maybe the label doesn't signify much because you have to first find out what Jesus and what Spirit and what gospel and what Christ and how that matches up to know what is meant by Christian. It is by now a generic term that is fuzzy enough to describe some groups that have almost nothing to do with the Christians in the Bible and some who have piled a lot of their own stuff on top of it to produce something the Christians in the Bible wouldn't recognize. It might be that in every church there is a mix of those types and even within the F&W's. Even thought the word isn't to be sniffed at or discarded I think that it is also good to not accept it at face value unless you know what the person making the claim means by 'Christian.'
I should also have asked that if Irvine's sis was in contact with the F&W's then why didn't Irvine join that group as a worker instead of starting something new. No Swiss names on those early lists and only Irish and Scots.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2014 18:08:09 GMT -5
Re-posted from The Missing Link thread April 2010.
At long last we have some kind of support for the long-held tenuous claims of a link between William Irvine, his faith, his organisation and his sister's connection. May this put to rest the doubts of his accusers whom I hope will show a measure of circumspect as they consider this enlightening material.
That his sister Dorothy was a prolific writer to editors of religious periodicals is a well attested fact. Her valiant efforts to the editor of the Impartial Reporter newspaper, though going unheeded, should nevertheless be recognised. It says a lot for that journal that she did not appear to have received even the courtesy of a reply?
Anyway, I feel it is worth reprinting this effort for the benefit of those reading here. I have the permission of Mrs Molly Keddle, great granddaughter of Eilleen Dover, who knew Christina Box, close friend of Dorothy Irvine, a sister to the late William Irvine. Therefore, reprinting rights are not an issue.
15 Main Street Kilsyth Scotland
30th August 1910
Dear Sir,
I am a sister of William Irvine and this is my third letter to you in recent times in response to the regular articles appearing in "The Impartial Reporter and Farmers' Journal" concerning the non-denominational Christian sect which you incorrectly refer to as "the Cooneyites" and by other inappropriate names.
It appears to me that you have chosen to completely ignore my previous letters as to date I have received no reply and neither of my letters have appeared in your journal. I would have thought in the interests of fairness and "impartiality" that you would have given air to my concerns, especially since I have pointed out the incorrect, biased and grossly offensive manner of your reporting?
On this occasion I am compelled to take issue with your most recent portrayal titled "The Tramp Preachers," published on page 8 of the August 25th issue of your journal. In this somewhat extensive article, purported to be the reproduction of an account by an annonymous former member, detailing the doctrine and beliefs of our sect, many, many false claims are made. It would take at least one full edition of the Impartial Reporter to even begin to address my many concerns. Let your readers be aware, this whole article is a complete fabrication and could not have been written by any person who possessed intimate day to day knowledge of our sect.
In view of this I will concentrate on the initial "false" claim by this supposed former member, who states, "William Irvine, the FOUNDER and SUPREME AUTHORITY of what is known as Cooneyism."
Firstly, there is no such thing as Cooneyism. Secondly, we take no name for ourselves.
My good brother most definately was not the FOUNDER of our group, though in a sense it could be agreed that he was the FINDER.
Let me introduce you to a brief background out of which our group emerged. It is sad that our "quiet" presence in history has gone unnoticed and that as a result of our recent revival, all of recognised Christendom in Eire and Great Britain has sought to destroy us on account of the many people who are flocking to us due to the dissatisfaction they are experiencing with the traditional churches and their wrong portrayal of the Gospel message, claiming that we are some kind of new thing when in reality we precede them all.
As you know there were ascetic missionaries and communities existing in Eire centuries before the invasion of the Romish faith from which the many Protestant churches sprung forth.
During the days when the Romish faith gained authority and power, these primitive peoples enjoying simplicity in worship were heavily persecuted and scattered, just as we read of what happened to the early Christian church in Acts of the Apostles.
Some were forced to leave their homelands and headed for the remoter regions in Europe such as the Alps and Pyranees, etc. Others fled to the deep glens of the McGillycuddy Reeks in the south of Eire, where they obtained refuge from the simple aborigenes who stayed there. They continued to worship in their homes, all the time maintaining a low profile in society for centuries.
Alas, during the poverty times in Eire during the 19th century, resulting from the potato blight which brought much famine during which many hundreds of thousands of people starved to death, the numbers of our ancestral group also diminished rapidly. Some lucky ones set off to Europe and joined our brethren who were still existing in the remoter regions in much the same way as they had continued to survive in the lower regions of McGillycuddy's Reeks.
During the early 1890's my late sister Margaret went to work as a housemaid for a family who owned a considerable tract of land in the Reeks' region. After a short time she met a small community of worshippers (about four-six families) who met in their homes every Sabbath and during weekdays. On one occasion they were visited by worshippers from the same sect who had travelled over from Switzerland. They too had suffered from many hardships over the years and were down to about three families at the most. However, they were very skilled at making sounding instruments from the horns of cattle and sheep and were able to survive better than most in those harsh days.
My sister later told my brother William about these simple people and the way they worshipped. Some time later my brother became a Superintendent with the Faith Mission and was sent to labour as a faith worker in the south of Eire for a number of years. During this time William visited these people, who quite naturally on account of all they had suffered in the past, beseached him to keep their existence and whereabouts secret.
William continued to visit these families in between his gospel missions and gradually saw that his way was wrong and that their way of worship was right. He remained true to his promise not to disclose any information about these few families, even to his fellow christian colleagues. Nevertheless, a work had begun in William. He had to break away from the Faith Mission and somehow continue the way he'd learned in the glens of the Reeks. A few years later, his connection with the Faith Mission ceased and after a short while he took up the torch of faith and carried it forward.
Now you can see how my brother was not the founder of this way of faith, but he clearly was the finder. Those few families in the Reeks region have diminished even further due to age, but nowadays there is little risk to them. Nevertheless, they desire to live in quietness and simplicity and cherish the fact that my brother is secretly carrying forward their faith which began on the shores of Gallilee some 2000 years ago.
If you have prevailed with me thus far you will see just how far off course that even the beginning of your article is. I crave desperately that you will publish this letter in order that everyone will know the truth of our sect and put an end to all the controvery and wrong reporting of our group.
Yours Faithfully Dorothy Irvine signed
|
|
|
Post by sharingtheriches on Jan 27, 2014 19:07:00 GMT -5
According to the Bible there are other Jesuses and other Spirits and other gospels and false Christs and probably other Christians. So maybe the label doesn't signify much because you have to first find out what Jesus and what Spirit and what gospel and what Christ and how that matches up to know what is meant by Christian. It is by now a generic term that is fuzzy enough to describe some groups that have almost nothing to do with the Christians in the Bible and some who have piled a lot of their own stuff on top of it to produce something the Christians in the Bible wouldn't recognize. It might be that in every church there is a mix of those types and even within the F&W's. Even thought the word isn't to be sniffed at or discarded I think that it is also good to not accept it at face value unless you know what the person making the claim means by 'Christian.' I should also have asked that if Irvine's sis was in contact with the F&W's then why didn't Irvine join that group as a worker instead of starting something new. No Swiss names on those early lists and only Irish and Scots. I prefer to call Jesus the Son of the God of Heaven, Immanuel or some spell it Emmanuel! Jesus comes out to closely to the other langauges then the children of Israel's. But then I suppose we'd have more Immanuel's then Jesus(Hay soos)! Although Immanuel is a mouthfull!
|
|
|
Post by sharingtheriches on Jan 27, 2014 19:14:05 GMT -5
Guess that is one reason I found myself in the situation I was placed...I always thought of myself and those believing in the Lord as "Christian" likely needing more understanding just like myself. Oh, oh, Denis! Are you saying you were told you weren't "getting it"?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2014 21:28:26 GMT -5
No, Ma'am, never told that, just told I was too great a sinner to be allowed in contact with good "professing people." Actually wanted to die being so misunderstood and misjudged knowing at that time there was nothing I could do about it nor about that kangaroo court led by a growing senile old man whose socks fell out of his hat onto our living room floor and were retrieved by a younger female worker accompanying him that day.
Later when that female worker came with a companion to deliver that letter of excommunication, it seemed like enduring a live nightmare. Still have that letter and copies of it. Nothing for anyone to be proud of, vague references to what I had supposedly done wrong, just saying I was guilty of committing a host of sins which were absolutely untrue with no way to disprove it, nor appeal.
For someone trying to be the very sincerest and most dedicated "professing person" possible, it was a real heart breaker. Those few who did come to my defense were told by those knowing only the false accusations that continue to change over time, that anyone defending me did not know the "truth" about me, including my own wife that she was just too close to me and needed to leave me.
Even yet, people try to convince others they just do not know the whole story about me, and I received written word someone could not know even yet what to believe, despite knowing how much evil that has had to be endured. I had to write back that I do not even know what the other side of the story was because it has changed so many times over the years. For someone whose first expressed testimony was a desire to be like "God's man Job" and who gave my all to prove that desire, if it had not been for my God proving Himself to me, I would have become as faithless as those who testify such of themselves in this forum.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Jan 27, 2014 22:00:18 GMT -5
According to the Bible there are other Jesuses and other Spirits and other gospels and false Christs and probably other Christians. So maybe the label doesn't signify much because you have to first find out what Jesus and what Spirit and what gospel and what Christ and how that matches up to know what is meant by Christian. It is by now a generic term that is fuzzy enough to describe some groups that have almost nothing to do with the Christians in the Bible and some who have piled a lot of their own stuff on top of it to produce something the Christians in the Bible wouldn't recognize. It might be that in every church there is a mix of those types and even within the F&W's. Even thought the word isn't to be sniffed at or discarded I think that it is also good to not accept it at face value unless you know what the person making the claim means by 'Christian.' I should also have asked that if Irvine's sis was in contact with the F&W's then why didn't Irvine join that group as a worker instead of starting something new. No Swiss names on those early lists and only Irish and Scots. WOW! Great point!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2014 22:58:19 GMT -5
This other sisters account somewhat dovetails with what Robt. Darling told me many decades later, how that deceased sisters empty place at the table motivated William Irvine's desire to cease his previous apparently libertine lifestyle before becoming a Faith Mission worker, having little to nothing to do with the 2&2 worker dogma later to follow. It doesn't add up to my way of thinking, but then, I am not given to revisionist history.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Jan 27, 2014 23:33:14 GMT -5
Jondough ~ I believe Christian became the first identifying name attached to early followers of Christ according to this passage and continued to be used for identification purposes ~ so they did take a name after all. How about this one "The Way"? I think that one is taken. Taoism is 'the way' or 'the path'
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Jan 27, 2014 23:49:02 GMT -5
Ram, who has the original copy of the letter? It sounds completely fanciful in many respects - as if even in the first 10 years they had to make up a story to support why/when it started and the newly introduced Living Witness doctrine. She writes they "cherish the fact that my brother is secretly carrying forward their faith which began on the shores of Gallilee some 2000 years ago". There was not too much secret about W Irvine....and I wonder why they didn't join W Irvine's meetings if they were so supportive? Who were they? Did they exist?....or were just a convenient story? Why would Dorothy Irvine want everyone to know "the truth of our sect" - why would she call it a sect in more than one place?? She indicates Wiliam I was the finder - what did he find?? I agree Roscoe, it looks like a fake to me. Its written in language closer to modern-day, rather than the UK language style of a century ago e.g. the Goodhand Pattison account. "Finder not founder" is how Willis Propp explained the beginnings of the movement. Is there any written record of "finder" being used earlier than Propp's era?
|
|
|
Post by snow on Jan 27, 2014 23:53:40 GMT -5
Mary's quote Interesting is that those in meetings do not call themselves Christians, they say they are professing. They talk about professing and not as becoming a Christian. They only use the term Christian when talking to outsiders as a way out of having to give a name for their church. Christians are those worldly people who go to worldly churches. How many people in meetings do you hear say when they became a Christian? No, they say when I met the workers and when I professed. Jesus is hardly in it. Their language is not like that in the Bible. The Bible talks about the church in someones house, professing people talk about the meeting in someones house. They hardly identify with the word church and Christian as it is in the Bible but only use these terms to outsiders." the last few years it has been more common for workers to use the word Christians in reference to F&W. I do use it regularly in my testimonies as do others . perhaps it's a regional thing. Perhaps that is why I never knew how to answer that question when I was growing up. I never heard the workers to use the word "Christians" in reference to F&W.
In fact, it almost seemed to me that one wasn't suppose to use that word!
That's what I remember too. My parents said we were not Christians. I was not to use that as an answer. Don't know if that was just my parents or if it was common 45 years ago.
|
|
|
Post by emy on Jan 28, 2014 0:16:11 GMT -5
Re-posted from The Missing Link thread April 2010.
At long last we have some kind of support for the long-held tenuous claims of a link between William Irvine, his faith, his organisation and his sister's connection. May this put to rest the doubts of his accusers whom I hope will show a measure of circumspect as they consider this enlightening material. That his sister Dorothy was a prolific writer to editors of religious periodicals is a well attested fact. Her valiant efforts to the editor of the Impartial Reporter newspaper, though going unheeded, should nevertheless be recognised. It says a lot for that journal that she did not appear to have received even the courtesy of a reply? Anyway, I feel it is worth reprinting this effort for the benefit of those reading here. I have the permission of Mrs Molly Keddle, great granddaughter of Eilleen Dover, who knew Christina Box, close friend of Dorothy Irvine, a sister to the late William Irvine. Therefore, reprinting rights are not an issue. 15 Main Street Kilsyth Scotland 30th August 1910 Dear Sir, I am a sister of William Irvine and this is my third letter to you in recent times in response to the regular articles appearing in "The Impartial Reporter and Farmers' Journal" concerning the non-denominational Christian sect which you incorrectly refer to as "the Cooneyites" and by other inappropriate names. It appears to me that you have chosen to completely ignore my previous letters as to date I have received no reply and neither of my letters have appeared in your journal. I would have thought in the interests of fairness and "impartiality" that you would have given air to my concerns, especially since I have pointed out the incorrect, biased and grossly offensive manner of your reporting? On this occasion I am compelled to take issue with your most recent portrayal titled "The Tramp Preachers," published on page 8 of the August 25th issue of your journal. In this somewhat extensive article, purported to be the reproduction of an account by an annonymous former member, detailing the doctrine and beliefs of our sect, many, many false claims are made. It would take at least one full edition of the Impartial Reporter to even begin to address my many concerns. Let your readers be aware, this whole article is a complete fabrication and could not have been written by any person who possessed intimate day to day knowledge of our sect. In view of this I will concentrate on the initial "false" claim by this supposed former member, who states, "William Irvine, the FOUNDER and SUPREME AUTHORITY of what is known as Cooneyism." Firstly, there is no such thing as Cooneyism. Secondly, we take no name for ourselves. My good brother most definately was not the FOUNDER of our group, though in a sense it could be agreed that he was the FINDER. Let me introduce you to a brief background out of which our group emerged. It is sad that our "quiet" presence in history has gone unnoticed and that as a result of our recent revival, all of recognised Christendom in Eire and Great Britain has sought to destroy us on account of the many people who are flocking to us due to the dissatisfaction they are experiencing with the traditional churches and their wrong portrayal of the Gospel message, claiming that we are some kind of new thing when in reality we precede them all. As you know there were ascetic missionaries and communities existing in Eire centuries before the invasion of the Romish faith from which the many Protestant churches sprung forth. During the days when the Romish faith gained authority and power, these primitive peoples enjoying simplicity in worship were heavily persecuted and scattered, just as we read of what happened to the early Christian church in Acts of the Apostles. Some were forced to leave their homelands and headed for the remoter regions in Europe such as the Alps and Pyranees, etc. Others fled to the deep glens of the McGillycuddy Reeks in the south of Eire, where they obtained refuge from the simple aborigenes who stayed there. They continued to worship in their homes, all the time maintaining a low profile in society for centuries. Alas, during the poverty times in Eire during the 19th century, resulting from the potato blight which brought much famine during which many hundreds of thousands of people starved to death, the numbers of our ancestral group also diminished rapidly. Some lucky ones set off to Europe and joined our brethren who were still existing in the remoter regions in much the same way as they had continued to survive in the lower regions of McGillycuddy's Reeks. During the early 1890's my late sister Margaret went to work as a housemaid for a family who owned a considerable tract of land in the Reeks' region. After a short time she met a small community of worshippers (about four-six families) who met in their homes every Sabbath and during weekdays. On one occasion they were visited by worshippers from the same sect who had travelled over from Switzerland. They too had suffered from many hardships over the years and were down to about three families at the most. However, they were very skilled at making sounding instruments from the horns of cattle and sheep and were able to survive better than most in those harsh days. My sister later told my brother William about these simple people and the way they worshipped. Some time later my brother became a Superintendent with the Faith Mission and was sent to labour as a faith worker in the south of Eire for a number of years. During this time William visited these people, who quite naturally on account of all they had suffered in the past, beseached him to keep their existence and whereabouts secret. William continued to visit these families in between his gospel missions and gradually saw that his way was wrong and that their way of worship was right. He remained true to his promise not to disclose any information about these few families, even to his fellow christian colleagues. Nevertheless, a work had begun in William. He had to break away from the Faith Mission and somehow continue the way he'd learned in the glens of the Reeks. A few years later, his connection with the Faith Mission ceased and after a short while he took up the torch of faith and carried it forward. Now you can see how my brother was not the founder of this way of faith, but he clearly was the finder. Those few families in the Reeks region have diminished even further due to age, but nowadays there is little risk to them. Nevertheless, they desire to live in quietness and simplicity and cherish the fact that my brother is secretly carrying forward their faith which began on the shores of Gallilee some 2000 years ago. If you have prevailed with me thus far you will see just how far off course that even the beginning of your article is. I crave desperately that you will publish this letter in order that everyone will know the truth of our sect and put an end to all the controvery and wrong reporting of our group. Yours Faithfully Dorothy Irvine signed Ram, who has the original copy of the letter? It sounds completely fanciful in many respects - as if even in the first 10 years they had to make up a story to support why/when it started and the newly introduced Living Witness doctrine. She writes they "cherish the fact that my brother is secretly carrying forward their faith which began on the shores of Gallilee some 2000 years ago". There was not too much secret about W Irvine....and I wonder why they didn't join W Irvine's meetings if they were so supportive? Who were they? Did they exist?....or were just a convenient story? Why would Dorothy Irvine want everyone to know "the truth of our sect" - why would she call it a sect in more than one place?? She indicates Wiliam I was the finder - what did he find?? Jesus doesn't feature heavily in the letter! In any case, it doesn't really matter....even if William I and others started out preaching more or less the gospel, in the last 116 years it has moved significantly away from what is in the Bible - to the point where there are major differences between God's Word and the doctrine they preach - yet they claim they have the "Truth". We can be sure from the Scriptures that the Holy Spirit will reveal God's Word to us as we read it and point us to Jesus - not to "the truth of our sect". *Another one bites the dust!" ... or is it hook
|
|
|
Post by christiansburg on Jan 28, 2014 0:17:04 GMT -5
Perhaps that is why I never knew how to answer that question when I was growing up. I never heard the workers to use the word "Christians" in reference to F&W.
In fact, it almost seemed to me that one wasn't suppose to use that word!
That's what I remember too. My parents said we were not Christians. I was not to use that as an answer. Don't know if that was just my parents or if it was common 45 years ago. I appreciate your response on this subject of Christian. You are right the workers sometimes left us without an easy explanation to some important things. I don't know when I began using this but it has been for some time. And you are right sometimes we just backed away from simple explanations.
|
|
|
Post by christiansburg on Jan 28, 2014 0:30:26 GMT -5
Ram, who has the original copy of the letter? It sounds completely fanciful in many respects - as if even in the first 10 years they had to make up a story to support why/when it started and the newly introduced Living Witness doctrine. She writes they "cherish the fact that my brother is secretly carrying forward their faith which began on the shores of Gallilee some 2000 years ago". There was not too much secret about W Irvine....and I wonder why they didn't join W Irvine's meetings if they were so supportive? Who were they? Did they exist?....or were just a convenient story? Why would Dorothy Irvine want everyone to know "the truth of our sect" - why would she call it a sect in more than one place?? She indicates Wiliam I was the finder - what did he find?? Jesus doesn't feature heavily in the letter! In any case, it doesn't really matter....even if William I and others started out preaching more or less the gospel, in the last 116 years it has moved significantly away from what is in the Bible - to the point where there are major differences between God's Word and the doctrine they preach - yet they claim they have the "Truth". We can be sure from the Scriptures that the Holy Spirit will reveal God's Word to us as we read it and point us to Jesus - not to "the truth of our sect". *Another one bites the dust!" ... or is it hook I feel like others that I would like to know if there is an original of this and whether or not there is any record of the Impartial Register even acknowledging this. Can you dig deeper for something more? Are you sure this is in fact a genuine letter? And are there any other records written by William I declaring that he would keep this information secret in order to protect these people. I am not chastising you on this I am only deeply curious.
|
|
|
Post by Mary on Jan 28, 2014 3:49:40 GMT -5
This other sisters account somewhat dovetails with what Robt. Darling told me many decades later, how that deceased sisters empty place at the table motivated William Irvine's desire to cease his previous apparently libertine lifestyle before becoming a Faith Mission worker, having little to nothing to do with the 2&2 worker dogma later to follow. It doesn't add up to my way of thinking, but then, I am not given to revisionist history. This is Irvine's sisters story from Robert Darling that Dennis heard. A lot different from that which others make of Irvine's sister's story. Did Robert mention anything about what we hear in the other stories about Irvine's sister that are going around, Dennis?
|
|
|
Post by sunshine on Jan 28, 2014 4:57:13 GMT -5
The letter from WI's sister sounds like a fake letter. The expressions are too modern.
|
|
|
Post by Persona non grata on Jan 28, 2014 6:04:50 GMT -5
Oh, ye of little faith! The letter has proven to be genuine.
It was, in fact, printed in the Impartial Reporter in the 31 September 1910 edition. Unfortunately a fire in the IR offices of 1 April 1918 destroyed all their archived copies of that edition.
Some years later, however, a copy of the letter was discovered amoungst documents formerly belonging to early worker Joe Kerr (see 1905 workers list), and delivered to Queens University Belfast by Kerr’s great nephew, also named Joe Kerr.
The original copy has remained in the archives of QUB, under the care of Professor Paul Ingyaleg, and access to it has been restricted to the students and faculty of the theology dept (confirm with Irvine Grey).
Despite numerous attempts by Canadian overseer, B.S., to have the document destroyed, the original has remained unmolested and, in fact, a facsimile copy of the letter was recently delivered to the Archivum Secretum Apostolicum Vaticanum.
The authenticity of the letter was promptly verified by Holy See archival staff and, two days later, presented to Pope Francis, who immediately released the following statement: "Engaging in dialogue does not mean renouncing our own ideas and traditions, but the pretense that they alone are valid and absolute."
The only part of the story that I have problems accepting is that Vatican City records show the letter being delivered on 21 January 2014 by one, Valient Thor.
|
|
|
Post by sunshine on Jan 28, 2014 6:20:27 GMT -5
Oh, ye of little faith! The letter has proven to be genuine. It was, in fact, printed in the Impartial Reporter in the 31 September 1910 edition. Unfortunately a fire in the IR offices of 1 April 1918 destroyed all their archived copies of that edition. Some years later, however, a copy of the letter was discovered amoungst documents formerly belonging to early worker Joe Kerr (see 1905 workers list), and delivered to Queens University Belfast by Kerr’s great nephew, also named Joe Kerr. The original copy has remained in the archives of QUB, under the care of Professor Paul Ingyaleg, and access to it has been restricted to the students and faculty of the theology dept (confirm with Irvine Grey). Despite numerous attempts by Canadian overseer, B.S., to have the document destroyed, the original has remained unmolested and, in fact, a facsimile copy of the letter was recently delivered to the Archivum Secretum Apostolicum Vaticanum. The authenticity of the letter was promptly verified by Holy See archival staff and, two days later, presented to Pope Francis, who immediately released the following statement: "Engaging in dialogue does not mean renouncing our own ideas and traditions, but the pretense that they alone are valid and absolute."The only part of the story that I have problems accepting is that Vatican City records show the letter being delivered on 21 January 2014 by one, Valient Thor. hee hee. too funny. are you sure about all this?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 28, 2014 7:15:35 GMT -5
Christianburg... It was a joke! from Ram. He thought I would jumped in both feet with his Dorthy's letter as historical fact. He made it up! a few yrs. back to make fun of William Irvine sister story. Nathan my friend, I take extreme exception to you declaring that the purpose of producing this letter was to make fun of William Irvine's sister's story. It was produced to provide "The Missing Link" that appears to have evaded us? A whole thread was created back in 2010 to examine the true facts of the document. Just face up to it. This letter is absolutely vital in proving the imaginary historical fact about Dorothy Irvine's testimony! People will reject the truth of the document purely for their own convenience!
|
|
|
Post by christiansburg on Jan 28, 2014 10:27:07 GMT -5
No, Ma'am, never told that, just told I was too great a sinner to be allowed in contact with good "professing people." Actually wanted to die being so misunderstood and misjudged knowing at that time there was nothing I could do about it nor about that kangaroo court led by a growing senile old man whose socks fell out of his hat onto our living room floor and were retrieved by a younger female worker accompanying him that day.
Later when that female worker came with a companion to deliver that letter of excommunication, it seemed like enduring a live nightmare. Still have that letter and copies of it. Nothing for anyone to be proud of, vague references to what I had supposedly done wrong, just saying I was guilty of committing a host of sins which were absolutely untrue with no way to disprove it, nor appeal.
For someone trying to be the very sincerest and most dedicated "professing person" possible, it was a real heart breaker. Those few who did come to my defense were told by those knowing only the false accusations that continue to change over time, that anyone defending me did not know the "truth" about me, including my own wife that she was just too close to me and needed to leave me.
Even yet, people try to convince others they just do not know the whole story about me, and I received written word someone could not know even yet what to believe, despite knowing how much evil that has had to be endured. I had to write back that I do not even know what the other side of the story was because it has changed so many times over the years. For someone whose first expressed testimony was a desire to be like "God's man Job" and who gave my all to prove that desire, if it had not been for my God proving Himself to me, I would have become as faithless as those who testify such of themselves in this forum.
I have a feeling of great compassion for you even though I have not had put together your story. But that doesn't matter to me because I sense a true sincerity in your posts. Someone you might remember from years ago communicated with you often. (board name: "no name")-- a relative of mine. She always spoke highly of your. Thought you might like to know that!
|
|