|
You are reading the VOT Archive Home Page · VOT Topics · Table of Contents |
Historical data is sufficient to prove to my satisfaction that William Irvine is the founder of the 2&2 fellowship. For me, it was important to determine whether or not the 2x2 group had a human founder, so I would know whether or not it could possibly be considered my only avenue to salvation. I had concluded that no system with a human founder can legitimately claim exclusive right to salvation. In my understanding of the Gospel, the doctrine of justification by grace alone through faith prohibits such a claim.
The workers today (mostly the younger ones) have been placed in an awkward situation in that many of them had never heard of William Irvine before either!
When I was a young boy I was told by my mother and grandparents on several different occasions that the Truth was started by Jesus when he was here on Earth.
For me the issue is NOT whether or not some man founded the "Way." The issue is that the workers have lied for years about this. Among other "explanations" they have said this way was "from the beginning;" it is since "2 and 2 became 4" (and we know how long THAT has been!)
Yes, yes, some HAVE known about the true beginnings all along. BUT I VENTURE TO SAY THAT THE VAST MAJORITY OF FRIENDS HAD NEVER HEARD THAT THIS ALL STARTED IN IRELAND ABOUT 100 YEARS AGO. This information was kept from us! The question is: WHY!!!?
The beginning isn't important. THE COVER-UP IS!!
Had the workers, specifically George Walker and Jack Carroll, never concocted their little cover-up plan years and years ago the workers wouldn't be in this jack-pot of a mess today! Imagine! They could have been telling us the truth all along. They could simply have told us that this way started in Ireland just before the turn of the century and over the course of time certain disagreements surfaced and some of the earlier workers were put out and a basically new group was formed and continued on.
But they didn't tell us the truth so I guess they are in a scramble now--how to "handle all the questions."
Since they have claimed to be "God's way" (and we know they mean "the only way to heaven") they have another little problem. IF they admit to Irvine and Cooney and the big cover-up they will have to admit that this isn't God's ONLY way after all! (Obviously a group that started so recently can't be God's ONLY true way.) And besides the Jehovah's Witnesses already have that claim and I believe the Mormons do too--and several other groups. Sure was interesting for me to learn that so many of these kinds of groups all seem to think their "Way" is God's only church. And to think any one bunch of people could dare to claim such!! (Talk about putting God in a box!)
Of course there are a few more problems. Their unorthodox theology being a HUGE one!
Anyway, I could really care less if this group has a founder or a group of founders or if some man decided this would be a good way to worship. Hey, I have no complaint about people meeting in homes to worship. Church buildings aren't necessary (although in my opinion not wrong), ministers going out two together without salary, etc, without their own home (they are NOT homeLESS!) is no problem either. Nothing wrong with ANY of that. If people in a said group all agree to a certain appearance code--fine!
The error comes when they say it is God-required, mandatory, part of God's plan, etc. AND, when an entire BELIEF system is BUILT on these features! Well! They can't retract "these things" or the entire thing will crumble--right from the tops of the ladies buns on down!
People! We have been hoodwinked! But praise the Lord we now have information. We can stay or we can leave. The choice is up to us.
1) The founder of the Two-by-Two religion was excommunicated from the very way he established - not "before the church," but secretly - by a cabal of those men he had placed in positions of trust (and great power). What kind of organization connives to throw out the person who started it? Where did this ever occur in the Bible?
2) The Two-by-Two "way" was established on the basis of supposed divine revelation given to Wm. Irvine, not upon a return to the principles of the Bible. In later years, Irvine referred to the organization he started as "an experiment." The "gospel" preached in those early years was this "revelation" of Matthew 10 (i.e., the homeless ministry itself), and this "gospel" message hasn't changed much over the years in many areas.
3) The founder of the Two-by-Two organization has since proved to be a false prophet on many counts, both theological and on the basis of predictions he claimed which never materialized. "Can a fountain send forth both sweet and bitter?" False prophets in the Bible were killed, and their prophecies were to be disregarded - not followed.
4) Irvine's role and the group's late 19th century roots have been implicitly and explicitly denied for the last 70+ years - by both those who knew the truth, and by those who merely repeated their lies. We have many examples of these false and deceptive statements, such as Jack Carroll's (who himself professed through Irvine): "You can tell whether a church is a false church or not if it was started by a man or woman. We are the only church on earth that was started by Christ."
5) Having a founder (even if he was supposedly "divinely inspired") puts the Two-by-Twos squarely in the company of the many other denominations who were started by human agency. The Two-by-Twos are not unique in their origin, nor do they have a better claim on being successors to the "New Testament Church."
And, aside from the lies about the founding, a strikingly similar pattern of deception has also been used by the leadership to mislead concerning other aspects of the Two-by-Two way: the claim to have no organization, the financial dealings, the claim to have no official name, the claim that they are not a denomination, etc. Is it even remotely possible for an organization that presents itself as being God's "Truth" and "Only Way" to also be the nursery for so many lies and so much deception?
One of the things that was so hurtful for my Mom when she discovered the truth about the beginnings (which she found by reading The Secret Sect, which I didn't want to hear about and refused to even discuss with her at the time) was knowing that some of those dear old workers who had brought "the truth" to her parents and who we had loved and looked after and looked up to, had not been honest with us. Most of the multi-generation 2x2 families on this list would have been acquainted with one or more of those early workers listed in The Secret Sect... I know our family was... they KNEW and yet they told us there was no earthly founder.
We have been led to believe that this fellowship has no founding fathers but can be traced all the way back to Jesus. When you make a fearless search of our history you will not be able to go further back than late 1800 early 1900’s and to a man by the name of William Irvine and fellow preacher by the name of Edward Cooney. We weren’t bothered by having a founder so much as being deceived that we didn’t.
I DO get all hot and bothered about the deception perpetrated about Wm Irvine. In fact the Wm Irvine issue is my hot button!
Irvine had little in the way of long-term Bible study/teaching; got off on Matthew 10, influenced others with his personality and ideas and, well, you know the rest!
>>Right. Actually to me Irvine was no more guilty than others after him that changed it to be even more subtle. As I remember it, he didn't promote the idea that it had no founder, he wanted the credit. Maybe it would be easier to spot as a false group today if it had been left more like it originally was. One way the workers today think they can say that it had no founder is because it was changed after he got the boot so therefore they say it wasn't him that started it. <<
If the workers had presented William Irvine as being the one who God chose to reveal his way to, and from there he converted Walker, Gill, Jardine, and others, I would have had no problem in believing this at all.
William Irvine’s name was unknown to me until seeing it written on a poster that was being carried by an elderly man who was picketing outside Casa Grande convention a few years ago.
I think too that William Irvine and Edward Cooney were very sincere in wanting to follow Christ. But good intentions are not necessarily right, and lack of solid Biblical teaching of the preachers sent forth, plus an emphasis on works and sacrifice have resulted in the mess we have today.
About the beginnings not being important to most truthers, I believe it continues to be very important to those of us who were continually lied to. We don't harp on about the beginnings of the 2x2s to prove it a false church, we just want to make the point that there has been a purpose deception and cover up, we have been consistently deceived! If any workers are now openly admitting the beginnings, it is only because they have been forced to by people finding out the truth from other sources! They would prefer this issue just went away and got lost in the noise.
I might as well add my comments with the others here on this founder issue. I'd like to ask a question. Who benefited from the cover-up of the founder to begin with? Were Irvine & Cooney even the ones who began this? To the best of my recollection, it was more Geo. Walker & workers after Irvine who were instrumental in this. Because Irvine had "gone off the deep end" they wanted to break any connection to him; therefore the group didn't originate with Irvine--it was from the beginning. Also the older something is--(like a piece of antique furniture)--the more valuable.
Therefore that made this group seem better because it had lasted all this time, while other groups dissolved, split or whatever. Usually when you have something that's old & valuable you have documents to authenticate the age; however like ______ said in an earlier post she was told to not "look in old, moldy history books".
____in my mind, when someone says "DON'T LOOK"--they usually have something to hide. Also the worker you mentioned, Dallas Linneman said it was true that the group started 100 yrs. ago--why has no one admitted to many of us here on this forum that it started 100 yrs. ago? Do they only acknowledge the history in some places & not others? And why didn't someone admit the beginning of the group to my grandparents who died in this fellowship so THEY could decide if it was important to them or not?
A lie is a lie whenever & however it's told. I can't understand why the workers can't acknowledge—we made a mistake or workers that came before us made a mistake & now we need to admit that & try to correct that problem & go on. Am I the only one who has never heard a worker admit they've made a mistake or make an apology? If they really want to correct things with the members they have left, it would seem to be that they need to clear up the past. If that means bulldozing all the old foundation down so they can start clean--then so be it.
I can't understand that all these private worker meetings they hold are the solution to the problem. My thoughts only here but it would seem to me if their confidence and faith is in God-- then perhaps they should start clean. Personally I could think more highly of the body of believers if I could see their faith & confidence placed in GOD instead of their system.
I'm not trying to condemn you here & I hope you won't take it as such. I admire your willingness to use your mind & keep it open to the leading of the Holy Spirit; however I feel like there is an open, oozing wound as far as this history thing with the group goes & a lot of other issues. In order to purify it, there first has to be cleansing done. That is painful but it isthe first step.
"Who benefited from the cover-up of the founder to begin with?"
- Response: When Irvine's empire had expanded globally, he thought it necessary to institute a structure to help him govern. He appointed overseers to superintend specific geographic areas. These men were his most trusted associates, men who had professed directly under himself (George Walker-eastern N. America, Wm. Carroll-Australia, Jack Carroll-western N. America, etc.) in the early days. Irvine was not a man to tolerate dissent. He was known to take senior workers to task publicly and his word was described as a final, almost god-like decree on matters. Irvine also controlled the purse-strings, and the workers turned over to him their accumulations at the annual home conventions in Ireland (much as many workers still turn over their excess today). Once they had been granted some measure of authority over others, however, these overseers understandably began to resent Irvine's interference in their affairs. In 1913-14, however, Irvine was preaching a new order, his "Omega Gospel" (in contrast with his 1897 "Alpha Message" revelation of Matthew 10). The overseers felt threatened by this new revelation, and began to systematically exclude Irvine and his core supporters from fellowship with the group. Mention of Irvine's name was dropped and his role as founder was denied outright or simply not mentioned. Irvine continued to have a world-wide following, and some kind of uneasy arrangement seems to have been reached between Irvine and the overseers. The clear beneficiaries of the cover-up were the overseers, who became undisputed masters over their regions. Whether the overseers were motivated more by pride, power, greed, fear or combinations of these may never be clear (and may have varied from overseer to overseer).
"Were Irvine & Cooney even the ones who began this? To the best of my recollection, it was more Geo. Walker & workers after Irvine who were instrumental in this. Because Irvine had 'gone off the deep end' they wanted to break any connection to him; therefore the group didn't originate with Irvine--it was from the beginning."
-Response: Irvine started the group, and all the original workers professed through him. There is no question as to this, and Irvine claimed to be (and Cooney and others acknowledged him to be) the founder. Irvine began a dialog with Cooney (an Anglican lay preacher) in 1897, but Cooney did not sell all and join Irvine's new group as a worker (a requirement of all in those days) for several years. In the meantime, George Walker (an employee of the Cooney family business) joined as worker in 1899. After the early years, Irvine often worked in the background. He traveled a great deal, checking up on overseers and opening new regions. Many of the rank and file outside the British Isles were little acquainted with him (many knew he was important, but little more than that). So it was easy in most areas to cover up Irvine's role. In Ireland, there has never been a cover-up, except that mention of Irvine is frowned upon. It would be impossible to claim no founder there, as Irvine and the group as a whole received wide publicity in the press and other public fora. BTW, the explanation that Irvine had "gone off the deep end" or had "gone mad" are misleading. Irvine was never institutionalized and lived independently to an old age. Irvine's later writings are not those of a madman. He was mystical (but no more so than when he had his original revelation), hurt by his rejection by those he trusted and who owed their positions to him, arrogant (again, no more so than in the earliest years of his movement) and clever.
"If that means bulldozing all the old foundation down so they can start clean--then so be it."
-Response: Cooney, too, thought there needed to be drastic reform. He came to the conclusion that the POSITION of worker was not scriptural and led to terrible abuse. Though he remained a homeless itinerant to his dying day, he abolished the positions of worker and overseer among his followers, retaining only local elders and meetings.
William Irvine set the tone; did he not!? He said it was a "great experiment." And what fun it is; to be a guinea pig!!!!!!!!!!
The Founding role of William Irvine and the supporting role of Cooney were always denied when I was in the tribe/sect/cult/group. I distinctly remember it happening over and over. There was a valiant individual who tried to uncover the tribal leaders deception on an ongoing basis. He would travel to conventions and special meeting around California and hold up signs saying that Irvine was the Founder of the 2x2s. I was always told that the man was crazy and that what he was saying (with his signs) was untrue. I was indoctrinated over and over with the idea that the group I was a part of went all of the way back to the beginning. My parents told me, and I heard it from the platform. After I quit going to tribal meetings, I asked Eldon Tenniswood if Irvine founded the group and Eldon told me "no."
The brainwashed do not know that they are brainwashed!!!! I did not know until some Light began shining into my life. The LIGHT OF TRUTH!!!!!!!
After I read THE SECRET SECT I asked an older (late 50's) sister worker who Cooney was. (I didn't mention Irvine--I didn't want to push it THAT far!) Well, she abruptly said that he had been a worker and had fallen away. With that she turned and plunked herself down on my kitchen chair with the body language that said: "And THAT is the end of THIS conversation!"
Many of us were definitely told and believed that the group had no earthly founder... even many of the workers. In my experience in the meetings, this was a fact that was often BOASTED about and held up as a clear indication that OUR way was far superior to and much more biblical than all those "false churches" out which were "started by some man" rather than by God.
Christian Conventions, yes, hmmm, to learn that the workers even had/HAVE letterhead was really something. And isn't it interesting how charismatic the group was at the start; under Irvine, and how very much the opposite it is now? My own thoughts tell me that the reason the group is conservative now is because all the people "back in them there days" had to "hush up" and sorta go "underground"--hence a group that is, today secretive, closed mouthed and hidden, as far as the world goes.
I agree with those who said that finding out the history was very important. It meant the difference between night and day to me. Finding out that those I trusted for many many years for my salvation had been part of a great deception really opened my eyes and mind to what was really right.
The Ireland story did not prove/manifest our lack of faith. It was not the final determination for "he lost out" or "she never really had it". The withholding of the Ireland story was simply the withholding of truth, the withholding of light.
Yes the history was definitely a big part of the reason I left. The history was a big deal because it revealed what I felt was actual dishonesty not something that could be passed off as difference in opinion. For me it seemed to take the double whammy of that + the doctrine of the Godhead but the differences in doctrine between different workers I could have tolerated (in a group with no organization) if they were willing to admit there are differences of opinion. But of course they're not willing to admit that either so for me the doctrine thing actually boiled down to honesty too.
I think the history problem is tied closely to the unwritten (and usually unspoken) idea that the fellowship is the only way to heaven. Obviously if it's the ONLY WAY, the history IS extremely important. It'salmost like a sort of apostolic succession thing, that you must be part of the group and get it from the right preacher, so how could it be right if it suddenly sprang up or started in 1899? ____ probably doesn't see this too well because he never got totally hooked. He probably never got what the 2&2s would call a REVELATION of truth. I don't think I ever heard (directly) in Gospel meetings that the fellowship is the only way to be saved or that when you get totally convinced the fellowship is right and are willing to follow it, you have what they call a REVELATION. In my experience this was generally talked about among the friends and workers when no outsiders were present. When outsiders were around, it probably wouldn't be mentioned but they'd be hoping for them to pick this up on their own and get a REVELATION. This type of conversation is used when talking ABOUT people who are hard to win over, not when talking TO them.
I was trapped in the 2x2s for exactly this reason. THEY DID NOT GIVE ME THE STRAIGHT GOODS. I did not pick up on the fact that what I was supposed to be "getting" was their "only way gospel" REVELATION. I picked up on THAT after I professed--from the friends in their homes after I had been loved in. Then I got a case of the "WHAT IFs?" What if they ARE right and this IS the only way? Then what? That case of "WHAT IFs" lasted for fourteen years until I learned about the history. Then the "WHAT IFs" began to leave me and rational thinking began to undo the subtle programming that had occurred even though I never could believe their "only way" and "only preachers" and "only in the home" basics. Yes, I'd definitely say learning about the history got me out!
I had been unhappy with much of the 2x2 doctrine before I left, but it was the deception regarding the history of the group that was the last straw as far as I was concerned.
I had been given a copy of George Walker's statement to the Selective Service System which I believed to be an accurate history, but once I read the Secret Sect I realised George Walker's account was deliberately misleading, and I wondered what George would have done had he been asked to swear or affirm that it was "the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth".
All sects or denominations are started by one or more people so there is nothing to be ashamed of in that, but I do not know of any other group which has been so dishonest regarding it's own history.