continued . . .

November 12, 1996

Dear List Subscribers,

I should explain my silence first of all. Some no doubt were thinking that I would not be responding. In my current situation I only have computer/telephone access for a few hours once a week, so my possibilities of using this channel of communication are limited. For that reason, my contributions at this point cannot be frequent. Thank you for your patience.

The responses to my previous comments, both those sent to me personally and those posted on the list, were fairly predictable. I do not have time right now to give detailed replies, though I hope to in the future. For today, I will try to address what seemed to be the two most common responses.

First of all, many doubted that I am in fact a real, honest-to-goodness, flesh-and-blood worker. I assure you that I am, though of course you will reserve the right to skepticism, just as I am skeptical of some of the claims that others make on the list. I think the Soviets and Americans used to call that detente, didn't they?

Second, many are questioning my decision to remain anonymous for the present. I never intended to participate on the list anonymously. I am not comfortable with anonymity. The only other time in my life that I have been anonymous was when I sent a "secret admirer" valentine in high school! My intention was to listen to the discussion on the list for a few days and then make a few comments openly. However, as I observed the participants in the list, I had to change my opinion. I will try to explain:

I am acquainted with many of the list subscribers. Some are my relatives, and are aware of my identity. Others are my relatives and are not aware of my identity. I have had open and personal dialogue with some of the participants; I hope to have more. I make no secret of what I believe and teach. In the Americas there are approximately 60 overseers in the fellowship; I am personally acquainted with all but six. Of these, many if not most have heard my public messages regarding my faith in Christ. In one case, I had a disagreement with an overseer when we were both visitors at a convention, and it was discussed openly. I have circulated signed study notes regarding my beliefs, and continue to do so. What I am trying to say is that I am not afraid of my colleagues in the work; I have no reason to be.

So how can I say this tactfully? My reason for anonymity has to do with what I know personally of the actions of some of the list subscribers. It is unscrupulous to search through others' personal possessions to find material to use for your own ends. It is not only unscrupulous, but illegal, to open mail addressed to others and then gleefully circulate or publish the contents. I have seen quotations deliberately changed from "I do not believe" to "I believe" in order to prove non-existent points. I have read personal letters filled with hatred and invective directed at loved ones, hatred which has its basis on personal grudges long in the past, yet now using discrepancies in belief or understanding as a cloak for that hatred. Aware that unscrupulous people have no qualms about misquoting or misrepresenting anything to suit their ends, I simply choose at this point to not allow others the luxury of using my name to continue hurting others. Please understand that this paragraph is not meant to apply to the majority of list subscribers, only to a few in particular.

Some of those who are aware of my identity and my reasons for anonymity are in agreement with me; others are not. Be that as it may, for the present, I will only be participating anonymously. If you can accept my participation on that basis, fine. If not, then I will continue my participation only on a personal level with those who are interested in doing so, and who can have patience with my slowness.

I am sorry that time does not allow me to reply in detail to questions from Sandi, Kelley, Dale, and others today. I do hope to reply in the future.

I would like to clarify regarding the quotations I cited in my previous posts. At that time I did not have access either to my notes or to Internet. The quotation from Walter Martin is: "Within the unity of the One God there are three Persons, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit; and these three share the same Nature and attributes. In effect then, the three Persons are the One God." I found this quote repeated in several websites that were refuting the "oneness" belief of such groups as the United Pentecostals and the followers of Wm. Branham.

Regarding the quote which I mentioned seeing on the R.I.S. website and attributed to E. Cooney, I must apologize for the tricks of my middle-aged memory. :( The quote actually is on the TTT website, and is not from Cooney at all, but rather an anonymous quote from 1909, just below another quote which is Cooney's, which likely gave me the impression that they were both his. I apologize for the confusion. [[ Administrative Note: The quote anon. worker refers to is actually on this site. Refer to *What they say about "the beginning"/Some Answers to the Questions/Section 5 ]] Anyway, the quote is, "We are not starting a new religion. We are earnestly contending for the faith once delivered to the saints and trying to separate it from the traditions of men..." Cooney said as much in the quote above also, (also from 1909) though in the stronger language that seemed typical of him! My point was and is simply that in 1909, before any supposed "coverup" was taking place, while William Irvine was still recognized as a leader in the fellowship, the believers were acknowledging that they were not following a "founder", but seeking to return to the principles and practices they found in the Bible.

Now I must stop for today. Thanks again for your patience and for your frank responses.

November 13, 1996

Dear Anon Worker,

Thank you for communicating with us again in this forum.

In my reply to your first post to this forum I dealt with the issue of your anonymity, hoping that you would soon be disclosing your identity. Since you decline to do that yet, I will leave that issue and address one which I consider to be much more fundamental. That is the question, "Do you believe there are saved people in other denominations?"

I'm not the first to ask you this. Elizabeth and Sandi, both on this list have also raised this issue. We are hoping for a direct "yes" or "no" answer. This would not require much of your limited time and access on the internet. It would help clarify your stand on a very major issue. If you do not care to give a yes or no answer, do you know of some overseers with whom you are in agreement doctrinally who would give us their answer and be willing to attach their names to their answer?

You may ask why this is such a major issue to me. It is because in their zeal, William Irvine and his successors denounced all other Christians and ministers. In my opinion this violated Rom.15:7, "Wherefore receive ye one another, as Christ also received us to the glory of God." They should have observed I John 3:14, We know that we have passed from death unto life because we love the brethren." How much better if they had loved as in I John 4:21, "And this commandment have we from him, That he who loveth God love his brother also." In my opinion it was unscriptural for William Irvine and his associates to consider themselves true preachers with a mission of bringing people to God, and then renounce all God-fearing Christians whom they should have looked upon as brothers and sisters in Christ. They even went so far as to repudiate their former associates in the Faith Mission which yet today is made up of Godly people, including men and women ministers who interestingly still call themselves workers!

In your previous letter you stated, "Yes, there have been many mistakes made through the years by many individuals." We all know that some mistakes either cannot be corrected or do not need to be corrected, because they are in the past.

For example, William Irvine and his collegues can not now correct their grave mistake in repudiating all other Christians. However, the workers of the year 1996 do have a choice. Do they continue that same repudiation of their fellow Christians, (and thus violate such scriptures as I referred to above) or do they avoid the mistake of their predecessors? Do they now begin to follow Romans 15:7 by aknowledging the faith and salvation of Christians in other denominations?

I believe this issue ties in with the principle of justification by grace alone. You seem to be saying that the majority of the overseers are now teaching justification by grace alone. However I think their understanding of justification is severely flawed if they still attach the condition that such justification is not possessed by believers in other denominations.

Again, thank you for your letter. Along with everyone else I eagerly await more from you. Let us all pray for each other that scruples, kindess, honesty, and love will temper our interaction with each other.

Sincerely,

Paul Abenroth, Walla Walla, WA

November 14, 1996

Dear Anon Worker,

You mentioned that:

>> My point was and is simply that in 1909, before any supposed "coverup" was taking place, while William Irvine was still recognized as a leader in the fellowship, the believers were acknowledging that they were not following a "founder", but seeking to return to the principles and practices they found in the Bible.<<

It has been my experience, when I was a Jehovah's Witness and had some studies with Mormons, Baptists, Mennonites, 7th Day adventists and Pentacostles, that while they recognized a founder, none claimed to be following a founder. They all claimed to be seeking to return to the principles and practices they found in the Bible. None of them tried to deny they had a founder, and all quite honestly state who their founder is. Some of these denominations do use the teachings of their founders and follow that set of beliefs as truth. But none DENY they have a founder. The way I see it, the only difference here is that they are honest about their founders, and the followers of William Irvine's teachings are not.

Love,

Linda Tame

Manitoba, Canada

November 14, 1996

Dear Anon Worker,

I am sorry that any of us would have to be anonymous to talk civilly, but I understand your reasons for doing so, there are a lot of issues involved, and some ex-members want to remain anonymous for similar reasons as the ones you cited. I am very unhappy if unscrupulous behaviour as you mentioned is going on, but I believe this is by no means one-sided (though I am not trying to justify this behaviour). The false slandering and accusations made against ex-members have been very painful, and strong emotions on both sides have been inflamed.

I guess you, dear anon worker, are not quite sure what "we" outsiders are arguing about. You claim to believe in salvation by grace through faith, a triune God, etc. That is fine, though most ex-members will argue they were never taught these truths in "the way". I certainly was not, and my family does not accept these "strange" doctrines that I hold too. (Would you believe that I have been branded as "The Antichrist" here in Australia for believing in the triune God?)

Anyway, I am getting off track.

You seem convinced that you are teaching sound doctrine, but in actual fact your worldwide fellowship holds to one of the worst heresies in existence. The bottom line has always been, and continues to be, that your fellowship IS THE WAY to heaven. Jesus has been misplaced as the only way to the Father by the "workers". You teach that we can only have access to Christ and to the Father, to have the right Spirit , IF we hear you and live under your "way".

I would like to insert here part of a letter by a worker in 1936 recently posted to the list (EMPHASIS MINE):

I like to notice that when we read of Jesus the slain Lamb, that He was in the midst of the throne and of the four living creatures and in the midst of the elders. He was the center of all and the only one who could clearly open the book of God, and the seals wherewith it was sealed. I can see how clearly the Bible was a seven sealed book for me, which I could not open or look therein, UNTIL I SAW A MAN WITH THE MARKS OF A SLAIN LAMB in his life.Then I looked on the CLERGY MAN and the other BIG PREACHERS, I saw nothing of what I read there, but when I saw A MAN IN THE WAY OF JESUS, the slain lamb of God it began to open up and I could look therein and understand. Jesus is not now on earth to open the book for people, as He did for His disciples of old, when their hearts burned within them as they listened, but He does it through those who go forth to represent Him and with the same marks in their lives. He says on the judgement Matt.25 "inasmuch as ye did it unto one of the least of these ye did it unto me." They had represented Him and HAD THE SAME MARKS IN THEIR LIVES. And I am sure that the devil is anxious to destroy these marks, as he knows then that the book of God would remained sealed. I like the verse which says no one in heaven or earth or under the earth could open this book or see therein, and surely it is still something to weep over, as John did when it is so. People sometimes say to us, "Has God only one way?" but how clearly we can see it here, that there was only one way and that was by sacrifice in the first place of His Son, and NOW THROUGH HIM IN THOSE HE SENDS FORTH TO PREACH AND REPRESENT HIM ON EARTH.

Dear anon worker, I was absolutely horrified when I read this passage, and my heart trembled within me. THESE WORKERS HAVE MADE THEMSELVES EQUAL TO CHRIST!!!!! Let me explain in the following points.

1. The seven sealed book in Revelations is here described as the Bible. I believe this to be a blatant misrepresentation, though someone please correct me if they can shed some more light on this.

2. A "Man with the marks of a slain lamb in his life" is obviously referring to a "worker". These marks of a slain lamb, as understood in the context of the letter, is the sacrifice the worker himself has made to be like Jesus.

3. The "Clergy man" and other "big preachers" are obviously ministers of other denominations, or "false churches" in your understanding. They did not have these marks of a slain lamb, ie: they have not made sacrifices like the workers.

4. This "man in the way of Jesus", clearly describing a "worker", apparently has equal rights as Christ in opening and reading the seven sealed book, for whom no one else was worthy. And it is through this worker (or other workers) that others can have access to God.

5. And so it is confirmed here, that as Christ is no longer on earth, He is no longer here to be the way, so those who are sent forth to represent Him are "the way".

Do you understand the significance of this? The Workers' sacrifices here are likened to Christ's sacrifice! They have replaced Christ's words "I am the Way" with their own "We are the now the Way". They apparently have the same "marks of a slain lamb"!! Do you know what these marks actually are? The sacrifice of Christ was not being homeless and wifeless. It was being crucified to bear the sins of you and me! Christ didn't come to show you how to sacrifice your life, He came to BE the sacrifice for us!! How dare anyone liken the sacrifice of God my Saviour to sacrifices they have made of a couple of worldly comforts!

The workers go on sacrificing their lives, being allegedly homeless, spouseless etc, but for what cause? We are only asked to believe in the sacrifice Christ made for us.

The workers preach themselves as the way to the Gospel, the way to Christ, the way to heaven, but Christ said "I am the Way, the Truth and the Light". The Worker claim all these 3 things for themself! They show the "Way", they are the "Truth" and only they can show us the "Light" of Christ in Scripture.

{In a corrected post she said: "Oops, sorry everybody! (and anon worker) :( I think I did a slight misquote. Jesus said "I am the Way, the Truth andthe Life", not "Light" I believe. Still, principle I was speaking of still applies. Besides, Jesus came to be the light of the world, did He not? So not entirely incorrect. : ) Humble apologies"}

Christ taught that He alone is the Way, Truth and Life. He did not teach that others would equally represent Him on earth, sacrificing their own lives for this purpose. He taught that the Comforter, the Holy Spirit would come to dwell within us and lead us into all Truth. NO OTHER HUMAN BEING IS NECESSARY FOR MY SALVATION IN CHRIST!! Jesus sent forth men to preach the gospel unto all men, not to be the "way" for them!! These men are instruments for this purpose only. They are no more holy or special than me, they are just fulfilling a different purpose that God created them for. And they do not have the "marks of a slain lamb" in their life! Show me the nailprints in Christ and I'll show you sacrifice. THE WORKERS ARE TRYING TO COPY CHRIST TO TAKE HIS PLACE ON EARTH TODAY!!

If you truly believe you know and teach sound doctrine, there are several questions you should consider:

1. If Christ is the only Way, why does my ministry believe they are the only way?

2. Do I want to belong to a ministry that believes it replaces Christ here on this earth?

3. If I don't believe this is the only way, why can't I have fellowship with other christian and christians in ministry who also believe the same truths of scripture? (Why can't you have fellowship with us ex-members if you agree to believing what we believe???)

4. Have I become a false Messiah? Directing people to a Christ replacement ?

I understand you have little time and limited access to a computer, but Ieagerly await any response you may have. If an opportunity does not arise, please consider what I have written. Please search scripture and seek God, if we only justify scripture to what we want it to say, we are lost.

I pray that you may have every blessing God can give.

Elizabeth Coleman

Australia

November 14, 1996

Dear Anon Worker,

Regarding this quote in your last letter:

>> My point was and is simply that in 1909, before any supposed "coverup" was taking place, while William Irvine was still recognized as a leader in the fellowship, the believers were acknowledging that they were not following a "founder", but seeking to return to the principles and practices they found in the Bible.<<

I wonder if we are having a problem with the application and definition of the word "founder".

I consider the word "founder" in this context to mean "originator".

If you are saying that William Irvine was not the founder or originator oftrue Christian Doctrine, then I agree.

Us ex-professing people who call William Irvine the founder (originator) are not saying that he originated the idea of the apostles traveling through Israel in pairs for a short time on a special mission ordained byJesus; or the idea of Christians meeting in homes; or the salvation doctrine taught in the New Testament. But we are saying that he founded or originated the fellowship as a BODY OF PEOPLE. He also founded or originated the idea that ministers of our day should imitate some (but not all) of the instructions Jesus gave to the Apostles on their limited mission to Israel in Matt. 10.

Let's analyze this statement, " ...the believers were acknowledging that they were not following a "founder", but seeking to return to the principles and practices they found in the Bible."

This statement has two parts:

1. The believers... following a founder...

2. The believers...seeking to return to... the Bible.

Let us not overlook the possibility that people can do both simultaneously. These two possibilities are not mutually exclusive. I believe both things ("following" a founder and "seeking" to return) happened simultaneously.

In fact, I believe many of those early workers and friends did follow a founder as a group or movement, and at the same time they were possibly sincerely trying to return to principles and practices they found in the Bible. However, their sincerity did not prevent them from detouring into heresy by "doctrinizing" Matt. 10 and by repudiating all other Christian people in all other denominations.

So, if English words have specific meanings I think I'd have to say William Irvine is a founder.

Sincerely,

Paul A. Abenroth

November 15, 1996

The worker-lurker recently posted:

>>I know personally of the actions of some of the list subscribers. It is unscrupulous to search through others' personal possessions to find material to use for your own ends. It is not only unscrupulous, but illegal, to open mail addressed to others and then gleefully circulate or publish the contents. I have seen quotations deliberately changed from "I do not believe" to "I believe" in order to prove non-existent points. I have read personal letters filled with hatred and invective directed at loved ones, hatred which has its basis on personal grudges long in the past, yet now using discrepancies in belief or understanding as a cloak for that hatred. Aware that unscrupulous people have no qualms about misquoting or misrepresenting anything to suit their ends, I simply choose at this point to not allow others the luxury of using my name to continue hurting others. Please understand that this paragraph is not meant toapply to the majority of list subscribers, only to a few in particular.<<

To the Worker/Lurker: I think you have been guilty of broad-sweeping statements also, and I hope you will explain. I dare say the "few in particular" would want to know where they have erred. Unless the guilty are identified then all are suspect.

As publishers, we have asked "friends" and workers to show us errors in any of our publications but, to date, none have. Often when someone has made similar derogatory remarks about our publications, we've asked which ones they've read, and they admit they haven't even read them -their remarks are based on rumors! The other people I know who have published anything regarding the "fellowship" are not unscrupulous! Please do us the kindness of presenting documented instances of where you see error or wrong-doing, so that truth will prevail.

Joan Daniel (Research & Information Services)

Oregon, USA

December 16, 1996

I am sorry, but I do not believe the words of 'worker lurker' who claims that he is telling us what "most workers" believe, related to who Jesus is, when, accumulating the years of 2x2 experience of just those few on this forum [List], there must be 500-1000 years of experience, AND NOBODY HAS EVER HEARD OTHER WORKERS PREACH WHAT HE CLAIMS TO BE THE 'NORM'!!

Bob Daniel (Research & Information Services)

Oregon, USA