This isn't what I've read.
What have you read????
They had conflicts, but their relationship was restored and John Wesley even presided over Whitefield's funeral.
Their relationship was severed for a time as the Wesley's continued their onslaught on Whitefield of which he was always gracious in reply. And their relationship was hardly "restored" so you'd be incorrect.
John said their fight was an irreparable breach, and he was partly correct. Whitefield had written to them on two occasions to restore fellowship, and they did not return the favor. Charles became incensed that John was softening towards Whitefield, and in turn wrote another hymnal of hymns attacking Whitefield.
Howell Harris
(and John Cennick iirc) attempted to have a conference with the Wesley's and others, but they did not come after all. "The idea that entire harmony was achieved is by no means correct."
George Whitefield, Vol. 2, p. 147.
Charles remained aloof from Whitefield and John only partially accepted, and this after numerous and gracious attempts by Whitefield, some which never received a response.
By the way, I am glad John had took a last attempt to behave graciously toward Whitefield after he died.
I think we all need to be careful when repeating comments like this.
You need to be careful in your veiled slander above, implying my statements aren't true.
My comments? They're documented, but you're just seeking to find something to argue about, as if I just made this up. Everything I've stated is documented. I'm not just repeating comments, so maybe you should be careful in your accusations and implications to slight me?
You're the one who needs to be careful, as can be further seen:
Because you believe in Calvinism, maybe you should follow Whitefield's example by loving those who love the Lord no matter what their doctrinal beliefs are.
There it is! I knew there was a reason for the little attack. It's because I'm a Calvinist, and because I'm a Calvinist it means I don't love others in their differing beliefs. It has to mean that, right? Or, could it be that nearly the entirety of my Christian brothers and sisters are not Calvinists?
Your assumption is most unChristian. And for the record I do have love for those who are not the same doctrinally. This is a well known fact.
I'm not a Calvinist, but I love the Lord with all my heart.
Of course, now you go to praising yourself after slighting me with false assumptions. Yes, you're so wonderful, and love the Lord with all your heart, but me, I don't love others who aren't like me, fabricate things &c. How Christ-like of you! LOL!!!!
Maybe you consider me not saved, but because you believe it doesn't make it so.
And...another attempt to cast me in a bad light and offer some not so veiled slander. That's uncalled for and should have never been stated, all you are doing is slandering me. Yes, I know you said "maybe" but the accusation is there and uncalled for.
How many times in this response have you sought to slam me? 3? 4? Too many???
The Wesley's and Whitefield came to an agreement.
What is this agreement? When did it happen? I've explained the "agreement" and there was no entire harmony ever achieved.
Perhaps this is the problem; You just cannot stand that a Calvinist actually was gracious to the Wesley's even after their malicious attacks on him via hymns, printed sermons and oral attacks on him among the saints. You just can't allow a Calvinist to actually have behaved himself above those who attack him. This is part of it right there.
Whitefield was more like the evangelist
Both he and John were evangelists. You should have known that since "you've read." Whitefield wasn't just "more like one" he was one. So was John.
and the Wesley's were the ones that discipled those who responded and were born of the Spirit.
Did they? Their "discipleship" included indoctrinating persons against other persons; Howell Harris, Whitefield, John Cennick and teaching them the false doctrine of sinless perfection. They never fully accepted Whitefield's extended olive branch.