|
Post by sacerdotal on Apr 12, 2012 9:05:22 GMT -5
I was surprised when on another thread, someone implied that I didn't profess because I referred to (the no name organization) as the 2x2s. I did that because that is how (the no name organization) is referred to most commonly on this board. Sigh. With my brothers in sisters in Christ who belong to (the no name organization) I refer to this fellowship as "The Truth". However, I have never thought of being labelled as being a "2x2" was offensive. If I get hit by a "2x4" then that is offensive, but not being called a 2x2. I actually like it. It's kind of catchy. And evidently William Irvine wasn't too offended by the phrase when he "resurrected God's true way". He initially called it- ready for this? - "the two by twos". He later instructed folks to tell everyone that we didn't have a name- and that concept evidently stuck. Here is the source, a snippet from a chapter on William Irvine from the book God's Lunatics by Michael Largo. IRVINE LEADER OF THE “CHURCH WITHOUT A NAME” Founders of new religions often have trouble deciding what to call their new faiths, as it was for Scottish minister William Irvine. At the turn of the twentieth century, Irvine was an articulate and convincing preacher who claimed the end of the world was going to happen in 1914. He borrowed from Jehovah’s Witnesses the concept that only 144,000 were going to be saved, but he went further, demanding absolute asceticism as the single most important requirement for salvation. More than thirty thousand gave away every possession and voluntarily became homeless. All that Irvine kept was his dog. At first he called his movement the “Two by Twos,” because pairs of his followers were sent about preaching and securing donations from dawn to dusk. Later he instructed them to say they belonged to the No Name Church, or the Church Without a Name. Largo, Michael (2010-06-17). God's Lunatics:Lost Souls, False Prophets, Martyred Saints, Murderous Cults, Demonic Nuns, and Other Victims of Man's Eternal Search for the Divine (Kindle Locations 3306-3314). Harper Collins, Inc.. Kindle Edition. PS- I have an issue with the Kindle version of the book, in that it has many references listed in the back- but no footnotes to point to the reference. And the entry on William Irvine had at least one obvious error and other things that I have never heard/read before- so until I can verify the source, I read what is written with skepticism. But, the book is very entertaining- I learned a lot about various Catholic saints, and it includes the history of Easter and Christmas- which is quite interesting. www.amazon.com/gp/product/0061732842/ref=s9_simh_gw_p14_d0_g14_i1?pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_s=center-2&pf_rd_r=1ZYD3TW793FW8D7JJKQA&pf_rd_t=101&pf_rd_p=470938631&pf_rd_i=507846
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Apr 12, 2012 9:44:57 GMT -5
Thanks for indicating there was no footnote pointing to a reference for the above statement. Sounds like an ad hoc statement. Take it with a grain of salt.
I could be mis-remembering, but I dont recall seeing a place where WmI called them 2x2s. He called them "The Testimony" in most of his letters written after he left, and the "Alpha," and various other uncomplimentary terms.
In Willie & Lizzie's Jamieson's letters dated 1910 forward that I've been reading recently, they called it The Way of Jesus, Jesus' Way; the Way of God and God's Way.
Somewhere in my computer, I have a study on the earliest references to it being called 2x2s in a published or historical document - and the term didnt start with WmI.
|
|
|
Post by ts on Apr 12, 2012 9:47:49 GMT -5
The reason that all these various names for the group that the friends and workers belong to(gttfawbt) is because they have an aversion to taking a name. It is as if naming their group detracts from Jesus. We are all familiar with the well worn explanation "We do not take a name for ourselves. We take Jesus' name." But the friends don't go around calling their group "Jesus" either.
A name categorizes the group. The group is already categorized. The friends are afraid of being known as an organization. They already are an organization. All that NOT having a name does is make them look like a disorganized organization. The attempt is to make the group look like that verse in proverbs that talks about the ants. They do not have a ruler but they get a lot done. Just because they do not have a name does not necessarily mean that they follow Jesus and have no ruler. Clearly there are overseers who are not following Jesus and are the rulers of the friends and workers in their area. Clearly there are churches with names who do follow Jesus.
The friends and workers feel that is a matter of doctrine to NOT have a name and fail to see the reality of language and human interaction that they are going to have a name regardless of their doctrine.
|
|
|
Post by peacefullycurious on Apr 12, 2012 10:43:02 GMT -5
This very discussion shows me the wisdom of not having a name. Other people call pwgtm names, but pwgtm do not call themselves 2x2s or 2and2s. A cow and a racoon do not refer to themselves as cows or racoons because they don't speak English. Humans refer to themselves as humans because they are humans. 2x2s refer to themselve as 2x2s if they are 2x2 (smaller than a 2x4). People who go to meetings (pwgtm) are just called people if you tear the sentence down to nouns and verbs. Hey, I kind of like that. It's kind of heart-warming to be called 'people' This thread has created warm fuzzy feelings already, thanks!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2012 10:54:24 GMT -5
This discussion shows the foolishness of not having a name. The endless discussion that it causes is really not a valuable use of time. Then, even when there is no official name, multiple names are assigned anyway by insiders and outsiders.....and it all becomes a confusing mess to anyone not familiar with the nuances of the culture.
Yes, names are assigned, you can't get away from it. An official name simplifies it so everyone uses the same terminology and people can then start talking about something meaningful rather than wrangle about the most popular current nicknames. It's not meaningful to have a name or not have a name, but having one eliminates a whole lot of useless discussion.
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Apr 12, 2012 10:58:03 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Apr 12, 2012 11:01:14 GMT -5
This discussion shows the foolishness of not having a name. The endless discussion that it causes is really not a valuable use of time. Then, even when there is no official name, multiple names are assigned anyway by insiders and outsiders.....and it all becomes a confusing mess to anyone not familiar with the nuances of the culture. Yes, names are assigned, you can't get away from it. An official name simplifies it so everyone uses the same terminology and people can then start talking about something meaningful rather than wrangle about the most popular current nicknames. It's not meaningful to have a name or not have a name, but having one eliminates a whole lot of useless discussion. My thots exactly, CD! And having a name also eliminates confusion and misunderstandings.
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Apr 12, 2012 11:06:00 GMT -5
This very discussion shows me the wisdom of not having a name. Other people call pwgtm names, but pwgtm do not call themselves 2x2s or 2and2s. A cow and a racoon do not refer to themselves as cows or racoons because they don't speak English. Humans refer to themselves as humans because they are humans. 2x2s refer to themselve as 2x2s if they are 2x2 (smaller than a 2x4). People who go to meetings (pwgtm) are just called people if you tear the sentence down to nouns and verbs. Hey, I kind of like that. It's kind of heart-warming to be called 'people' This thread has created warm fuzzy feelings already, thanks! Deciding not to take an official name is a choice voluntarily made,and it is the right of your church. Just don't expect the outsiders and exes to feel sorry for you when you don't like/care for the nicknames your church and its followers get saddled with. You all but "asked" for it by taking the no-name stand. In other words, you brought on yourselves, and that's the price you pay for taking that stand...being assigned nicknames you dont like.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2012 11:12:19 GMT -5
"Saints" were quite common in my parents' generation, the second generation of F&Ws. I hear "2x2" more than I hear "saints" with the friends these days......neither being common though.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2012 11:44:04 GMT -5
I am not quite sure why the term 2x2 would be deemed offensive to the friends and workers, except for the fact that it is a name that they haven't given themselves. That is the foolish side of not taking a name yourself -- others are going to want to identify the group in some way -- and surely will figure out a way to do in, if the group won't do it themselves.
Even 2x2ers insist on their unique status and their identity with each other is very important to them -- after all, they are collectively the only folks on the world right with God!!!
The term 2x2 as an identifier has kicked arround for a long long time -- I doubt if it was the exes that invented it --- but it has become the most generally accepted ID for the group of recent years. -- just check out "2x2 religion" on a google search!!!
|
|
|
Post by peacefullycurious on Apr 12, 2012 11:53:31 GMT -5
I am a pwgtm and I am not offended that people here call pwgtm 2x2s or friends or truthers or 2and2s or any other name. People who go to meeting do not call themSELVES/ourSELVES 2x2s or 2and2s and such. Still a true statement even though it has been turned into a statement eluding to being offended. I'm not offended. If I were offended, those who have offended me would be condemned and I seek not to do that to anyone. Again...my statement (People who go to meeting do not call themselves 2x2s) does not state: People who go to meeting are offended to be called 2x2s. Just to make sure that ladder statement is taken in context, let me repeat: My statement did NOT mention being offended to be called such. Edgar, I kind of like the fact that you can google things these days. I kind of like the fact that real life is still a better reference than the cyber world. Sometimes I've been known to google symptoms my patients exhibit, but thankfully I know how to discern the accurate from the inaccurate. I don't even doubt there are people called 2x2s. I don't doubt people could be offended to be called such. BUT...(wait for it) People who go to meeting do not call themselves 2x2s.
|
|
|
Post by peacefullycurious on Apr 12, 2012 12:06:04 GMT -5
And Mr. Massey (Sorry to be so familiar as to have previously called you Edgar without invitation), being the kind of seeker that I am, I googled you a long time ago. I hope that is ok, since you have your info out there I figured it was ok. Anyway, somewhere along the line I happened on a picture of you with some fine Swedish people I know in Georgia.
Also..in case noone has ever done this..I'd like to thank you for your years of sacrifice in service.
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Apr 12, 2012 12:07:54 GMT -5
You may not have stated it and may not feel offended - but many friends on and off this board HAVE stated that it offends them.
|
|
|
Post by sacerdotal on Apr 12, 2012 12:08:20 GMT -5
Thanks for indicating there was no footnote pointing to a reference for the above statement. Sounds like an ad hoc statement. Take it with a grain of salt. I could be mis-remembering, but I dont recall seeing a place where WmI called them 2x2s. He called them "The Testimony" in most of his letters written after he left, and the "Alpha," and various other uncomplimentary terms. In Willie & Lizzie's Jamieson's letters dated 1910 forward that I've been reading recently, they called it The Way of Jesus, Jesus' Way; the Way of God and God's Way. Somewhere in my computer, I have a study on the earliest references to it being called 2x2s in a published or historical document - and the term didnt start with WmI. The irony, of course, Cherie, is that many workers refer to your site as "poison" BUT if you weren't so diligent about accurately documenting the 2x2 history, then less diligent authors could totally write the 2x2 history and no one would be the wiser. So, when I read this author's account of William Irvine and the fellowship, and having read your account, then I knew that the author hadn't put in much homework or effort- and was probably inaccurate in his chapter on William Irvine. In other words- your website is PROTECTING the friends and workers from inadvertent or even malicious lies about our fellowship's origin! How is that for irony?! Your website isn't poison, it is an antidote.
|
|
|
Post by quizzer on Apr 12, 2012 12:20:46 GMT -5
I prefer the name "Cooneyite" because it links all the Cooneyite groups across history. If I have to be particular to which type of Cooneyite I am, I prefer 2x2. This is because I am not part of the Cooneyites who went with Ed Cooney.
I dislike the name "the Truth" because almost all of the restoravist churches refer to themselves as "the Truth:" Jehovah Witness, Mormon, Church of Latter-Day Saints.
I dislike the label of "friends" because the Quakers use the word "Friend" to define themselves.
I prefer using a label which defines my belief system with no chance to confuse others. I'm also grateful for all of the work to document my belief system so when I use the word "Cooneyite," others can research it easily.
To me, it's all about being able to communicate so that others can make their own determinations.
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Apr 12, 2012 12:32:53 GMT -5
Sac wrote: Yes, it's ironical. Good observation, Sac. On TTT I list EVERY reference I have ever come across that refers to the F&W Fellowship in the Basic Researchers Guide (aka BRG) ...even if its not accurate, like I suspect the one you gave above. Click Here to go to The BASIC RESEARCHER'S GUIDE, a list of all known available material written about the 2x2 sect, as well as historical documents written by members and non-members. The list and material are presented without prejudice for the readers' examination and evaluation, with no regard given to the orientation of the information; i.e. negative or positive. The Basic Researcher's Guide is a historical data base of the 2x2 sect, created to aid those who want to research this group. It is a researcher's tool. Inclusion of material in The Basic Researcher's Guide is based solely on the subject matter, with the criteria being that information (1) must be published or circulated and (2) must relate to The Church Without a Name, its history, founder and/or congregation. The TTT Editor makes no representations concerning the accuracy of the information presented in the references listed. CERTIFICATION: Telling The Truth certifies that its compiler has visually examined a copy of each and every item listed in this Basic Researcher's Guide, and holds a hard copy in its files to substantiate each item listed herein. Additional historical documents are welcome.
|
|
|
Post by sacerdotal on Apr 12, 2012 12:34:42 GMT -5
Sac wrote: Yes, it's ironical. Good observation, Sac. On TTT I list EVERY reference I have ever come across that refers to the F&W Fellowship in the Basic Researchers Guide (aka BRG) ...even if its not accurate, like I suspect the one you gave above. Click Here to go to The BASIC RESEARCHER'S GUIDE, a list of all known available material written about the 2x2 sect, as well as historical documents written by members and non-members. The list and material are presented without prejudice for the readers' examination and evaluation, with no regard given to the orientation of the information; i.e. negative or positive. The Basic Researcher's Guide is a historical data base of the 2x2 sect, created to aid those who want to research this group. It is a researcher's tool. Inclusion of material in The Basic Researcher's Guide is based solely on the subject matter, with the criteria being that information (1) must be published or circulated and (2) must relate to The Church Without a Name, its history, founder and/or congregation. The TTT Editor makes no representations concerning the accuracy of the information presented in the references listed. CERTIFICATION: Telling The Truth certifies that its compiler has visually examined a copy of each and every item listed in this Basic Researcher's Guide, and holds a hard copy in its files to substantiate each item listed herein. Additional historical documents are welcome. And I, for one appreciate the due diligence you put into your site. I don't put a lot of stock in books or other publications if they don't properly source their research.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Apr 12, 2012 12:38:42 GMT -5
This discussion shows the foolishness of not having a name. The endless discussion that it causes is really not a valuable use of time. Then, even when there is no official name, multiple names are assigned anyway by insiders and outsiders.....and it all becomes a confusing mess to anyone not familiar with the nuances of the culture. Yes, names are assigned, you can't get away from it. An official name simplifies it so everyone uses the same terminology and people can then start talking about something meaningful rather than wrangle about the most popular current nicknames. It's not meaningful to have a name or not have a name, but having one eliminates a whole lot of useless discussion. I agree with you. But if it's such a waste of time why did you "waste" two whole paragraphs on the subject?
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Apr 12, 2012 12:40:54 GMT -5
Thank you Sac.
I really do try hard for TTT to contain ALL known reference material and to contain accurate data. On the other hand, I'm quite willing to modify incorrect info, when documentation is provided; and even to post conflicting information/references.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2012 12:47:06 GMT -5
This discussion shows the foolishness of not having a name. The endless discussion that it causes is really not a valuable use of time. Then, even when there is no official name, multiple names are assigned anyway by insiders and outsiders.....and it all becomes a confusing mess to anyone not familiar with the nuances of the culture. Yes, names are assigned, you can't get away from it. An official name simplifies it so everyone uses the same terminology and people can then start talking about something meaningful rather than wrangle about the most popular current nicknames. It's not meaningful to have a name or not have a name, but having one eliminates a whole lot of useless discussion. I agree with you. But if it's such a waste of time why did you "waste" two whole paragraphs on the subject? I'm practicing "Waste Management"!
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Apr 12, 2012 12:53:44 GMT -5
I don't find the name 2x2 offensive in the least. I do find it condescending, but that partly depends on the context in which the name is used. Consider - United Church of Canada, Two-by-twos. Which of the above sounds more legitimate to you? Most churches do have nick names like this and they often focus on a unique visible feature of the church while ignoring the central teaching of the church. Not having an actual name does leave one open, but 2x2s are not the only church with a nickname. Consider - Holy Rollers, Baby Sprinklers, Jesus freaks, Bible thumpers, Happy Clappers, Fish Eaters, and so on. Anyway, we could do worse than 2x2 but it is just a nickname. Here's an interesting read on this: www.jehovahs-witness.net/jw/friends/6276/2/What-is-your-favorite-nickname-for-the-SocietyThe Borg?
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Apr 12, 2012 12:57:58 GMT -5
Sac wrote: Yes, it's ironical. Good observation, Sac. On TTT I list EVERY reference I have ever come across that refers to the F&W Fellowship in the Basic Researchers Guide (aka BRG) ...even if its not accurate, like I suspect the one you gave above. Click Here to go to The BASIC RESEARCHER'S GUIDE, a list of all known available material written about the 2x2 sect, as well as historical documents written by members and non-members. The list and material are presented without prejudice for the readers' examination and evaluation, with no regard given to the orientation of the information; i.e. negative or positive. The Basic Researcher's Guide is a historical data base of the 2x2 sect, created to aid those who want to research this group. It is a researcher's tool. Inclusion of material in The Basic Researcher's Guide is based solely on the subject matter, with the criteria being that information (1) must be published or circulated and (2) must relate to The Church Without a Name, its history, founder and/or congregation. The TTT Editor makes no representations concerning the accuracy of the information presented in the references listed. CERTIFICATION: Telling The Truth certifies that its compiler has visually examined a copy of each and every item listed in this Basic Researcher's Guide, and holds a hard copy in its files to substantiate each item listed herein. Additional historical documents are welcome. And I, for one appreciate the due diligence you put into your site. I don't put a lot of stock in books or other publications if they don't properly source their research. Too bad you didn't appreciate it enough to research your opening post properly. Perhaps you could amend it now that you know that Irvine did not use the term. (A good way to do that is to use the strike-out function rather than deleting outright, because now quite a few posts refer to yours.)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2012 13:02:22 GMT -5
Well, here's another suggestion - how about "Professers" ?
|
|
|
Post by sacerdotal on Apr 12, 2012 13:03:44 GMT -5
Well, here's another suggestion - how about "Professers" ? I like the "Gilligans" better, or even the "Skippers". I refuse to be called the "Mary-Anns" or the "Gingers" though.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2012 13:14:19 GMT -5
I very often hear insiders use the term " 'fessin' " and "Friendlies", particularly young people.
|
|
|
Post by Greg on Apr 12, 2012 13:17:05 GMT -5
Well, here's another suggestion - how about "Professers" ? I like the "Gilligans" better, or even the "Skippers". I refuse to be called the "Mary-Anns" or the "Gingers" though. Many could aspire to be Mary Ann and fall far short. There are many Ginger's.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Apr 12, 2012 13:20:01 GMT -5
Well, here's another suggestion - how about "Professers" ? I like the "Gilligans" better, or even the "Skippers". I refuse to be called the "Mary-Anns" or the "Gingers" though. How about the "Thurston W. Howell the Third" - ers. Did you see the episode where they almost got off the island, but right at the last minute something went wrong and they were stuck until at least next week?
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Apr 12, 2012 13:54:32 GMT -5
what wrote:
HOLD ON! I havent checked it out for certain - I'm not where I can access my home computer. My memory isn't "perfect"!! This is what I wrote...
|
|