|
Post by StAnne on Apr 18, 2012 8:55:54 GMT -5
From another thread I noticed the name "Christian Conventions" on a historical document. Orginally, the wikipedia article was written under "Christian Conventions" and later changed to "2x2"s. It's a much better name, but it won't ever stick. It's not suitably derisory for the foes of the friends as it contains the word 'Christian', and church ministry would never endorse the name on anything other than a formal government petition. So although it's a good name, no one in either camp is going to advocate it. Seems an odd name to me. It references Conventions equally as much as Christian while avoiding any mention of church.
|
|
|
Post by placid-void on Apr 18, 2012 9:07:40 GMT -5
Not having a "name" has the advantage of avoiding pigeonholing and stereotyping. Please tell me this comment was made on TMB with tongue planted firmly in cheek!
|
|
|
Post by quizzer on Apr 18, 2012 10:19:20 GMT -5
From another thread I noticed the name "Christian Conventions" on a historical document. Orginally, the wikipedia article was written under "Christian Conventions" and later changed to "2x2"s. It's a much better name, but it won't ever stick. It's not suitably derisory for the foes of the friends as it contains the word 'Christian', and church ministry would never endorse the name on anything other than a formal government petition. So although it's a good name, no one in either camp is going to advocate it. "Christian Conventions" is the legal name of the 2x2s in the United States, given by George Walker for CO status. Fun name, but it conflicts with the different legal names given to the 2x2s by the overseers in different countries.
|
|
|
Post by Scott Ross on Apr 18, 2012 10:50:19 GMT -5
From another thread I noticed the name "Christian Conventions" on a historical document. Orginally, the wikipedia article was written under "Christian Conventions" and later changed to "2x2"s. It's a much better name, but it won't ever stick. It's not suitably derisory for the foes of the friends as it contains the word 'Christian', and church ministry would never endorse the name on anything other than a formal government petition. So although it's a good name, no one in either camp is going to advocate it. "Christian Conventions" is the legal name of the 2x2s in the United States, given by George Walker for CO status. Fun name, but it conflicts with the different legal names given to the 2x2s by the overseers in different countries. It just points out the fact that the fellowship isn't the same around the world. They may have similar practices, but there are different teachings and traditions from country to country.
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Apr 18, 2012 10:56:33 GMT -5
|
|
KST
New Member
Posts: 49
|
Post by KST on Apr 18, 2012 16:19:07 GMT -5
...for CO status.
I would be curious why some readers of George Walker’s letter to the selective service folks would interpret it to mean something related to “CO” (conscientious objector) status. The purpose of his letter is clearly stated by him (Walker) as “…for the purpose of enabling the Local Draft Boards to correctly classify Ministers of this Church throughout the United States who are subject to the Selective Service Laws.”
US conscription laws have exempted ministers of religion from the draft. This is a total exemption, not equating to objector status, either through alternative service or exemption from carrying arms.
My reading of his letter is that he wanted to make sure the selective service folks recognized the F&W as a group whose ministers should be provided a classification equating to “minister of religion” and thus exempt from military service.
|
|
|
Post by emy on Apr 18, 2012 17:17:32 GMT -5
Seems an odd name to me. It references Conventions equally as much as Christian while avoiding any mention of church. Maybe it's not about the gatherings called "convention." Maybe it's this: a general agreement about basic principles or procedures; also : a principle or procedure accepted as true or correct Plugging that into Cherie's complete letterhead name would result in something like this: Christian Conventions Principles Representing Assemblies of Christians Assuming this Name Only
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Apr 18, 2012 19:03:02 GMT -5
Seems an odd name to me. It references Conventions equally as much as Christian while avoiding any mention of church. Maybe it's not about the gatherings called "convention." Maybe it's this: a general agreement about basic principles or procedures; also : a principle or procedure accepted as true or correct Plugging that into Cherie's complete letterhead name would result in something like this: Christian Conventions Principles Representing Assemblies of Christians Assuming this Name Only I like it, but I don't think that's what they were thinking. The conventions are a unique differentiating characteristic that the draft board could use. While stanne's statement is correct, I really don't see the problem myself.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Apr 18, 2012 19:04:59 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Gene on Apr 18, 2012 19:18:36 GMT -5
Seems an odd name to me. It references Conventions equally as much as Christian while avoiding any mention of church. Maybe it's not about the gatherings called "convention." Maybe it's this: a general agreement about basic principles or procedures; also : a principle or procedure accepted as true or correct Plugging that into Cherie's complete letterhead name would result in something like this: Christian Conventions Principles Representing Assemblies of Christians Assuming this Name Only Ummmm.... but... there's a list of convention grounds on the letter head....
|
|
|
Post by placid-void on Apr 18, 2012 19:23:27 GMT -5
Thank you, what, that was an interesting description of the group!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2012 20:19:38 GMT -5
Maybe it's not about the gatherings called "convention." Maybe it's this: a general agreement about basic principles or procedures; also : a principle or procedure accepted as true or correct Plugging that into Cherie's complete letterhead name would result in something like this: Christian Conventions Principles Representing Assemblies of Christians Assuming this Name Only Ummmm.... but... there's a list of convention grounds on the letter head.... I had mentioned Occam's Razor before but.........
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2012 20:23:28 GMT -5
There are no comments on the entry yet....but I suspect that won't last long! I see Dr.J changed how he sees the term 2x2 used. In his book I think he said it was used "condescendingly" while in that entry he says it is used "satirically". It's interesting to see how insiders see outsiders seeing insiders!
|
|
|
Post by emy on Apr 18, 2012 22:25:29 GMT -5
I like it.
|
|
|
Post by StAnne on Apr 18, 2012 22:45:19 GMT -5
Seems an odd name to me. It references Conventions equally as much as Christian while avoiding any mention of church. Maybe it's not about the gatherings called "convention." Maybe it's this: a general agreement about basic principles or procedures; also : a principle or procedure accepted as true or correct Plugging that into Cherie's complete letterhead name would result in something like this: Christian Conventions Principles Representing Assemblies of Christians Assuming this Name Only Oh right. And exactly which Christian group is assuming this name ... Now that's really really odd. Or maybe you meant it to be a joke. How about this: To God's church that was made holy by Christ Jesus and called to be God's holy peopleOr the 55 references to the church of GodOr the 163 references to the church of ... Or the 163 references to the churchI don't see anything in the NT about Christian Conventions. Or any of the other weird derivatives being bandied about ...
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Apr 18, 2012 23:40:45 GMT -5
Maybe it's not about the gatherings called "convention." Maybe it's this: a general agreement about basic principles or procedures; also : a principle or procedure accepted as true or correct Plugging that into Cherie's complete letterhead name would result in something like this: Christian Conventions Principles Representing Assemblies of Christians Assuming this Name Only Oh right. And exactly which Christian group is assuming this name ... Now that's really really odd. Or maybe you meant it to be a joke. How about this: To God's church that was made holy by Christ Jesus and called to be God's holy peopleOr the 55 references to the church of GodOr the 163 references to the church of ... Or the 163 references to the churchI don't see anything in the NT about Christian Conventions. Or any of the other weird derivatives being bandied about ... Is Catholic Church in the New Testament? I'm told, "the first known reference to the "Catholic Church" is by St. Ignatius ~107 A.D. in his letter to the Smyrneans". Does that mean it's a weird derivative?
|
|
|
Post by JO on Apr 18, 2012 23:47:15 GMT -5
Wouldn't it be nice if this thread wasn't hijacked into a discussion of Catholicism?
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Apr 18, 2012 23:49:48 GMT -5
Wouldn't it be nice if this thread wasn't hijacked into a discussion of Catholicism? Whoops.
|
|
|
Post by Greg on Apr 18, 2012 23:50:02 GMT -5
Is Catholic Church in the New Testament? I'm told, "the first known reference to the "Catholic Church" is by St. Ignatius ~107 A.D. in his letter to the Smyrneans". Does that mean it's a weird derivative? Just an opinion, obviously, but I think Ignatius described he church as being catholic and later the term was adopted (adapted?) as the name of a church.
|
|
|
Post by StAnne on Apr 18, 2012 23:54:48 GMT -5
Oh right. And exactly which Christian group is assuming this name ... Now that's really really odd. Or maybe you meant it to be a joke. How about this: To God's church that was made holy by Christ Jesus and called to be God's holy peopleOr the 55 references to the church of GodOr the 163 references to the church of ... Or the 163 references to the churchI don't see anything in the NT about Christian Conventions. Or any of the other weird derivatives being bandied about ... Is Catholic Church in the New Testament? I'm told, "the first known reference to the "Catholic Church" is by St. Ignatius ~107 A.D. in his letter to the Smyrneans". Does that mean it's a weird derivative? Ignatius knew of what he spoke. So the church throughout all Judea and Galilee and Samaria enjoyed peace, being built up; and going on in the fear of the Lord and in the comfort of the Holy Spirit, it continued to increase.
throughout all ... kath oles
2596 [e] kath' καθ' throughout Prep 3650 [e] holēs ὅλης all biblos.com/acts/9-31.htm
|
|
|
Post by lilwolfmisty on Apr 19, 2012 7:51:27 GMT -5
that is a good idea What
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Apr 19, 2012 9:02:02 GMT -5
Is Catholic Church in the New Testament? I'm told, "the first known reference to the "Catholic Church" is by St. Ignatius ~107 A.D. in his letter to the Smyrneans". Does that mean it's a weird derivative? Just an opinion, obviously, but I think Ignatius described he church as being catholic and later the term was adopted (adapted?) as the name of a church. I must be a bit thick, but what is the significance of that? The use of "catholic" meaning "universal" likely predates Ignatius.
|
|
|
Post by quizzer on Apr 19, 2012 10:06:23 GMT -5
Just an opinion, obviously, but I think Ignatius described he church as being catholic and later the term was adopted (adapted?) as the name of a church. I must be a bit thick, but what is the significance of that? The use of "catholic" meaning "universal" likely predates Ignatius. Yep. That's why a lot of the early Christian creeds contain the word "catholic." The word was intended to be used as "universal," rather than pointing to a particular denomination.
|
|
will
Senior Member
Posts: 516
|
Post by will on Apr 19, 2012 10:16:45 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Apr 19, 2012 10:31:41 GMT -5
I must be a bit thick, but what is the significance of that? The use of "catholic" meaning "universal" likely predates Ignatius. Yep. That's why a lot of the early Christian creeds contain the word "catholic." The word was intended to be used as "universal," rather than pointing to a particular denomination. Or, the word was used to indicate that your group's particular beliefs are to be considered "universal".
|
|
|
Post by sacerdotal on Apr 19, 2012 10:56:47 GMT -5
Wouldn't it be nice if this thread wasn't hijacked into a discussion of Catholicism? I think that it is against the TMB policy for a thread not to get hijacked about Catholic dogma, the Trinity, or the Pope's infallibility.
|
|
will
Senior Member
Posts: 516
|
Post by will on Apr 19, 2012 11:00:32 GMT -5
When hasn't a thread on TMB been hijacked? I've whined about it before. There are no thread police here. Nobody to tell you not to take part.
|
|
|
Post by emy on Apr 19, 2012 11:26:20 GMT -5
Personally, I'm glad there are no thread police. I like things to evolve as a conversation. Many conversations move fluidly from one topic to another.
That said, I get tired of the constant return to Catholicism (and some other topics) as well, but I just pass over those posts (usually).
|
|