Why Anabaptists and Mennonites are not Orthodox

[haithabu]

Both Orthodox and Anabaptist derive their faith from Apostolic teaching (how else can you describe the New Testament?); the difference between the two is that the Orthodox tradition extends Apostolic authority beyond the first generation of believers because of their belief in Apostolic succession.

[mike]

Anabaptists are not Orthodox because they do not derive their beliefs from the 11th, or 6th or 4th or even 1st century writings of church leaders. They derive their beliefs and practices from the words of Jesus as recorded or attested to by His chosen witnesses. Many churches went astray, even as early as the apostolic period when Paul had to write letters to correct errors in the churches. Obviously this drift continued. The churches of the Roman Empire (West and East) look nothing like anything described about Jesus' followers in the Gospels and letters of the apostles. SO rather than emulate a drifted, fallen religious tradition, Anabaptist return to the indisputable source that all churches should have been following - the New Testament.

Problem was, and still is, using this 'indisputable source' we carry on many disputes and are one of the most 'split off' groups per numbers within Christianity.

Which, if true, reflects on our humanity and imperfectness. What is beyond dispute for Anabaptists however is the source that we believe we should follow - the life and teachings of the Jesus the King. This has typically set us apart from theonomists and Judaizers on the one hand (those who seek to make the law of Moses authoritative for us) and Catholic/Orthodox on the other hand (those who seek to make institutional Christian church history and dogma authoritative for us).

[Sudsy]

Anabaptists are not Orthodox because they do not derive their beliefs from the 11th, or 6th or 4th or even 1st century writings of church leaders. They derive their beliefs and practices from the words of Jesus as recorded or attested to by His chosen witnesses. Many churches went astray, even as early as the apostolic period when Paul had to write letters to correct errors in the churches. Obviously this drift continued. The churches of the Roman Empire (West and East) look nothing like anything described about Jesus' followers in the Gospels and letters of the apostles. SO rather than emulate a drifted, fallen religious tradition, Anabaptist return to the indisputable source that all churches should have been following - the New Testament.

Problem was, and still is, using this 'indisputable source' we carry on many disputes and are one of the most 'split off' groups per numbers within Christianity.

Obviously it's not the undisputed things that we split over.

Would you consider same sex sexual relations for a believer a disputable thing ?

I agree that the emphasis in Anabaptism is on the NT readings of the life and teachings of Jesus and not other non-NT sources although the teachings of both Jesus and the apostles are disputed in their application. What is often referred to here on this forum as the straightforward or obvious or truth about what Jesus said is certainly not seen in all of Anabaptism as undeniable statements to literally obey in a certain practise. As mike pointed out in our best efforts to follow NT recordings we still are imperfect as humans. We, too, are not the one true church.

[silentreader]

Problem was, and still is, using this 'indisputable source' we carry on many disputes and are one of the most 'split off' groups per numbers within Christianity.

Obviously it's not the undisputed things that we split over.

Would you consider same sex sexual relations for a believer a disputable thing ?

I agree that the emphasis in Anabaptism is on the NT readings of the life and teachings of Jesus and not other non-NT sources although the teachings of both Jesus and the apostles are disputed in their application. What is often referred to here on this forum as the straightforward or obvious or truth about what Jesus said is certainly not seen in all of Anabaptism as undeniable statements to literally obey in a certain practise. As mike pointed out in our best efforts to follow NT recordings we still are imperfect as humans. We, too, are not the one true church.

I've been trying to think of all the church splits among Mennonites in this area that I am familiar with and that happened in my lifetime and I haven't been able to think of one that I could say was honestly caused by a plain reading of Scripture.
There have been individuals and families leaving one group and joining another because of same-sex ad female leadership issues, but I am not aware of any church splits because of that type of thing around here, yet.
I think it was Leonard Ravenhill that said that probably less than 15% of professing Christians are actually born again. This, of course, is one of the prime reasons for discord and church splits and an inablity to hear the voice of the Holy Spirit.

[Neto]

There seems to be a popular concept among modern "Plain anabaptists" that anabaptism is founded primarily on the Red Letters of Scripture (Jesus' words) first, and then secondly on the remainder of the NT, and then lastly, only reluctantly, on the Jewish Scripture, the Old Testament. I do not know for certain about the early Swiss Brethren, but this cannot be supported in regards to the Dutch Mennonites, at least judging from the Writings of Menno Simons, and the Martyrs Mirror. I do believe that it is true that they typically interpreted all of Scripture through the lens of Christ, but I don't think that is the same thing as saying the Red Letters deserve more respect than the remainder of Scripture, because the Christ is already the focus of all of Scripture.

[Valerie]

Anabaptists are not Orthodox because they do not derive their beliefs from the 11th, or 6th or 4th or even 1st century writings of church leaders. They derive their beliefs and practices from the words of Jesus as recorded or attested to by His chosen witnesses. Many churches went astray, even as early as the apostolic period when Paul had to write letters to correct errors in the churches. Obviously this drift continued. The churches of the Roman Empire (West and East) look nothing like anything described about Jesus' followers in the Gospels and letters of the apostles. SO rather than emulate a drifted, fallen religious tradition, Anabaptist return to the indisputable source that all churches should have been following - the New Testament.

This is one of the better succinct answers to this question that I have read. Thanks Wayne.

Jesus said, though- that He had many more things to say but they couldn't bear them now- but when He, the Holy Spirit comes, He would guide into all truth. Jesus left the building of the NT Church to begin with the Apostles, led by the Holy Spirit- so one can say they go by just what Jesus said- it seems those would be the ones that couldn't bear more that He had to say-

Also, Jesus said the falling away comes before His Second Coming- not 'right away' as this claim makes- the 'wolves' & 'problems' were addressed, and so were and are, heresies. To say that the entire Church whereever the Apostles started the Church in various countries fell away goes against what Jesus said about 'when' the falling away would occur, are we sure we understand Jesus as well as we think we do? I am not sure- but maybe I also couldn't 'bear more' nor could handle meat & live on milk- that has been suggested as the reasons of some things I struggle with-

[Hats Off]

Some of us are more sure than others. When we have good ground in the Bible for what we believe, we do not need to doubt. When we rely more on what came later as some do, we have good reason to wonder or doubt!

[mike]

Jesus said, though- that He had many more things to say but they couldn't bear them now- but when He, the Holy Spirit comes, He would guide into all truth. Jesus left the building of the NT Church to begin with the Apostles, led by the Holy Spirit- so one can say they go by just what Jesus said- it seems those would be the ones that couldn't bear more that He had to say-

Many have misconstrued that statement of Jesus to justify their innovations and fabrications which they attach onto the good news of Jesus. Jesus was speaking to his twelve disciples when he said that, and without a doubt he fulfilled his promise. And because of that, we value the teachings of Jesus' disciples and include them in the canon of scripture, unlike the those of succeeding generations of Christian leaders.

[GaryK]

Anabaptists are not Orthodox because they do not derive their beliefs from the 11th, or 6th or 4th or even 1st century writings of church leaders. They derive their beliefs and practices from the words of Jesus as recorded or attested to by His chosen witnesses. Many churches went astray, even as early as the apostolic period when Paul had to write letters to correct errors in the churches. Obviously this drift continued. The churches of the Roman Empire (West and East) look nothing like anything described about Jesus' followers in the Gospels and letters of the apostles. SO rather than emulate a drifted, fallen religious tradition, Anabaptist return to the indisputable source that all churches should have been following - the New Testament.

This is one of the better succinct answers to this question that I have read. Thanks Wayne.

Jesus said, though- that He had many more things to say but they couldn't bear them now- but when He, the Holy Spirit comes, He would guide into all truth. Jesus left the building of the NT Church to begin with the Apostles, led by the Holy Spirit- so one can say they go by just what Jesus said- it seems those would be the ones that couldn't bear more that He had to say-

Also, Jesus said the falling away comes before His Second Coming- not 'right away' as this claim makes- the 'wolves' & 'problems' were addressed, and so were and are, heresies. To say that the entire Church whereever the Apostles started the Church in various countries fell away goes against what Jesus said about 'when' the falling away would occur, are we sure we understand Jesus as well as we think we do? I am not sure- but maybe I also couldn't 'bear more' nor could handle meat & live on milk- that has been suggested as the reasons of some things I struggle with-

Valerie, what in your view is lacking in the original Anabaptist worldview that had, as its core principles, the teachings of Christ?

[silentreader]

Anabaptists are not Orthodox because they do not derive their beliefs from the 11th, or 6th or 4th or even 1st century writings of church leaders. They derive their beliefs and practices from the words of Jesus as recorded or attested to by His chosen witnesses. Many churches went astray, even as early as the apostolic period when Paul had to write letters to correct errors in the churches. Obviously this drift continued. The churches of the Roman Empire (West and East) look nothing like anything described about Jesus' followers in the Gospels and letters of the apostles. SO rather than emulate a drifted, fallen religious tradition, Anabaptist return to the indisputable source that all churches should have been following - the New Testament.

This is one of the better succinct answers to this question that I have read. Thanks Wayne.

Jesus said, though- that He had many more things to say but they couldn't bear them now- but when He, the Holy Spirit comes, He would guide into all truth. Jesus left the building of the NT Church to begin with the Apostles, led by the Holy Spirit- so one can say they go by just what Jesus said- it seems those would be the ones that couldn't bear more that He had to say-

Also, Jesus said the falling away comes before His Second Coming- not 'right away' as this claim makes- the 'wolves' & 'problems' were addressed, and so were and are, heresies. To say that the entire Church whereever the Apostles started the Church in various countries fell away goes against what Jesus said about 'when' the falling away would occur, are we sure we understand Jesus as well as we think we do? I am not sure- but maybe I also couldn't 'bear more' nor could handle meat & live on milk- that has been suggested as the reasons of some things I struggle with-

Seems Judas Iscariot would be an example of one who fell away right away.
Those that made up the "Church" may have fallen away to a large extent, but the 'little flock' who made up the Body of Christ remained/were kept faithful.