Soteriology and related matters

[Neto]

Hillsong is probably the best example of a “gigachurch”. Their biggest campus had Sunday attendance of 20,000.

You are probably talking about the North American context, but just thought I'd mention that the congregation where the South Korean couple who took over our work in Brazil are members has 50,000 members. (But as I recall, they told us that there are usually about 15 to 20 thousand who are not there for any given service.) They also have separate pastors for every 100 people, and those groups are also broken down into groups of ten, for prayer groups. And apparently they sit in the same area for meetings, so that as they claimed "You cannot miss a service w/o being missed."

[Ken]

To cite one notable evangelical example of what Josh was saying (took out picture)

I don't follow you on this. This man had some sin in his life that finally surfaced (beware your sin will find you out) but I believe he knew all the while in his heart he was sinning. Like John Howard Yoder, an Anabaptist, who even had some scriptural justication for his sex sinning. And there are many more examples. 'If we confess our sins He is faithful to forgive us our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness', right ?

So, what are you saying ?

That in some Evangelical circles there is a "virtue cycle" (to coin a term) of sin and redemption and sin and redemption, rinse and repeat that is more or less tolerated and accepted as inevitable. Being unfaithful or sinful is acceptable if you repent and then the cycle repeats.

It is true that Jesus blood goes on cleansing us from our sins but true repentance involves turning our back on sins. Scripture also says if we say we have no sin, the truth is not in us. I believe God forgives the same sin again and again but not turning away from sin has it's present consequences and should be preached as well.

It is quite the opposite of Anabaptist life where living a virtuous life is the highest objective.

I best not comment on that statement.

You also see it with the conversion stories. There is a certain type of Baptist church where if you come to them with a hugely dramatic redemption story of how you were a horrible sinner with drugs and alcohol thievery and betrayal and sin and then found Jesus and were saved they are completely thrilled. The worse the sinner the better. But if you walk across the street from the Lutheran church and have been a devout Christian all your life and just feel like the Baptists are a better fit for your theology they are completely bored.

I see nothing wrong with being thrilled and amazed at the more obvious conversion experiences many of which I seen in my youth. 'Amazing grace how sweet the sound that saved a wretch like me' was often one of their favourite hymns. The apostle Paul called himself the chief of sinners. To not be as excited of a believer switching churches, to me, would be a normal human response. We need more of these 'Damascus road conversions' as they are sometimes called.

Whereas joining an Anabaptist church is exactly the opposite. The more "dramatic" your history of sin, the longer it will take to prove yourself before being fully accepted. Whereas someone walking in with a long devout history in some other similar church will be much more quicky welcomed and accepted. Especially if there are Mennonite Game type connections.

Well, not in my experience in an MB Evangelical church. Membership acceptance was on your confession of belief after membership classes and there was no proving of oneself. What you say I can see happening in churches who have rules of conduct but how often do they get new converts from no church background joining them ? We have many different Mennonite churches in our area and my guess is 90+% of these only have ethnic background Mennonites so I doubt much proving goes on except perhaps coming as believers from another type of Mennonite group.

You are talking theology. But obviously all Christian denominations are based on the same scriptures. I'm talking more about a difference in "tone" that I have observed in different denominations.

Much of CA culture is about removing even the temptation of sin from one's life. Rural communities. No internet, radio, TV, or very filtered versions of such. Dress codes to enforce modesty and plain living. That sort of thing. It even seeps over into the most liberal versions like MCUSA which still tend to have plain modest churches and their own versions of a simple life. Which is not at all present in much of Evangelical life. If you want to see a fashion show, visit a big Baptist church in Texas on Sunday morning. It is all high heels, fancy dresses and makeup and big hair. And Baptist Texas is full of things like drive through Beverage Barns where you do not even have to get out of your truck to buy your beer and liquor. The better to do it without your neighbor seeing you I guess.

As for joining a church? There are LONG threads here about the long steps it takes for "seekers" to be accepted into Anabaptist denominations. And even threads about whether their CHILDREN will be accepted. You would not tend to see that sort of thing in a Baptist or evangelical setting.

[Ernie]

You will need to give me a verse that helps me understand what you mean. Here is one that includes grace, faith, a gift and works

For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.

Yes. The NT says we are saved through faith. Not faith alone.

New International Version
You see that a person is considered righteous by what they do and not by faith alone.

New Living Translation
So you see, we are shown to be right with God by what we do, not by faith alone.

English Standard Version
You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone.

Berean Standard Bible
As you can see, a man is justified by his deeds and not by faith alone.

Berean Literal Bible
You see that a man is justified by works, and not by faith alone.

King James Bible
Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.

New King James Version
You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only.

New American Standard Bible
You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone.

NASB 1995
You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.

NASB 1977
You see that a man is justified by works, and not by faith alone.

Legacy Standard Bible
You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.

Amplified Bible
You see that a man (believer) is justified by works and not by faith alone.

Christian Standard Bible
You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone.

Holman Christian Standard Bible
You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.

American Standard Version
Ye see that by works a man is justified, and not only by faith.

Aramaic Bible in Plain English
You see that by works a man is justified and not from faith alone.

Contemporary English Version
You can now see that we please God by what we do and not only by what we believe.

Douay-Rheims Bible
Do you see that by works a man is justified; and not by faith only?

English Revised Version
Ye see that by works a man is justified, and not only by faith.

[Sudsy]

You will need to give me a verse that helps me understand what you mean. Here is one that includes grace, faith, a gift and works

For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.

Yes. The NT says we are saved through faith. Not faith alone.

New International Version
You see that a person is considered righteous by what they do and not by faith alone.

New Living Translation
So you see, we are shown to be right with God by what we do, not by faith alone.

English Standard Version
You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone.

Berean Standard Bible
As you can see, a man is justified by his deeds and not by faith alone.

Berean Literal Bible
You see that a man is justified by works, and not by faith alone.

King James Bible
Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.

New King James Version
You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only.

New American Standard Bible
You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone.

NASB 1995
You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.

NASB 1977
You see that a man is justified by works, and not by faith alone.

Legacy Standard Bible
You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.

Amplified Bible
You see that a man (believer) is justified by works and not by faith alone.

Christian Standard Bible
You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone.

Holman Christian Standard Bible
You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.

American Standard Version
Ye see that by works a man is justified, and not only by faith.

Aramaic Bible in Plain English
You see that by works a man is justified and not from faith alone.

Contemporary English Version
You can now see that we please God by what we do and not only by what we believe.

Douay-Rheims Bible
Do you see that by works a man is justified; and not by faith only?

English Revised Version
Ye see that by works a man is justified, and not only by faith.

Thankyou. I see now how my phrase 'faith alone' could be taken and I had followed this by saying the faith I was referring to is a faith that produces good works as I see works and faith must go together to be a saving faith.

[Sudsy]

You are talking theology. But obviously all Christian denominations are based on the same scriptures. I'm talking more about a difference in "tone" that I have observed in different denominations.

Much of CA culture is about removing even the temptation of sin from one's life. Rural communities. No internet, radio, TV, or very filtered versions of such. Dress codes to enforce modesty and plain living. That sort of thing. It even seeps over into the most liberal versions like MCUSA which still tend to have plain modest churches and their own versions of a simple life. Which is not at all present in much of Evangelical life. If you want to see a fashion show, visit a big Baptist church in Texas on Sunday morning. It is all high heels, fancy dresses and makeup and big hair. And Baptist Texas is full of things like drive through Beverage Barns where you do not even have to get out of your truck to buy your beer and liquor. The better to do it without your neighbor seeing you I guess.

As for joining a church? There are LONG threads here about the long steps it takes for "seekers" to be accepted into Anabaptist denominations. And even threads about whether their CHILDREN will be accepted. You would not tend to see that sort of thing in a Baptist or evangelical setting.

How I see it is that 'Evangelical life' has some different views on what weightier matters are in Christian practise than CAs and of course, all Evangelicals cannot be painted with the same brush anymore than all Anabaptists can. The practises of living 'plain' and enforcing ways of life considered 'plain' and the 'coming out from among them' are not the practises that many Evangelicals regard as weightier but rather the evangelical focus of living by your own convictions and mingling with the world as Jesus did to reach the lost is.

I was raised in what Pentecostalism referred to as 'holy living' rather than 'plain living'. Many of the same things you mentioned regarding CAs was the same as our practises back when I was younger. Today, not so much especially in the big Pentecostal city churches. Even in the MB church I attended there is no 'plain' concept or enforcing certain detailed Christian practise as required to be a member. In the years I spent in the MB church I don't recall the word 'plain' ever used with regard to Christian practise. Being as old as I am and going through the changes in 'holy living' over the years I see pros and cons to the old and the new concepts.

Regarding 'long steps it takes for "seekers" to be accepted into Anabaptist denominations', this is not the case in our local MB church or the local MCUSA equivalent. I don't doubt it is still occurs in the more conservative Menno churches. I think most Evangelical churches have a much more open concept of church community, which I prefer, and imo, results in reaching beyond ethnic barriers. My guess is that our local MB church would be about 50% ethnic Mennonites and the other 50% from all kinds of backgrounds. I don't think I could ever be comfortable in a CA church as my understanding of weightier matters is quite different than what I understand them to be through this forum. What I see as worldliness in CAs, I doubt CAs would see about themselves and vice versa.

[Ken]

You are talking theology. But obviously all Christian denominations are based on the same scriptures. I'm talking more about a difference in "tone" that I have observed in different denominations.

Much of CA culture is about removing even the temptation of sin from one's life. Rural communities. No internet, radio, TV, or very filtered versions of such. Dress codes to enforce modesty and plain living. That sort of thing. It even seeps over into the most liberal versions like MCUSA which still tend to have plain modest churches and their own versions of a simple life. Which is not at all present in much of Evangelical life. If you want to see a fashion show, visit a big Baptist church in Texas on Sunday morning. It is all high heels, fancy dresses and makeup and big hair. And Baptist Texas is full of things like drive through Beverage Barns where you do not even have to get out of your truck to buy your beer and liquor. The better to do it without your neighbor seeing you I guess.

As for joining a church? There are LONG threads here about the long steps it takes for "seekers" to be accepted into Anabaptist denominations. And even threads about whether their CHILDREN will be accepted. You would not tend to see that sort of thing in a Baptist or evangelical setting.

How I see it is that 'Evangelical life' has some different views on what weightier matters are in Christian practise than CAs and of course, all Evangelicals cannot be painted with the same brush anymore than all Anabaptists can. The practises of living 'plain' and enforcing ways of life considered 'plain' and the 'coming out from among them' are not the practises that many Evangelicals regard as weightier but rather the evangelical focus of living by your own convictions and mingling with the world as Jesus did to reach the lost is.

I was raised in what Pentecostalism referred to as 'holy living' rather than 'plain living'. Many of the same things you mentioned regarding CAs was the same as our practises back when I was younger. Today, not so much especially in the big Pentecostal city churches. Even in the MB church I attended there is no 'plain' concept or enforcing certain detailed Christian practise as required to be a member. In the years I spent in the MB church I don't recall the word 'plain' ever used with regard to Christian practise. Being as old as I am and going through the changes in 'holy living' over the years I see pros and cons to the old and the new concepts.

Regarding 'long steps it takes for "seekers" to be accepted into Anabaptist denominations', this is not the case in our local MB church or the local MCUSA equivalent. I don't doubt it is still occurs in the more conservative Menno churches. I think most Evangelical churches have a much more open concept of church community, which I prefer, and imo, results in reaching beyond ethnic barriers. My guess is that our local MB church would be about 50% ethnic Mennonites and the other 50% from all kinds of backgrounds. I don't think I could ever be comfortable in a CA church as my understanding of weightier matters is quite different than what I understand them to be through this forum. What I see as worldliness in CAs, I doubt CAs would see about themselves and vice versa.

Yes there are lots of flavors of everything.

We should also distinguish between Evangelicalism and Fundamentalism.

A lot of Evangelicals are pretty worldly and not Fundamentalist. The mainstream big Southern Baptist churches fall into that category as do institutions like Baylor University and Liberty University. And all the prosperity Gospel type stuff and Evangelicals close to the Trump camp and Republican party.

Some plain Anabaptists could probably be called Fundamentalist but not Evangelical. The Amish, for example.

Pentecostals (at least many of them) are both Evangelical and Fundamentalist.

Mainstream denominations and MCUSA are neither.

Note, I'm using the terms loosely here. There may be better language to express what I am trying to say and distinguish. But I'm imagining a two axis graph or four cornered box with evangelicalism on one axis and fundamentalism on the other axis with each denomination fitting into one of the four boxes.

[Sudsy]

You are talking theology. But obviously all Christian denominations are based on the same scriptures. I'm talking more about a difference in "tone" that I have observed in different denominations.

Much of CA culture is about removing even the temptation of sin from one's life. Rural communities. No internet, radio, TV, or very filtered versions of such. Dress codes to enforce modesty and plain living. That sort of thing. It even seeps over into the most liberal versions like MCUSA which still tend to have plain modest churches and their own versions of a simple life. Which is not at all present in much of Evangelical life. If you want to see a fashion show, visit a big Baptist church in Texas on Sunday morning. It is all high heels, fancy dresses and makeup and big hair. And Baptist Texas is full of things like drive through Beverage Barns where you do not even have to get out of your truck to buy your beer and liquor. The better to do it without your neighbor seeing you I guess.

As for joining a church? There are LONG threads here about the long steps it takes for "seekers" to be accepted into Anabaptist denominations. And even threads about whether their CHILDREN will be accepted. You would not tend to see that sort of thing in a Baptist or evangelical setting.

How I see it is that 'Evangelical life' has some different views on what weightier matters are in Christian practise than CAs and of course, all Evangelicals cannot be painted with the same brush anymore than all Anabaptists can. The practises of living 'plain' and enforcing ways of life considered 'plain' and the 'coming out from among them' are not the practises that many Evangelicals regard as weightier but rather the evangelical focus of living by your own convictions and mingling with the world as Jesus did to reach the lost is.

I was raised in what Pentecostalism referred to as 'holy living' rather than 'plain living'. Many of the same things you mentioned regarding CAs was the same as our practises back when I was younger. Today, not so much especially in the big Pentecostal city churches. Even in the MB church I attended there is no 'plain' concept or enforcing certain detailed Christian practise as required to be a member. In the years I spent in the MB church I don't recall the word 'plain' ever used with regard to Christian practise. Being as old as I am and going through the changes in 'holy living' over the years I see pros and cons to the old and the new concepts.

Regarding 'long steps it takes for "seekers" to be accepted into Anabaptist denominations', this is not the case in our local MB church or the local MCUSA equivalent. I don't doubt it is still occurs in the more conservative Menno churches. I think most Evangelical churches have a much more open concept of church community, which I prefer, and imo, results in reaching beyond ethnic barriers. My guess is that our local MB church would be about 50% ethnic Mennonites and the other 50% from all kinds of backgrounds. I don't think I could ever be comfortable in a CA church as my understanding of weightier matters is quite different than what I understand them to be through this forum. What I see as worldliness in CAs, I doubt CAs would see about themselves and vice versa.

Yes there are lots of flavors of everything.

We should also distinguish between Evangelicalism and Fundamentalism.

A lot of Evangelicals are pretty worldly and not Fundamentalist. The mainstream big Southern Baptist churches fall into that category as do institutions like Baylor University and Liberty University. And all the prosperity Gospel type stuff and Evangelicals close to the Trump camp and Republican party.

Some plain Anabaptists could probably be called Fundamentalist but not Evangelical. The Amish, for example.

Pentecostals (at least many of them) are both Evangelical and Fundamentalist.

Mainstream denominations and MCUSA are neither.

Note, I'm using the terms loosely here. There may be better language to express what I am trying to say and distinguish. But I'm imagining a two axis graph or four cornered box with evangelicalism on one axis and fundamentalism on the other axis with each denomination fitting into one of the four boxes.

I wonder what others mean by being 'worldly' ? Some would say this means being friends with the world. But Jesus was a friend of sinners but in a certain way that did not make Him worldly. He even ate with sinners yet that did not make Him worldly. We can't be a light in the darkness if we withdraw ourselves from the darkness but how ? I think there is much to consider in how Jesus lived amongst sinners and did not live in a secluded group and although the Pharisees accused Him of being of the world, He was in the world but not of the world. Who of us are 'coming out from among them and being separate' in the way Jesus did ? Perhaps this is a thread of it's own.

[Josh]

A significant issue for Anabaptists is that, generally speaking, they expect their members who claim to be following Jesus to practice the ideals of pacifism or nonresistance. This makes them markedly different than evangelicals, who would not expect such a lifestyle change.

For example, most Anabaptists would expect someone not to attend communion whilst carrying a concealed firearm. (I am aware there are some that would tolerate or even celebrate this, but this is not the norm.) That makes them quite different from evangelicals, who would consider the choice to carry a personal defensive weapon an entirely individual and personal matter.

[Sudsy]

A significant issue for Anabaptists is that, generally speaking, they expect their members who claim to be following Jesus to practice the ideals of pacifism or nonresistance. This makes them markedly different than evangelicals, who would not expect such a lifestyle change.

For example, most Anabaptists would expect someone not to attend communion whilst carrying a concealed firearm. (I am aware there are some that would tolerate or even celebrate this, but this is not the norm.) That makes them quite different from evangelicals, who would consider the choice to carry a personal defensive weapon an entirely individual and personal matter.

Have you ever wondered why Jesus did not confront the centurion regarding his use of authority which I think we can assume included resistance involving bodily harm ? Jesus actually praised the centurion for the kind of faith He had in Jesus. Did Jesus pass up an opportunity to tell the centurion that he needed to change his lifestyle, his job ? Matthew 8:5-13.

[Ernie]

A significant issue for Anabaptists is that, generally speaking, they expect their members who claim to be following Jesus to practice the ideals of pacifism or nonresistance. This makes them markedly different than evangelicals, who would not expect such a lifestyle change.

For example, most Anabaptists would expect someone not to attend communion whilst carrying a concealed firearm. (I am aware there are some that would tolerate or even celebrate this, but this is not the norm.) That makes them quite different from evangelicals, who would consider the choice to carry a personal defensive weapon an entirely individual and personal matter.

Have you ever wondered why Jesus did not confront the centurion regarding his use of authority which I think we can assume included resistance involving bodily harm ? Jesus actually praised the centurion for the kind of faith He had in Jesus. Did Jesus pass up an opportunity to tell the centurion that he needed to change his lifestyle, his job ? Matthew 8:5-13.

Yes, I've often wondered. But John says that if he wrote all that could be written about Jesus' life, the world would not have enough room for all the books. So I just go with what is recorded on what Jesus said about these matters. He said plenty.