What ? You know what a 'royal flush' is ? Must have been from your pre-Christian days.MattY wrote: ↑Mon Apr 22, 2024 11:38 amAgreed with all of this. Appreciate the interaction. I also just want to ask, is a divine flush similar to a royal flush?Praxis+Theodicy wrote: ↑Mon Apr 22, 2024 8:43 amMattY, I just want to say that thus sentence made me laugh out loud.Menno even excommunicated the Swiss Brethren for not accepting his strict views on excommunication.
Luther also "excommunicated" Zwingli and the reformed church in Geneva because they couldn't agree on the metaphysics at play in the Lord's Supper.
And speaking back to Menno Simon's, a reactionary theology he had was the "divine flush" theory of the incarnation. A protestant reformer was reacting against the Roman theology of the immaculate conception (the idea that Mary was sinless), and described Jesus as having Original Sin. Menno reacted against this theology and posited that Jesus wasn't exactly conceived of Mary, but that Mary was just a vessel for carrying Jesus, and contributed nothing material to his conception. The incarnation of God passed through her like water passes through a pipe, but Jesus was not, properly understood, incubated in her womb as with a normal child.
I think these days a good number of Anabaptists and Kingdom Christian's like David Bercot are very reactionary against assurance of salvation, or eternal security, or once-saved-always-saved, whatever you want to call it. This theology has a lot of nuance and is very Biblical, but imo Bercot and the Mennonites/anabaptists/Kingdom Christiand in his camp tend to react against a strawman of this theology instead of seeking to understand and elaborate a well-thought-out biblical expression of the doctrine of salvific security.
Yes, it is interesting to look at the variations even in Orthopraxy in Anabaptists or Pentecostals or Baptists and others. Anabaptists seem to label these as going from 'liberal' to 'conservative' and ranges within each of these categories. Another label is from 'worldly' to 'holy'. On both ends even salvation is sometimes in question. On the 'worldly/liberal' extreme are they really saved ? On the 'holy/conservative' extreme are they really saved ?
And the Orthopraxy of how 'plain' an Anabaptist should live and what it literally means to 'follow Jesus'. Anabaptism seems to me to have more divisions (splits) on Orthopraxy than many of the other groups.
This all brings me back to what is the essential belief(s) that keeps one from ending up in hell ? What is one going to believe that will get them to heaven ? Isn't that what really matters when all is said and done ?