Where Mennonites and others connect
https://forum.mennonet.com/
I've been watching from the sidelines. I'm almost shocked this thread didn't get deep-sixed by now. Beyond the first page or two, I really didn't get the responses I was hoping for. Better luck next time.Hats Off wrote:From my point of view, this conversation is pointless. I will not be drawn into an unending argument about something that I believe to be basic to our way of life and faith. We take the Bible at face value - what it says is what it means. (although we do not raise our hands in prayer.)
That is up to the individual isn't it as one is not forced into discussing how other Anabaptists interpret certain texts that may have opposing views to other Anabaptists. When moving to a more 'liberal' church there are areas to consider on whether or not we can agree to disagree and still have fellowship.Hats Off wrote:From my point of view, this conversation is pointless. I will not be drawn into an unending argument about something that I believe to be basic to our way of life and faith. We take the Bible at face value - what it says is what it means. (although we do not raise our hands in prayer.)
Be interesting to know the percentage by gender.Sudsy wrote:My guess is that you will find far more men preachers 'teaching that homosexuality and trans sexuality needed to be respected / promoted'. I don't see where this has anything to do with which gender is preaching this sort of thing.Josh wrote:I'm a little puzzled how you can say women are now qualified to teach but they weren't in the past.
Today, we have women preachers teaching that homosexuality and trans sexuality needed to be respected / promoted in a typical denomination that also allows women preachers. I'd say this is not a very good case for how women are "more qualified" today.
Regarding the 'slippery slope' argument when challenging traditional interpretations of scripture, I agree that there are some looking for a more carnal type of Christian practise. However, there are others looking at what some of these interpretations of scripture have produced and are looking into the possibility that some of these views have been wrong for many years. Even in the early church fathers period the understandings of what scripture meant on various texts differed. For instance, the church father Origen taught that the Holy Spirit was a created being, that Satan and the demons will all eventually be saved. And what about the early teachings on baptismal regeneration, transubstantiation and infant baptism. Since Anabaptists and others have strayed from these beliefs were they on a 'slippery slope' into worldliness ?
By the way, I am challenging some traditional interpretations for various reasons. One being to see what kind of thought has gone into what one has chosen to believe and also to hopefully trigger more biblical conversation which most often comes only through a challenge of traditional thought. I appreciate those willing to join in and don't mind their opposing views. Opposing views on Christian belief and practise have been around since the earliest of the NC period and they are not about to go away. Within this we still have a core understanding of what Paul called the Gospel that saves us. Any church departing from those beliefs I would not fellowship in.
I suppose Menno Simons and Martin Luther would be two good sources to ask.KingdomBuilder wrote:I cannot help but wonder... What would it take for someone who supports something clearly spoken against in the NT to change their minds??
Not meaning to be aggressive, just seriously curious.
Conviction from the Holy Spirit.KingdomBuilder wrote:I cannot help but wonder... What would it take for someone who supports something clearly spoken against in the NT to change their minds??
Trouble is, those who have their minds changed believe it is a conviction of the Holy Spirit just as those who don't change their mind also believe. Perhaps one is right as knowing Spirit conviction but perhaps both are still wrong through their human reasonings without Spirit guidance. Also, not everyone reads certain NT scripture as something clearly spoken against for all ages to come or beyond the immediate audience.ohio jones wrote:Conviction from the Holy Spirit.KingdomBuilder wrote:I cannot help but wonder... What would it take for someone who supports something clearly spoken against in the NT to change their minds??
Human reasoning won't do it; that's generally what got them where they are to begin with.