Why have the Anabaptists FAILED at Reaching the Masses

[ohio jones]

Understand what the Orthodox teach on it first.

And how might we find out what they teach?

[Josh]

No, I just don't like blatant denial of history and false accusations. It has no place in the Christian faith.

Can you explain us to what is going on with the EOs and Putin?

Putin is part of the Russian Orthodox church. The man with the flowers is Patriarch Kirill. Basically he is the Patriarch of Moscow and all of Russia. He would be one of the bishops needed if the EO and RC church ever reunited to have a full Ecumenical council. He has MILLIONS of people under him. Basically the RC church calls their top Bishop a "Pope". This guy would be the "Pope" of Russia. Originally the churches were the same church all with an even vote between bishops. Then the Great Schism happened..... And because we all have a life, and that is a subject of vast reading, I'll stop there.

But yeah, Kirill is a very important figure in Russia, and Putin knows it, and he would be Putin's top Bishop.

You’re dodging the question.

What’s going on with Kirill and Putin when it comes to Putin’s invasion of Ukraine?

[Soloist]

Are you speaking of the Latin Vulgate? That's just a translation of the Bible.

You need to read HOW the books were canonized. At one time there were many bishops, and many books, who voted in and left out books that are in the Bible.

Those Bishops were part of the church of a combined Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox church called "The Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church". (You can see it referenced in the Nicean Creed).

You apparently need to read up on the history with the Vulgate and Jerome’s unilateral decisions.

[Neto]

.... it sounds that the general consensus is the Menno church will not go after a woman to work her, only if the woman is not submitting to her husband, and going to the Mennos for counseling and advice.

Please clarify the first part of the quoted part above (the "to work her" part). I suspect an auto-correct feature messed up what you were typing. Thank you.

[Josh]

But Matthew 28's Great Commission is NOT LAW, and is ignored, BARELY brought to cities, when it is a direct command of Jesus after he declared all of Heaven AND Earth to be under his authority. He said "Go ye therefore...".

Matt. 28 says to go to the “nations”, not cities. Anabaptists seem quite willing to go to all kinds of different nations and countries. They are also eager to reach sub nations inside America and Canada such as Navajo.

It’s true they haven’t set up a megachurch in downtown Dallas. The Bible doesn’t command such. Nonetheless they are in dense cities ranging from Minneapolis to the forests of Tennessee, across the plains of Texas, from Detroit down to Houston, and from NYC to L.A.

If Anabaptists never went out to the nations, they’d be confined to a hill in Switzerland and a few city blocks of Flanders.

[Judas Maccabeus]

The EO faith is deep.

So is Islam, Buddhism and Mormonism.

For the record, Hell is deep as well.

That does not mean that we should go there.

Those who encourage others to kill will.

[Joy]

I know this conjoins my other thread, but 1 Corinthians 11 is treated like "LAW" in Menno churches, but Menno churches forget quickly about verse 16. This isn't a hard line rule, it's just a beautiful custom, tradition, and symbolic spiritual garment. It's good to do it, but not a "salvation issue". Mennos will even withhold communion to somebody unwilling to do something where there is "no such requirement". The EO church many women cover in many churches, and many do not in other churches. But it is pretty much "LAW" in a Menno church.

Some translations add "other" to verse 16 as a clarification. That makes sense, because why would the apostle go to such lengths to describe what the woman is to do while praying or prophesying--But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with [her] head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven. For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered. --and then turn around and say, ""We don't do that stuff, and neither do the churches of God"?

[Ernie]

I would like to read more input pertaining to the title of this thread.

What is it that you want to hear?

Bumping this question...

[Sudsy]

I would like to read more input pertaining to the title of this thread.

What is it that you want to hear.

The conversation seems to have wandered off again into those very popular subjects again like headcoverings and women in ministry. But if this is thought to be related to failing to reach the masses, I would suggest that wearing unique headcoverings worn outside local church meetings and the restraints on women in ministry by some are two possible hindrances to reaching the lost.

Personally, as I have mentioned before, I was raised under the teachings of a woman pastor for 20 years and many souls were saved and a number of them also became soul winners. So the whole women in ministry thing, in my experience, was a teaching for that NT culture and not for today where God has poured out His Spirit upon all flesh both male and female. God is using women today in many leadership roles and has for many years especially in mission work.

Regarding headcoverings worn in public, if this was to be the practise for all time, then men should not wear any head coverings in public, ever.

So, these two practises, imo, detract from reaching the masses as they are two things that strongly go against the grain of the culture we live in and can be immediate turn offs to people listening to the Gospel. In the NT era women preachers would be a problem in that culture and headcoverings were a norm to wear by most women. Neither of these would be an immediate detraction in the norm of that culture.

I believe in the Mennonite realm the most evangelical Mennonites are not following the NT customs in our area and are the ones that are growing and reaching out beyond their ethnic backgrounds.

[Soloist]

The conversation seems to have wandered off again into those very popular subjects again like headcoverings and women in ministry. But if this is thought to be related to failing to reach the masses, I would suggest that wearing unique headcoverings worn outside local church meetings and the restraints on women in ministry by some are two possible hindrances to reaching the lost.

If women in ministry ie, pastors, ministers or bishops is why people don’t want to join. Sorry, but the cost is high for some and being unwilling to die to self will doom anyone.
As for the head covering, I agree we should be consistent on application.

Personally, as I have mentioned before, I was raised under the teachings of a woman pastor for 20 years and many souls were saved and a number of them also became soul winners. So the whole women in ministry thing, in my experience, was a teaching for that NT culture and not for today where God has poured out His Spirit upon all flesh both male and female. God is using women today in many leadership roles and has for many years especially in mission work.

Scripture forbids women having spiritual authority over men. The Holy Spirit teaches the same. Women have the ability to teach, preach and witness, but they are not given the right of authority. By implication, women do not teach men nor preach to men but women do witness to men.
To teach otherwise is in direct contradiction to Scripture and the Holy Spirit.

Regarding headcoverings worn in public, if this was to be the practise for all time, then men should not wear any head coverings in public, ever.

I’m not convinced that asking women to cover means men can’t protect themselves from the sun. Women in my view are just as able to remove their covering for specific reasons too. I do think that in strict application, it’s perfectly appropriate for a woman to only cover during church or spiritual activities, I also see it within the church authority to ask a woman to do so. I do not see a church having authority to ask a man to wear a specific hat(covering)

So, these two practises, imo, detract from reaching the masses as they are two things that strongly go against the grain of the culture we live in and can be immediate turn offs to people listening to the Gospel. In the NT era women preachers would be a problem in that culture and headcoverings were a norm to wear by most women. Neither of these would be an immediate detraction in the norm of that culture.

I have heard all sorts of arguments, but it’s very clear that a self sacrificial lifestyle is counterculture and a serious detriment to people converting.

People unwilling to do tiny things that Scripture teach are likely unwilling to follow Jesus in a self sacrificial lifestyle.