Stereotyping and Overgeneralizing People and Institutions

[Ernie]

Jewish Holy Person: I can take complete confidence that my religion is superior to the wicked Roman paganism and the godless Roman militarism.

Jesus to an actual Roman Centurion: I have not found anyone in Israel with such great faith.

Both can be true, correct?

The Kingdom of God is of such a nature that perhaps we ought to be humble regarding our own "institutions" and our "judgements" about other people/institutions. There is a lot we don't know. In the words of Rich Mullins, we aren't as strong as we think we are. In the above case, a man with a sword, representing a pagan institution, was a man of greater faith than all of Israel...while holy ones of Israel were full of dead bones.

But God led the centurion away from his false religion and towards the true religion, correct?

It seems clear there is a larger lesson here that we can learn from this interaction. And to my eye, it fits a theme of the Kingdom of God, it shows up in unexpected places, on the electric chair, in a whore house, etc. And to be sure, in an Amish farm, and a Mid Atlantic church-house, and a RCC cathedral.

May we have the eyes of Jesus to see it where it is.

Sure. I agree that faith can be found in the most unlikely places and that where one might expect to find it, it may be absent.
We see both of these with our international friends here in State College.
Some of the people I would last have guessed may be interested in following Jesus begin following Jesus. Some of those who seem quite promising never go through with following Jesus.

Our international friends who are coming to God, assume that anyone professing Christianity is a follower of Jesus. When they discover the opposite, they are confused. "Why would someone claim to be a Christian if they don't want to follow Jesus?" And many times this is then the occasion to give them a lesson about cultural/nominal Christianity vs. being a devoted Christian.

[JohnH]

And, as long as the judgement in question is based on Scripture, it isn't a personal judgement, it is 'merely' an application of GOD's judgements.

Isn't that a personal judgment of what I think scripture says?

[joshuabgood]

But God led the centurion away from his false religion and towards the true religion, correct?

I don't know if I would frame it quite like this. Jesus doesn't speak to his "false religion," but instead recognizes the deep faith in him. And I do feel confident the man was on a growth journey toward Godliness.

The point is...pronouncements about where the Kingdom of God is found, with regard to institutions, is perhaps a path fraught with peril.

[JohnH]

But God led the centurion away from his false religion and towards the true religion, correct?

I don't know if I would frame it quite like this. Jesus doesn't speak to his "false religion," but instead recognizes the deep faith in him. And I do feel confident the man was on a growth journey toward Godliness.

Yes, because he actually had great faith. Jesus did not otherwise praise people who were pagans and heathens and who rejected him as not being God.

[joshuabgood]

But God led the centurion away from his false religion and towards the true religion, correct?

I don't know if I would frame it quite like this. Jesus doesn't speak to his "false religion," but instead recognizes the deep faith in him. And I do feel confident the man was on a growth journey toward Godliness.

Yes, because he actually had great faith. Jesus did not otherwise praise people who were pagans and heathens and who rejected him as not being God.

Sure..but he was still a Roman with a sword. That's the point.

[JohnH]

I don't know if I would frame it quite like this. Jesus doesn't speak to his "false religion," but instead recognizes the deep faith in him. And I do feel confident the man was on a growth journey toward Godliness.

Yes, because he actually had great faith. Jesus did not otherwise praise people who were pagans and heathens and who rejected him as not being God.

Sure..but he was still a Roman with a sword. That's the point.

What are the implications of this?

I'm not going to attend communion and commune with someone who packs heat to church in case they need to shoot an intruder to the church service. Sorry. I don't care how much "great faith" they have.

[Ernie]

The point is...pronouncements about where the Kingdom of God is found, with regard to institutions, is perhaps a path fraught with peril.

No disagreement with that. I'm guessing the only folks on this forum who disagree with this are those who embrace One True Church theology and apply that to their particular church.

[JohnH]

The point is...pronouncements about where the Kingdom of God is found, with regard to institutions, is perhaps a path fraught with peril.

No disagreement with that. I'm guessing the only folks on this forum who disagree with this are those who embrace One True Church theology and apply that to their particular church.

I think you just engaged in a stereotype and an overgeneralization of people and institutions.

I don't think someone needs to be OTC to agree that the Kingdom of God isn't found in these places:

- the Unitarian-Universalist church, which no longer is theistic
- a small home fellowship I used to visit that eventually took the position that Jesus is just a man, isn’t God, and was open to not believing God exists at all.

Likewise, whilst I am an adherent of an OTC church, I think the Kingdom of God is found in many churches (and places that are not churches), amongst God's faithful followers. I don't think it is found amongst people, though, who are busy denying that Jesus is the Christ. That's not what the kingdom of heaven is about.

I wrote what I said above in response to this:

The dynamic of adding value statements that are judgmental in nature as opposed to descriptive in nature like JohnH did. JohnH's descriptions are accurate or inaccurate assessments of a groups observable values. Accuracy depends on the observers level of bias, depth of research, and ability to describe their findings.

That is very different than saying group A has more value than group B. Describing my own group as superiour or inferiour is quite different from merely describing my group.

Using language like we are the "biblical" ones, or we are the "real" Christians or the "real" Mennonites is a value statement. It begs the question of "who placed you in that position to judge the world? And if you are in that position, can others analyze your standard of judgement and use it against you?"

I think that we most certainly can judge whether people are real Christians or not. A person who meets any of these descriptions is not a real Christian:

- Cheats on his wife, consumes pornography, acts pious, attends church, finds things to be self righteous about compared to others
- Molests children, tries to escape justice, finds former victims and shames them into silence by telling them they aren't unforgiving if they speak to police, denies he did it despite overwhelming evidence he did.
- Preaches a false gospel that teaches that Jesus is not the Christ and was merely a man with no supernatural powers and is not God or a deity.

I don't think it's a sign of OTC believe to be able to make pronouncements, "This is not what real Christians, real Mennonites, or people who are living victorious Christian lives, filled with the support, and trying to follow Jesus do."

[Bootstrap]

If one is interested in how to win friends and influence people, stereotyping and overgeneralizing is not the way to go about it.

I would stand by my statement that most (not all, but nearly all) moderate-conservative Mennonite churches in the present era are plagued with transitional Anabaptism.

Of course, one can find exceptions.

To be fair, I think you should let people make similarly broad generalizations about Holdeman Mennonites. Without providing evidence. Something you do almost every day here on MN for other groups.

Is it a good way to treat other groups and other people or not? Let's be consistent.

My preference: No, this is terrible and leads to bad fruit. And it's the main energy behind so many threads here on MennoNet, sometimes swamping discussions that start out with really good discussion of a topic. Stereotyping and overgeneralizing takes no effort and helps boost post count, and you can always keep repeating the same claims to swamp a thread. You aren't the only one who does this, but it does make MennoNet much less useful for serious discussion of so many things that are worth discussing.

[Bootstrap]

I think that we most certainly can judge whether people are real Christians or not. A person who meets any of these descriptions is not a real Christian:

- Cheats on his wife, consumes pornography, acts pious, attends church, finds things to be self righteous about compared to others
- Molests children, tries to escape justice, finds former victims and shames them into silence by telling them they aren't unforgiving if they speak to police, denies he did it despite overwhelming evidence he did.
- Preaches a false gospel that teaches that Jesus is not the Christ and was merely a man with no supernatural powers and is not God or a deity.

I don't think it's a sign of OTC believe to be able to make pronouncements, "This is not what real Christians, real Mennonites, or people who are living victorious Christian lives, filled with the support, and trying to follow Jesus do."

And you just happen to know exactly who does and does not fit these descriptions, which accusations are true, which are false, because you know the hearts of all men?

I don't know very many people that well, and I doubt you do. I am fairly certain almost none of knows this for most of the people whose lives have been discussed here on MN, often with the conviction that people can somehow know these things confidently based on what they feel.