Josh wrote: ↑Sun Aug 29, 2021 1:04 pm
The Frisian-Flemish divide happened in the 18th century in the Low Countries and this division persisted all the way into the present era.
Thank you.
In this thread, my questions are about the OP video content, The Amish and The Reformation, what’s included and not.
And why or why not.
i’m supposing JJ Graber is known IRL to some forum members? not sure.
Ken wrote: ↑Sun Aug 29, 2021 1:05 pmMeanwhile the more mainstream branch of the church has also split into various groups (MCUSA, CMC, Lancaster Conference, etc.) and MCUSA itself was formed by the union of the mainstream Swiss/German origin Mennonite Church and the Russian-origin General Conference Mennonite Church, so the two most liberal branches united to form MCUSA about 2 decades ago, from which more conservative groups have subsequently split.
And then simultaneously broke apart into MC USA and MC Canada, which I never thought made a whole lot of sense; why should a denomination parse itself according to national borders?
Josh wrote: ↑Sun Aug 29, 2021 1:04 pm
The Frisian-Flemish divide happened in the 18th century in the Low Countries and this division persisted all the way into the present era.
This is my background, and I have ancestry from both ethnicities (if they can be considered separately in the ethnic sense). They had different church traditions from the beginning, in what is now Holland. These differences, as you say, have persisted during this whole period of history from the 1500s. (One group preached standing, the other sitting. Ordination customs, baptismal rites, a lot was different. Then of course also the language/dialect differences. The was church discipline was viewed and administered also a dividing factor.)
Josh wrote: ↑Sun Aug 29, 2021 1:04 pm
The Frisian-Flemish divide happened in the 18th century in the Low Countries and this division persisted all the way into the present era.
This is my background, and I have ancestry from both ethnicities (if they can be considered separately in the ethnic sense). They had different church traditions from the beginning, in what is now Holland. These differences, as you say, have persisted during this whole period of history from the 1500s. (One group preached standing, the other sitting. Ordination customs, baptismal rites, a lot was different. Then of course also the language/dialect differences. The was church discipline was viewed and administered also a dividing factor.)
These differences persisted well into the Holdeman era; one side calls themselves “polsch” and the other “Molotschna” (pronounced “mole-ush”). Generally speaking the two sides didn’t get married to each other until around 40-50 years ago. My wife’s parents are mixed polsch-Molotcshna.
The classic “fancy clothes” vs “plain clothes” difference persists to this day.
Ken wrote: ↑Sun Aug 29, 2021 1:05 pmMeanwhile the more mainstream branch of the church has also split into various groups (MCUSA, CMC, Lancaster Conference, etc.) and MCUSA itself was formed by the union of the mainstream Swiss/German origin Mennonite Church and the Russian-origin General Conference Mennonite Church, so the two most liberal branches united to form MCUSA about 2 decades ago, from which more conservative groups have subsequently split.
And then simultaneously broke apart into MC USA and MC Canada, which I never thought made a whole lot of sense; why should a denomination parse itself according to national borders?
As Temp said, my people (Russian Mennonites) are not a part of this discussion at all, but regarding the division according to national boundaries, the North America MB conference did the same, dividing into the the US conf and the Canada conf. Oddly, while those who immigrated later to Canada were in many ways the more conservative ones in the beginning, by the time you get to the latter part of the last century, it was flipped. The Canadian MBs were pressing for women in pastoral positions (in addition to some other issues), so they separated. I suppose I could look it up & find when that happened, but I'm pretty sure that it was after I was no longer attending an MB congregation. (Incidentally, the migration pattern was, from Holland to Prussia, now a part of Poland, then from there to "New Russia", also referred to as "South Russia" in documents of that time period, which is now Eastern Ukraine. Then from there to the Americas.
Josh posted again while I was writing this, so adding a bit more. The first colony was in the Chortitsa area, and the 2nd in the Molotschna. There were Frisian & Flemish people in both colonies, but it is my understanding that they generally worshiped separately. However there were some congregations from one group, who followed the ordination customs of the other group, so it's not cut & dried. But my mom's family came from the Chortitsa colony, and my dad's from Molotschna.)
Somebody wrote: ↑Sun Aug 29, 2021 5:44 pm
I watched it. Very interesting how history is repeating itself.
It would be great to have a transcript.
i appreciate how Martin Luther’s “stand,” by itself, wasn’t described as such a big deal. scholarly men, mostly priests+monks in the Catholic Church, had been questioning similarly for hundreds of years prior. it was MOVEABLE TYPE, the printing press, that changed things.
possibly this era we’re in, with the internet, will mark another historic time of change. ohio jones once pointed out, the Roman Roads significantly changed the world.
what impresses me is how history continues, the quest to find Light and Truth continues. there have been some stunning failures.
but that inward burning desire to grasp Truth continues. from the time of Jesus, before scriptures, before the cross was recognized as a sign of Christianity, it has not stopped. the pursuit of Truth. the battle with lies.
I just finished watching this video. A couple of comments:
First, I obviously am 100% behind the drive to put the Scripture in the hand of all peoples in their own language.
Some things that were not brought out:
How the "Textus Receptus" (in English generally referred to as the "Majority Text, or, as a direct translation of the Latin, the "Received Text) was developed. Basically, textual variations in the different Greek texts were dealt with on the basis of which reading had the most manuscripts which represented that wording. Also, the texts available to Erasmus were what are referred to as the "Western Texts", hand-written copies made by monks in western Europe. Some additions were also made to the text directly from the Latin Vulgate - words, phrases and whole verses added, translated into Greek, where there were no existing Greek texts that had those wordings. (I John 5:7b & 8a are an example of this. In many other places, phrases found in a different NT book were added to similar sounding contexts in other NT books.) These are the differences which are used by proponents of KJV only to condemn modern English translations such as the NIV. Most modern English translations are based on a somewhat different Greek textual tradition, based on comparisons between much older texts, the Eastern Texts. But that is not the only difference. Differences were dealt with from a different approach, placing more value on the oldest texts available, and using an analytical process which would often choose the most difficult reading as the most likely correct one. One example: In the book of The Acts, when Paul (then Saul) was called to Cornelius' house, Luke reports that Paul mentions some men came to call on him at the gate of Saul the Tanner's house, where he was staying. The oldest texts say it was two men. But our translations "regularize" the reading to match the fact that Cornelius sent three men. (Some old texts also omit the number entirely. The Textus Receptus has 'three'.) But Cornelius sent two servants, AND one soldier. I do believe that the true reading of the original is 'two', referring to the two servants, who, because of the way they describe their master to Paul, I personally believe to have been Jews, and that it was only these two men who Paul invited into the house. By the time they all arrived at Cornelius' house, he had thought through the meaning of the vision he had had just prior to the calling out at the gate enough that he tells Cornelius, "You know that as a Jew, I'm not supposed to come into your house. But I know now that God is no respecter of persons.”
The Catholic priest talks about the importance of a changed life, but apparently (judging from the words of a Catholic priest quoted in The Martyr’s Mirror, whose responses were so foul that that story does not appear in the first editions of MM) very few Catholics, even among the preisthood, exhibited changed lives during the reformation era.
Re: Pennsylvania “Dutch” (German): Linguistically, this language is closest to the German dialect spoken in a region of German known as Schweiben (or maybe Schweibia?).
Lastly, in fairness to many of the Old Older ministers I know personally, they DO study from the English Bible, and I also know for a fact that many have a number of commentaries written by Evangelicals. (I have been in several of these men’s studies, and have seen the books in their library.) (The film was dated 2017, so either Holmes County is really different than other areas such as in PA, for instance, or there is this slight misrepresentation.)
