High Demand Religions?

[Valerie]

Jokes aside, this is a tremendous point. There is barely any unity, but weak cells of randomness. Too busy infighting, and forgetting Matthew 28.

I’d rather argue over women’s shoes then kill my brother.
There really is no comparing.

As for slandering when losing the arguments… what exactly do you think you’ve been doing this entire time?

Admonishing?

[Sudsy]

Jokes aside, this is a tremendous point. There is barely any unity, but weak cells of randomness. Too busy infighting, and forgetting Matthew 28.

I’d rather argue over women’s shoes then kill my brother.
There really is no comparing.

As for slandering when losing the arguments… what exactly do you think you’ve been doing this entire time?

If that is how you understand what you should and should not do, regarding 'killing my brother' then live accordingly. However that is not the interpretation of scriptures that most other Christians have. And if some who would never engage in war where they might kill someone, view those who do as 'won't be saved in the end', that, to me, is a very radical view of NT Christianity.

Actually when it comes to killing, the way Jesus put murder, this is happening right here amongst us. The way we treat each other and call each other the eqivalent of a 'fool' Jesus says we will be 'sent to a fiery hell'. How literal are we going to take that ?

Anyway, here is a way of understanding 'killing' with a different interpretation of scripture. I believe everyone should be convicted in their own mind as that someday is what we will account for.

https://www.insightforliving.ca/read/ar ... Z0EALw_wcB

[Judas Maccabeus]

The city I live in and area outside of it I see the Catholic churches thriving. I point that out to my husband as I drive past them and see the parking lots full, and street lines with cars as well. Considering they have several services my impression is they are drawing people.

I'm especially impressed with a young man at work who attends one, in his walk with the Lord. My other coworker is 58 & attends the other, and she is a stronger Christian than most I know- I love to hear things they both share but the 22 year old makes me glad to know he has a real relationship with Christ, and bold in faith. And he has joy!
There's a huge Catholic church in next town that I hear good things about.

I appreciate Max loathing the divisiveness. The other night I heard a really good message on Christian radio, "Unity vs Uniformity" How the Church at large needs more unity!!

In Baltimore, they are shutting most of them down. Josh is quite correct, the few that are left look more busy.

https://www.ncronline.org/news/baltimor ... ch-stomach

There is no possibility of unity with falsehood. Both the Roman Catholic Church and the Orthodox churches teach falsehoods, that have no basis in the Bible. Truly they are the commandments of men.

The RCC and Orthodox churches believe they and their traditions are final authority.

The Anabaptist churches teach that the inspired word of God, the Bible is final authority.

These positions cannot be reconciled. Nor should there be an attempt to do this. Choose ye this day, who you will follow.

I don't mean to hurt your feelings but the Anabaptist church was not founded on Sola Scriptura similar to the EO and RC churches. That is protestantism that came in. The EO and RC church teach the Canon (which they voted into the Bible officially) is a manual and guide for faith, but without means to an end. Anabaptists do not believe the scripture is a means to and end either, nor are they sola scriptura.

Also rather than pulling info off a website, look at the live Google map to find active churches. Here's a zoomed in map of BAPTIST only churches.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/HURhLYXRtwVxS3xH6

Historically, you are simply wrong here. This movement began when dissidents from Ulrich Zwingli’ movement came to the correct conclusions that he was not using the Bible as his final authority, but the town council. While we may not hold the three Solas the way some Protestant churches do, effectively we do hold the Bible as our final authority. I would suggest you take a look at a high school level text, like Martin’s “Cup and Cross” if you want to understand the foundation of the Anabaptist movement. And I would also suggest that your view of how the Cannon came to be is uniquely Orthodox, and not unchallenged, suggest you pull a copy of Geisler and Nix off of your shelf, the idea of the Cannon arising by general consensus rather than through the vote of church councils. Church councils can and have erred. Your view needs infallible councils to hold logical sway, and that just does not hold water.

I would contend that the so-called Orthodox Church did not begin until 1054.

[Judas Maccabeus]

This is what is on offer. I grew up with these people.

Most of them did little to none of this, but they had really good festivals. How do you think I knew that they did not fast on Wednesday and Fridays? Easy, had lunch with them

Wednesdays and Fridays are their fasting days but it's not totally fasting from food. It's certain foods. It is also not a "requirement" - The Church started those fasting days in the early days of the Church so they would have different fasting days than the Jews. When we were visiting EO they said some are strict about fasting, some are not, it's voluntary and they are not to judge each other about it. But as a Church, those are fasting days if one desires to, their stricter gadts are during Lent and Advent season before Christmas. On Sundays after Church most have fellowship eating together of some kind which is nice.

It can be discouraging to witness how EO still has the deposit of the faith, original teachings and interpretations, etc yet seems to have allowed worldliness to influence the people. Our EO friends who are drivers for the Amish,, do not attend EO church anymore for that reason, they are extremely "plain" EO, their daughters dress are more modest than many Anabaptists (example, sleeves have to be below elbow, no printed material, head coverings "really" cover.)

I forget, you have to spell it out as people do not know of other religions much. Yes fasting from certain foods Wednesday & Friday.
And yes, most EO do practice all of these things.

EO doesn't work like Menno churches in "church standards" sort of ways. All EO Christians really do follow Great Lent and the Nativity Fasts. Cheesefare Sunday (Malenitsa) marks the beginning of Great Lent - churchwide.

You have devolved into the “No true Scotsman “ line of reasoning here. I grew up with these people, and I know for a fact that many, and probably most of them did not do most of this stuff. And yes, I understand the differences in the calendar, but you would not hide this from your best friends. Seriously, you seem to have found yourself an unusually observant cohort to hang out with.

One other thing that I noted was that occult practices seemed far more prevalent than the rest of the community. Such things as “evil eye” charms and fortune telling, all were ubiquitous. Yet they were in church most Sundays. But, yes “No true Scotsman.”

[Judas Maccabeus]

The city I live in and area outside of it I see the Catholic churches thriving. I point that out to my husband as I drive past them and see the parking lots full, and street lines with cars as well. Considering they have several services my impression is they are drawing people.

I'm especially impressed with a young man at work who attends one, in his walk with the Lord. My other coworker is 58 & attends the other, and she is a stronger Christian than most I know- I love to hear things they both share but the 22 year old makes me glad to know he has a real relationship with Christ, and bold in faith. And he has joy!
There's a huge Catholic church in next town that I hear good things about.

Overall, attendance in the area is declining. They keep closing parishes and then merging them. So the few that are left open look like they have stronger attendance.

Out where I live they are talking about closing our diocese (Steubenville) and merging it with Columbus. Who knows how many parishes would close as a result.

I appreciate Max loathing the divisiveness. The other night I heard a really good message on Christian radio, "Unity vs Uniformity" How the Church at large needs more unity!!

Are we sure that’s what’s going on? The Catholic Church claims all other churches are false, and that only they have the doorway of salvation. They have a lot of false doctrines such as claiming that salvation is granted through baptism - including to infants, but that unbaptised infants are not saved. Does that really sound like something we see in scripture at all?

Must we be in “unity” with false doctrine?

When I read David Bercot's Dictionary of Early Christian Beliefs, their understanding "today" seems to be that of the early Church father's- so with the Holy Spirit guiding the early Church, could the Reformation era which split into many more interpretations although sincere in attempt, be assuming of them being wrong? We won't know for sure until the other side. All Protestants have similar view of Catholics- I remember being a Christian from the Jesus movement era being encouraged to "reach" the Catholics but so many of the Catholics I encountered had great "faith" so I was perplexed.

Only God knows the hearts, I think Catholics can teach us a thing or two. My husband grew up Catholic & left at ,
19 during Jesus Movement but, since learning more via Eastern Orthodox so much of what he misunderstood has come to light.

You do realize that Bercot’s views, particularly his more recent writings are highly controversial in many conservative Mennonite circles. I would be shocked if he were invited as a speaker in moderate conservative groups. Generally, what I am hearing reinforced is while the second and third century writers are interesting, they hold no weight in the formulation of church doctrine and practice. You can find something in them to support just about anything you like. This would include such heresy as infant baptism and monasticism.

[Judas Maccabeus]

I forget, you have to spell it out as people do not know of other religions much. Yes fasting from certain foods Wednesday & Friday.
And yes, most EO do practice all of these things.

EO doesn't work like Menno churches in "church standards" sort of ways. All EO Christians really do follow Great Lent and the Nativity Fasts. Cheesefare Sunday (Malenitsa) marks the beginning of Great Lent - churchwide.

mrbilliam, I have worked with EOs and at one point was business partners with one in a bar/nightclub. I can assure you there was no fasting going on Wed. & Fri. except right around Easter. That was it. There was also an icon placed by the cash register, for good luck.

Mennonite churches do have one standard: we have a standard against requiring priests country-wide to pray for "victory for Holy Russia" in the war against Ukraine. Half of your purported membership of EOs is the Russian Orthodox Church/ROCOR. Are you really defending that?

Josh...

Just don't go there. Trust me. Don't go there. I've known my fair share of EO's. Yes they do practice that, and Anabaptists plenty visit bars and nightclubs. Russia doesn't speak for the entire church, they are only 1 patriarchate and right now tensions are very high.

Why is it when the argument is lost, slander begins?

We have failed at reaching cities. Other churches have done a much better job. Period.

The Moscow Patriarchy: “Gentle Jesus bless each bomb.”

Krilli is nothing more than Putin’s altar boy.

https://www.rferl.org/a/russia-patriarc ... 52380.html

[Valerie]

Overall, attendance in the area is declining. They keep closing parishes and then merging them. So the few that are left open look like they have stronger attendance.

Out where I live they are talking about closing our diocese (Steubenville) and merging it with Columbus. Who knows how many parishes would close as a result.



Are we sure that’s what’s going on? The Catholic Church claims all other churches are false, and that only they have the doorway of salvation. They have a lot of false doctrines such as claiming that salvation is granted through baptism - including to infants, but that unbaptised infants are not saved. Does that really sound like something we see in scripture at all?

Must we be in “unity” with false doctrine?

When I read David Bercot's Dictionary of Early Christian Beliefs, their understanding "today" seems to be that of the early Church father's- so with the Holy Spirit guiding the early Church, could the Reformation era which split into many more interpretations although sincere in attempt, be assuming of them being wrong? We won't know for sure until the other side. All Protestants have similar view of Catholics- I remember being a Christian from the Jesus movement era being encouraged to "reach" the Catholics but so many of the Catholics I encountered had great "faith" so I was perplexed.

Only God knows the hearts, I think Catholics can teach us a thing or two. My husband grew up Catholic & left at ,
19 during Jesus Movement but, since learning more via Eastern Orthodox so much of what he misunderstood has come to light.

You do realize that Bercot’s views, particularly his more recent writings are highly controversial in many conservative Mennonite circles. I would be shocked if he were invited as a speaker in moderate conservative groups. Generally, what I am hearing reinforced is while the second and third century writers are interesting, they hold no weight in the formulation of church doctrine and practice. You can find something in them to support just about anything you like. This would include such heresy as infant baptism and monasticism.

I'm sorry, you really don't have the qualifications to determine what is heresy on those things. It is an opinion not shared by all- actually it wouldn't fall under the category of "heresy" . Since the Apostles taught infant baptism, you cannot know, only speculate. Monasticism is not heresy either-
It doesn't matter what Mennonites opinion of Bercot is ( I was introduced to his books from Amish that recommended his books) this was not a book compiled of his opinions but of the faith passed down by the people that had the deposit of the faith and put the very Scriptures you read, together - if you don't trust them- it's strange.

[Josh]

I'm sorry, you really don't have the qualifications to determine what is heresy on those things. It is an opinion not shared by all- actually it wouldn't fall under the category of "heresy" . Since the Apostles taught infant baptism, you cannot know, only speculate. Monasticism is not heresy either-
It doesn't matter what Mennonites opinion of Bercot is ( I was introduced to his books from Amish that recommended his books) this was not a book compiled of his opinions but of the faith passed down by the people that had the deposit of the faith and put the very Scriptures you read, together - if you don't trust them- it's strange.

David Bercot's encyclopedia is not inspired scripture, and he would be extremely concerned if anyone were treating it as such.

[ken_sylvania]

I'm sorry, you really don't have the qualifications to determine what is heresy on those things. It is an opinion not shared by all- actually it wouldn't fall under the category of "heresy" . Since the Apostles taught infant baptism, you cannot know, only speculate. Monasticism is not heresy either-
It doesn't matter what Mennonites opinion of Bercot is, this was not a book compiled of his opinions but of the faith passed down by the people that had the deposit of the faith and put the very Scriptures you read, together - if you don't trust them- it's strange.

That is exactly what the RC church people told our forefathers who complained that adultery, fornication, war, greed, covetousness, etc are contrary to the Word of God. They said "You aren't qualified to read or interpret the Scriptures - if we catch you reading them we'll kill you." And they did exactly that.

Also, we have no contemporaneous record of the Apostles teaching infant baptism, only of them teaching believer's baptism.

[Judas Maccabeus]

When I read David Bercot's Dictionary of Early Christian Beliefs, their understanding "today" seems to be that of the early Church father's- so with the Holy Spirit guiding the early Church, could the Reformation era which split into many more interpretations although sincere in attempt, be assuming of them being wrong? We won't know for sure until the other side. All Protestants have similar view of Catholics- I remember being a Christian from the Jesus movement era being encouraged to "reach" the Catholics but so many of the Catholics I encountered had great "faith" so I was perplexed.

Only God knows the hearts, I think Catholics can teach us a thing or two. My husband grew up Catholic & left at ,
19 during Jesus Movement but, since learning more via Eastern Orthodox so much of what he misunderstood has come to light.

You do realize that Bercot’s views, particularly his more recent writings are highly controversial in many conservative Mennonite circles. I would be shocked if he were invited as a speaker in moderate conservative groups. Generally, what I am hearing reinforced is while the second and third century writers are interesting, they hold no weight in the formulation of church doctrine and practice. You can find something in them to support just about anything you like. This would include such heresy as infant baptism and monasticism.

I'm sorry, you really don't have the qualifications to determine what is heresy on those things. It is an opinion not shared by all- actually it wouldn't fall under the category of "heresy" . Since the Apostles taught infant baptism, you cannot know, only speculate. Monasticism is not heresy either-
It doesn't matter what Mennonites opinion of Bercot is, this was not a book compiled of his opinions but of the faith passed down by the people that had the deposit of the faith and put the very Scriptures you read, together - if you don't trust them- it's strange.

I have absolute authority to call the doctrines that some claim to be early church doctrine. In the view of conservative Mennonites, infant baptism is a papist heresy:

Schlictheim Confession, Article 1- All conservitive Mennonites agree on this position- ALL:

I. Notice concerning baptism. Baptism shall be given to all those who have been taught repentance and the amendment of life and [who] believe truly that their sins are taken away through Christ, and to all those who desire to walk in the resurrection of Jesus Christ and be buried with Him in death, so that they might rise with Him; to all those who with such an understanding themselves desire and request it from us; hereby is excluded all infant baptism, the greatest and first abomination of the pope. For this you have the reasons and the testimony of the writings and the practice of the apostles.[16] We wish simply yet resolutely and with assurance to hold to the same.

We as a group hold, that the views some incorrectly ascribe to the early church are a papist heresy. The so-called “deposit of faith” is the invention of man.

And I actually do have the qualifications to call infant baptism heresy. EVERY Mennonite does. Those who teach in particular. Bercot’s book represents his OPINION of which teachings are actually relevant. Just because someone in the second century wrote something down, does not mean it should be regarded as part of the true evangelical faith. I could pull second century quotes that would have your head spinning. The second century, indeed the first century was full of heresies. Just read the book of 1 John once. The TRUE deposit of faith is the Bible.