Church Discipline

[JohnH]

If you're trying to be convincing, you aren't helping your case. You thought painting a horror story about increasing numbers of Amish in kapps is the most scary thing imaginable... on an anabaptist forum? Where church services are offered in a region that previously had not a chance to hear the gospel? Of course you pepper in other details that have I'll effects, too so yes, horror story achieved.

But look

You spent an inordinate amount of time writing up a fiction you were in complete control of. That's not an argument any more than if I were to sit and write out the history of a flat earth in order to disprove the sphere-pushers. Writing out a fictional story doesn't argue for anything. It can be persuasive, but it's not an argument. If you want to argue something, you're not. If you want to persuade, you're doing it in the wrong place. Your point of view, when taken to its logical conclusion, would see Amish people suffer a genocide. Simple as. In fact, anyone who "refuses to acculturate" and speaks another language is what is wrong in the scenario you paint. Anyone that doesn't have an easy to place to "go back to" would be in grave danger under this mindset. Natives in the America would be sent to schools as children in order to wash away their culture (oh wait, that's already happened). Muslims would be sent to re-education camps (oh wait, that's already happening in China). Jews would be rounded up, identified, and put under strict laws, as would other unaculterated diaspora like the Amish, Romani, and Hutterites (I swear something like this has happened before, I can't place my finger on it).

Most people (about 97%) are not very interested in assimilating to other cultures or learning more about foreign cultures. 3% of people (such as myself) are. It is important we respect the 97% of people who would prefer to only associated with their own kind, often delineated by language, ethnic group, or religious leaning.

Your premise rests on the fact that we need to bow down to the people that want to never have the chance to see or hear from anyone around them who is of a different culture than them. I reject that principle on Christian grounds. It doesn't matter if "97%" of people feel that way. Jesus feels the other way, and it could be "100%" and I still wouldn't care. Let God be true and 100% of men be liars. I. Do. Not. Care. Giving in to the most disgusting, anti-Christian opinions of "the majority" is the ideology of secular liberalism and I reject it outright. let Christ be true and those 97% of men be blasphemous God-haters. I don't care.

Paul and the apostles fought HARD to make sure the church didn't give in to this toxic idea in the early church. When Peter started placating them, Paul called him out. Peter stood condemned by giving in to the idea of separating cultures, of the spirit that those "97%" of people carry. Yes, this exists in the world but it must not be tolerated in the church. And that is where the whole conversation stems. If you are right in your interpretation, then the man in question needed to be put through church discipline. The New Testament testifies to it. Let God be true and his Word be trustworthy.

PD,

Do you imagine that when the Amish go and colonize a new area, they somehow have any local people attending their church services?

[Bootstrap]

Do you imagine that when the Amish go and colonize a new area, they somehow have any local people attending their church services?

People asked the same question about the Irish, the Germans, the Italians ... but nobody colonized America for the Germans, the United States absorbed them over time.

Regardless, if we Seek First the Kingdom of God, the real question is what we learn from the New Testament. An awful lot of the New Testament is about how we relate to ethnic and religious others in the Kingdom of God. And I hope that a church that attempts to live that out won't be thrown to the flames of political outrage.

Churches need to be able to live the Gospel as they understand it. Are you saying this church forfeits that right if you disagree with them? This thread is about the church discipline question: does the church have the right to practice church discipline? If they do that, should they be sacrificed to the toxic media soup?

[Southerner]

If you're trying to be convincing, you aren't helping your case. You thought painting a horror story about increasing numbers of Amish in kapps is the most scary thing imaginable... on an anabaptist forum? Where church services are offered in a region that previously had not a chance to hear the gospel? Of course you pepper in other details that have I'll effects, too so yes, horror story achieved.

But look

You spent an inordinate amount of time writing up a fiction you were in complete control of. That's not an argument any more than if I were to sit and write out the history of a flat earth in order to disprove the sphere-pushers. Writing out a fictional story doesn't argue for anything. It can be persuasive, but it's not an argument. If you want to argue something, you're not. If you want to persuade, you're doing it in the wrong place. Your point of view, when taken to its logical conclusion, would see Amish people suffer a genocide. Simple as. In fact, anyone who "refuses to acculturate" and speaks another language is what is wrong in the scenario you paint. Anyone that doesn't have an easy to place to "go back to" would be in grave danger under this mindset. Natives in the America would be sent to schools as children in order to wash away their culture (oh wait, that's already happened). Muslims would be sent to re-education camps (oh wait, that's already happening in China). Jews would be rounded up, identified, and put under strict laws, as would other unaculterated diaspora like the Amish, Romani, and Hutterites (I swear something like this has happened before, I can't place my finger on it).

Most people (about 97%) are not very interested in assimilating to other cultures or learning more about foreign cultures. 3% of people (such as myself) are. It is important we respect the 97% of people who would prefer to only associated with their own kind, often delineated by language, ethnic group, or religious leaning.

Your premise rests on the fact that we need to bow down to the people that want to never have the chance to see or hear from anyone around them who is of a different culture than them. I reject that principle on Christian grounds. It doesn't matter if "97%" of people feel that way. Jesus feels the other way, and it could be "100%" and I still wouldn't care. Let God be true and 100% of men be liars. I. Do. Not. Care. Giving in to the most disgusting, anti-Christian opinions of "the majority" is the ideology of secular liberalism and I reject it outright. let Christ be true and those 97% of men be blasphemous God-haters. I don't care.

Paul and the apostles fought HARD to make sure the church didn't give in to this toxic idea in the early church. When Peter started placating them, Paul called him out. Peter stood condemned by giving in to the idea of separating cultures, of the spirit that those "97%" of people carry. Yes, this exists in the world but it must not be tolerated in the church. And that is where the whole conversation stems. If you are right in your interpretation, then the man in question needed to be put through church discipline. The New Testament testifies to it. Let God be true and his Word be trustworthy.

PD,

Do you imagine that when the Amish go and colonize a new area, they somehow have any local people attending their church services?

I am not PD, but I have attended some of my Amish friends' weddings and there are often many locals in attendance. Where did you get your stat about the 97% versus the 3%?

[Szdfan]

If you're trying to be convincing, you aren't helping your case. You thought painting a horror story about increasing numbers of Amish in kapps is the most scary thing imaginable... on an anabaptist forum? Where church services are offered in a region that previously had not a chance to hear the gospel? Of course you pepper in other details that have I'll effects, too so yes, horror story achieved.

But look

You spent an inordinate amount of time writing up a fiction you were in complete control of. That's not an argument any more than if I were to sit and write out the history of a flat earth in order to disprove the sphere-pushers. Writing out a fictional story doesn't argue for anything. It can be persuasive, but it's not an argument. If you want to argue something, you're not. If you want to persuade, you're doing it in the wrong place. Your point of view, when taken to its logical conclusion, would see Amish people suffer a genocide. Simple as. In fact, anyone who "refuses to acculturate" and speaks another language is what is wrong in the scenario you paint. Anyone that doesn't have an easy to place to "go back to" would be in grave danger under this mindset. Natives in the America would be sent to schools as children in order to wash away their culture (oh wait, that's already happened). Muslims would be sent to re-education camps (oh wait, that's already happening in China). Jews would be rounded up, identified, and put under strict laws, as would other unaculterated diaspora like the Amish, Romani, and Hutterites (I swear something like this has happened before, I can't place my finger on it).



Your premise rests on the fact that we need to bow down to the people that want to never have the chance to see or hear from anyone around them who is of a different culture than them. I reject that principle on Christian grounds. It doesn't matter if "97%" of people feel that way. Jesus feels the other way, and it could be "100%" and I still wouldn't care. Let God be true and 100% of men be liars. I. Do. Not. Care. Giving in to the most disgusting, anti-Christian opinions of "the majority" is the ideology of secular liberalism and I reject it outright. let Christ be true and those 97% of men be blasphemous God-haters. I don't care.

Paul and the apostles fought HARD to make sure the church didn't give in to this toxic idea in the early church. When Peter started placating them, Paul called him out. Peter stood condemned by giving in to the idea of separating cultures, of the spirit that those "97%" of people carry. Yes, this exists in the world but it must not be tolerated in the church. And that is where the whole conversation stems. If you are right in your interpretation, then the man in question needed to be put through church discipline. The New Testament testifies to it. Let God be true and his Word be trustworthy.

PD,

Do you imagine that when the Amish go and colonize a new area, they somehow have any local people attending their church services?

I am not PD, but I have attended some of my Amish friends' weddings and there are often many locals in attendance. Where did you get your stat about the 97% versus the 3%?

My hunch is that John’s “97%” is a completely made-up number.

[Southerner]

https://www.youtube.com/live/SAh9pzRBue ... hdup7vlgpX

This is what happened in the 2nd largest Amish colonization in Ohio last week. The criminals were from Canton...so were from outside the colony.

[Praxis+Theodicy]

My hunch is that John’s “97%” is a completely made-up number.

My hunch is that it's a real stat about something specific (like "percent of people willing to learn a new language") and is being presented in a way that isn't indicative of what it was actually representing ("people who can't stand to be around displays of other cultures").

[Szdfan]

My hunch is that John’s “97%” is a completely made-up number.

My hunch is that it's a real stat about something specific (like "percent of people willing to learn a new language") and is being presented in a way that isn't indicative of what it was actually representing ("people who can't stand to be around displays of other cultures").

Maybe…but even in that case it’s a deceptive use of a statistic.

[JohnH]

I am not PD, but I have attended some of my Amish friends' weddings and there are often many locals in attendance.

A wedding is not a normal church service.

How many non-Amish people are attending a typical Amish church service?

Where did you get your stat about the 97% versus the 3%?

From Ernie, from this forum.

[JohnH]

My hunch is that John’s “97%” is a completely made-up number.

I got it from Ernie, on this forum, checked the sources, and it was legitimate.

Thanks for your unfounded accusation, though.

[Szdfan]

My hunch is that John’s “97%” is a completely made-up number.

I got it from Ernie, on this forum, checked the sources, and it was legitimate.

Thanks for your unfounded accusation, though.

Could you please list the sources, so I can check them too? I’m curious where the 97% statistic came from.