The Amish

[alphaparticle]

 

actually I think just the fact that they are identified simply by the name of "AMISH" would conclude that people know exactly who they are and what they believe.

How do you know they don't share their faith in selling of their furniture or their foods, seems a bit more like a guess than a personnel observation, they live in a closed community but do business every day with the outside world. so you are only assuming they don't evangelize to people outside their world 

 

It would be helpful if you read some of the information provided in the thread. If you read the articles you will see that they have stopped evangelizing as a community. You will also see that they believe that following their church rules is part of how they make it to heaven.

[Guest Butero]

I've noticed several people holding up the amish a some kind of  model community lately, and I have to admit, I find this baffling. This is a group that shuns those who leave the community, that demand adherence to a strict set of complicated rules to be in good standing at the community and the thought that God will allow them into heaven based on how well they do at following these rules. There are rules about how men have to wear their beards, the allowed color of clothing, against belts. Their young people are poorly educated, so that if they do want to leave, they are at a huge disadvantage. Not to mention, they do not evangelize as we are commanded to. I also find it strange that these people are lauded as a model on an internet forum, which they are forbidden to use. It's not a matter of personal choice here, they are forbidden to by their community if they want to remain in the place they grew up, around their family, for the only life they were really prepared for at all. What is so fantastic about this? If you crave simplicity, why not just create that? If you feel that wearing simpler more covering clothes would be better, why not just do that? I don't think holding this group up though is a good idea.

 

Check out this below:

http://web.missouri....udduthfs00.html

 

"Indeed, the Amish believe that the entire purpose of this life is to prepare for the life to come by overcoming their corrupt human nature. Not only does this process take most people an entire lifetime to complete, one's salvation must always be in question (Hartman). A person overcomes his or her sinfulness by yielding to the church authority structure, a concept known as Gelassenheit (Kraybill 102). If one obeys the church leaders, who are God's mouthpieces, or the rules those leaders establish under divine guidance, one is disobeying God Himself. To borrow a Buddhist term, the church is the Mahayana, or "great vehicle," used to bring people to salvation, and all those not on board have no hope of achieving eternal life. It is only available through the guidance and authority of the Amish faith."

 

One obeys church leaders, if they don't, they are disobeying God Himself. This is disturbing.

I have spent a lot of time looking into the Amish beliefs.  There have been times I have considered converting to being Amish, or at least Beachy Amish.  Recently I watched a video at YouTube about the Amish that was produced by the BBC.  There was one Amish family that consented to allowing them to be filmed because they felt like they should spread the faith.  This was in opposition to the elders opposition to being filmed and put them at risk of being put out of the church. 

 

For the most part, I agree with the way they live.  What surprised me was that they all knew their Bible.  Even the children were smart in the Word.  The family was in Biblical order.  When I started watching the program, my first concern was over the family choosing to disobey the elders, as that is rebellion, and rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft.  At the same time, the reason they disobeyed the elders was to obey Christ's command to share the gospel, and Christ is higher than human leaders. 

 

There are reasons for what they teach.  I don't necessarily agree all of these things are necessary to salvation, but there is nothing wrong with them.  I have always opposed compulsory education, so I have no issue with Amish children not always being that far along in their studies, but I would point out that I went to school with High School seniors that could barely read, yet they still got a Diploma.  They just put those struggling into easy classes, and push them along.  They don't have cars for two reasons.  One reason is that they feel it is better that everyone be a close knit community, and limiting the distance they can easily travel keeps them that way.  The other reason is so they won't be prideful over their automobile.  Do I feel this is necessary?  No, but neither do I have an issue with it. 

 

The Amish people don't have electricity, and that protects them from the bad influences of the media, as well as time wasting activities.  I come in contact with Amish people while traveling in Ohio, Indiana and Pennsylvania, and I have a great deal of respect for them.  I do believe the way they live is much more Biblical than the way most people live.  Yes, they do put people out of the church for rebellion against the authorities, and they are not to eat with those people or have close contact with them, but they know the rules.  None of this comes by surprise.  My view is that any church has a right to place any rules on the congregation they want, and this is a free nation and if we don't like them, we can go elsewhere.  If we choose to be part of a strict community like the Amish, then we should abide by their rules. 

 

I mentioned the distinction with them and the Beachy Amish.  They have many of the same standards, but don't shun all modern conveniences, like cars and electricity.  I feel like I would be more likely to join that type of Amish if I was to go that far.  They also do believe in evangelizing, unlike the older order of Amish.  You say you don't understand people admiring the Amish because of a list of things you don't agree with.  In my case, I have no problem with any church being extremely legalistic, and even find it preferable to the liberal churches.  In my case, the things that bother you don't bother me. 

[Guest Butero]

No way Micheal.  No way.  How do you account for Peter's sermon in the book of Acts?  How do you account for Jesus sending out disciples two by two?

 

How do you account for the missionary journeys of Paul and others?

 

The Bible does not say they lived in a commune...they shared all things...does not mean they lived in a commune...if I share the eggs with my neighbor

that our chickens lay, does not mean we are living together

 

It is recorded in the Book of Acts, that 3000 people were converted to Christ that day alone...where did they all live?  In the cramped inner city core?  Outside the

walls refugee camp style?  Maybe someone had an extra big house?  

 

Actually, the Book of Acts records And every day, in the temple and from house to house, they kept right on teaching and preaching Jesus as the Christ.

 

They preached in the temple (prob the courtyard), met in HOUSES (plural) and KEPT ON TEACHING AND PREACHING.

 

They did not segregate themselves like the Amish, they did not all wear the same clothes like the Amish, they did not set up a commune like you suggest and further

and the most important, they SPREAD THE GOSPEL.

 

A few facts would be nice next time around please.

 

 

1. The early believers did not sell all their possessions. Even though it may seem that the phrases “had all things in common” or “selling their property” or “all things were common property” means that the early believers sold everything and had a common pot, the context immediately qualifies these general statements. The believers continued to live and meet in their own homes. Craig Blomberg says in his study Neither Poverty nor Riches¹:

Verses 43-47 are dominated by highly marked imperfect tense verbs, whereas one normally expects aorists [once-for-all actions] in historical narrative. There is no once-for-all divestiture of property in view here, but periodic acts of charity as needs arose

- See more at: http://tifwe.org/research/does-acts-2-5-teach-socialism/#sthash.dZVuopbO.dpuf

 

I predict a course on Biblical history may be in your near future...that is if the aliens don't get us first

 

disclaimer:  the blue background is most likely a copy/paste block mechanism as the page for the article is white..

Some of the leadership in the church sold all of their possessions and pooled the resources, but they did that to spread the gospel.  Nobody was forced to do that. 

 

The Amish people are following the command to come out from among the world and be separate and touch not the unclean thing.  Do you really think there are many people in America that haven't heard about Jesus?  I am not saying they have all heard strong doctrinal messages, but I mean people that know nothing about the Lord, have never heard of him?  When the church was first formed, there were many that hadn't heard of Jesus, and knew nothing about salvation.  I don't think that the fact the Amish people don't go around preaching everywhere makes them in error.  Most Christians don't go around as traveling evangelists.  In additon to that, the Amish people just living their lives are a witness.  People take note of how they live, and they want to know more, as I did.  Most of the Christian church today has become so much like the world, there is nothing to draw anyone to them.  You can't even tell them from your good moral unbeliever.  That is why I am also drawn to the family in Arkansas with the 19 children.  They are living their faith.  Others say they are Christians, and they do have a form or religion, but you don't see that saltiness or light.  The Amish people are truly a light in a world of darkness.   

[Micheal Westin]

 

I've noticed several people holding up the amish a some kind of  model community lately, and I have to admit, I find this baffling. This is a group that shuns those who leave the community, that demand adherence to a strict set of complicated rules to be in good standing at the community and the thought that God will allow them into heaven based on how well they do at following these rules. There are rules about how men have to wear their beards, the allowed color of clothing, against belts. Their young people are poorly educated, so that if they do want to leave, they are at a huge disadvantage. Not to mention, they do not evangelize as we are commanded to. I also find it strange that these people are lauded as a model on an internet forum, which they are forbidden to use. It's not a matter of personal choice here, they are forbidden to by their community if they want to remain in the place they grew up, around their family, for the only life they were really prepared for at all. What is so fantastic about this? If you crave simplicity, why not just create that? If you feel that wearing simpler more covering clothes would be better, why not just do that? I don't think holding this group up though is a good idea.

 

Check out this below:

http://web.missouri....udduthfs00.html

 

"Indeed, the Amish believe that the entire purpose of this life is to prepare for the life to come by overcoming their corrupt human nature. Not only does this process take most people an entire lifetime to complete, one's salvation must always be in question (Hartman). A person overcomes his or her sinfulness by yielding to the church authority structure, a concept known as Gelassenheit (Kraybill 102). If one obeys the church leaders, who are God's mouthpieces, or the rules those leaders establish under divine guidance, one is disobeying God Himself. To borrow a Buddhist term, the church is the Mahayana, or "great vehicle," used to bring people to salvation, and all those not on board have no hope of achieving eternal life. It is only available through the guidance and authority of the Amish faith."

 

One obeys church leaders, if they don't, they are disobeying God Himself. This is disturbing.

I have spent a lot of time looking into the Amish beliefs.  There have been times I have considered converting to being Amish, or at least Beachy Amish.  Recently I watched a video at YouTube about the Amish that was produced by the BBC.  There was one Amish family that consented to allowing them to be filmed because they felt like they should spread the faith.  This was in opposition to the elders opposition to being filmed and put them at risk of being put out of the church. 

 

For the most part, I agree with the way they live.  What surprised me was that they all knew their Bible.  Even the children were smart in the Word.  The family was in Biblical order.  When I started watching the program, my first concern was over the family choosing to disobey the elders, as that is rebellion, and rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft.  At the same time, the reason they disobeyed the elders was to obey Christ's command to share the gospel, and Christ is higher than human leaders. 

 

There are reasons for what they teach.  I don't necessarily agree all of these things are necessary to salvation, but there is nothing wrong with them.  I have always opposed compulsory education, so I have no issue with Amish children not always being that far along in their studies, but I would point out that I went to school with High School seniors that could barely read, yet they still got a Diploma.  They just put those struggling into easy classes, and push them along.  They don't have cars for two reasons.  One reason is that they feel it is better that everyone be a close knit community, and limiting the distance they can easily travel keeps them that way.  The other reason is so they won't be prideful over their automobile.  Do I feel this is necessary?  No, but neither do I have an issue with it. 

 

The Amish people don't have electricity, and that protects them from the bad influences of the media, as well as time wasting activities.  I come in contact with Amish people while traveling in Ohio, Indiana and Pennsylvania, and I have a great deal of respect for them.  I do believe the way they live is much more Biblical than the way most people live.  Yes, they do put people out of the church for rebellion against the authorities, and they are not to eat with those people or have close contact with them, but they know the rules.  None of this comes by surprise.  My view is that any church has a right to place any rules on the congregation they want, and this is a free nation and if we don't like them, we can go elsewhere.  If we choose to be part of a strict community like the Amish, then we should abide by their rules. 

 

I mentioned the distinction with them and the Beachy Amish.  They have many of the same standards, but don't shun all modern conveniences, like cars and electricity.  I feel like I would be more likely to join that type of Amish if I was to go that far.  They also do believe in evangelizing, unlike the older order of Amish.  You say you don't understand people admiring the Amish because of a list of things you don't agree with.  In my case, I have no problem with any church being extremely legalistic, and even find it preferable to the liberal churches.  In my case, the things that bother you don't bother me. 

 

good post, personally I think the errors of the Amish to legalistic traditions (believing some things help save them) will fair much better on judgment day then liberal Christianity that believes living in continual habitual sin will have no effect on their salvation

 

to error on the side of caution is wisdom  

[Sevenseas]

 

No way Micheal.  No way.  How do you account for Peter's sermon in the book of Acts?  How do you account for Jesus sending out disciples two by two?

 

How do you account for the missionary journeys of Paul and others?

 

The Bible does not say they lived in a commune...they shared all things...does not mean they lived in a commune...if I share the eggs with my neighbor

that our chickens lay, does not mean we are living together

 

It is recorded in the Book of Acts, that 3000 people were converted to Christ that day alone...where did they all live?  In the cramped inner city core?  Outside the

walls refugee camp style?  Maybe someone had an extra big house?  

 

Actually, the Book of Acts records And every day, in the temple and from house to house, they kept right on teaching and preaching Jesus as the Christ.

 

They preached in the temple (prob the courtyard), met in HOUSES (plural) and KEPT ON TEACHING AND PREACHING.

 

They did not segregate themselves like the Amish, they did not all wear the same clothes like the Amish, they did not set up a commune like you suggest and further

and the most important, they SPREAD THE GOSPEL.

 

A few facts would be nice next time around please.

 

 

1. The early believers did not sell all their possessions. Even though it may seem that the phrases “had all things in common” or “selling their property” or “all things were common property” means that the early believers sold everything and had a common pot, the context immediately qualifies these general statements. The believers continued to live and meet in their own homes. Craig Blomberg says in his study Neither Poverty nor Riches¹:

Verses 43-47 are dominated by highly marked imperfect tense verbs, whereas one normally expects aorists [once-for-all actions] in historical narrative. There is no once-for-all divestiture of property in view here, but periodic acts of charity as needs arose

- See more at: http://tifwe.org/research/does-acts-2-5-teach-socialism/#sthash.dZVuopbO.dpuf

 

I predict a course on Biblical history may be in your near future...that is if the aliens don't get us first

 

disclaimer:  the blue background is most likely a copy/paste block mechanism as the page for the article is white..

Some of the leadership in the church sold all of their possessions and pooled the resources, but they did that to spread the gospel.  Nobody was forced to do that. 

 

The Amish people are following the command to come out from among the world and be separate and touch not the unclean thing.  Do you really think there are many people in America that haven't heard about Jesus?  I am not saying they have all heard strong doctrinal messages, but I mean people that know nothing about the Lord, have never heard of him?  When the church was first formed, there were many that hadn't heard of Jesus, and knew nothing about salvation.  I don't think that the fact the Amish people don't go around preaching everywhere makes them in error.  Most Christians don't go around as traveling evangelists.  In additon to that, the Amish people just living their lives are a witness.  People take note of how they live, and they want to know more, as I did.  Most of the Christian church today has become so much like the world, there is nothing to draw anyone to them.  You can't even tell them from your good moral unbeliever.  That is why I am also drawn to the family in Arkansas with the 19 children.  They are living their faith.  Others say they are Christians, and they do have a form or religion, but you don't see that saltiness or light.  The Amish people are truly a light in a world of darkness.   

 

 

 

That is true.  No one forced them and that is the point.

 

Yes.  I most definately and absolutely believe there are men, women and children who do not know and have not heard.  And more so all of the time.

 

Most people do not evangelize?  Well then  who is going to tell their neighbor?  Our neighbors know what we believe...the lady next door went to church ALL her life but never

accepted Jesus until a few weeks ago because someone from my home witnessed to her.  There are churches every where but many no longer preach the gospel

 

I'm not taking it further with you Butero because we both know where that will lead.  Suffice it to say that the Bible does not tell us to hide away, live in communes or legalize

Christianity so that some can be better Christians in their own eyes than others.

 

Seriousl, that is my only response to your post.

[Sevenseas]

 

good post, personally I think the errors of the Amish to legalistic traditions (believing some things help save them) will fair much better on judgment day then liberal Christianity that believes living in continual habitual sin will have no effect on their salvation

 

to error on the side of caution is wisdom  

 

 

IMO, a good post consists of more than what a person believes or consists of a previously held opinion.  You are 100% wrong if you think anything but the blood of Christ shed on our behalf

will do more for legalism than freedom in Christ.

 

 

 

to error on the side of caution is wisdom 

 

Well that is certainly not widom found in scripture.

 

That, is no compass at all IMO

[Guest Butero]

 

 

good post, personally I think the errors of the Amish to legalistic traditions (believing some things help save them) will fair much better on judgment day then liberal Christianity that believes living in continual habitual sin will have no effect on their salvation

 

to error on the side of caution is wisdom  

 

 

IMO, a good post consists of more than what a person believes or consists of a previously held opinion.  You are 100% wrong if you think anything but the blood of Christ shed on our behalf

will do more for legalism than freedom in Christ.

 

 

 

to error on the side of caution is wisdom 

 

Well that is certainly not widom found in scripture.

 

That, is no compass at all IMO

 

IMO, Based on what you just said, yours is a terrible post? 

 

But I keep under my body, and bring it into subjection:  lest that by any means, when I have preached to others, I should myself be a castaway.  1 Corinthians 9:27

 

It is Biblical to watch the things we do, so we won't wind up being cast into outer darkness at the final judgment. 

[Guest Butero]

 

 

No way Micheal.  No way.  How do you account for Peter's sermon in the book of Acts?  How do you account for Jesus sending out disciples two by two?

 

How do you account for the missionary journeys of Paul and others?

 

The Bible does not say they lived in a commune...they shared all things...does not mean they lived in a commune...if I share the eggs with my neighbor

that our chickens lay, does not mean we are living together

 

It is recorded in the Book of Acts, that 3000 people were converted to Christ that day alone...where did they all live?  In the cramped inner city core?  Outside the

walls refugee camp style?  Maybe someone had an extra big house?  

 

Actually, the Book of Acts records And every day, in the temple and from house to house, they kept right on teaching and preaching Jesus as the Christ.

 

They preached in the temple (prob the courtyard), met in HOUSES (plural) and KEPT ON TEACHING AND PREACHING.

 

They did not segregate themselves like the Amish, they did not all wear the same clothes like the Amish, they did not set up a commune like you suggest and further

and the most important, they SPREAD THE GOSPEL.

 

A few facts would be nice next time around please.

 

 

1. The early believers did not sell all their possessions. Even though it may seem that the phrases “had all things in common” or “selling their property” or “all things were common property” means that the early believers sold everything and had a common pot, the context immediately qualifies these general statements. The believers continued to live and meet in their own homes. Craig Blomberg says in his study Neither Poverty nor Riches¹:

Verses 43-47 are dominated by highly marked imperfect tense verbs, whereas one normally expects aorists [once-for-all actions] in historical narrative. There is no once-for-all divestiture of property in view here, but periodic acts of charity as needs arose

- See more at: http://tifwe.org/research/does-acts-2-5-teach-socialism/#sthash.dZVuopbO.dpuf

 

I predict a course on Biblical history may be in your near future...that is if the aliens don't get us first

 

disclaimer:  the blue background is most likely a copy/paste block mechanism as the page for the article is white..

Some of the leadership in the church sold all of their possessions and pooled the resources, but they did that to spread the gospel.  Nobody was forced to do that. 

 

The Amish people are following the command to come out from among the world and be separate and touch not the unclean thing.  Do you really think there are many people in America that haven't heard about Jesus?  I am not saying they have all heard strong doctrinal messages, but I mean people that know nothing about the Lord, have never heard of him?  When the church was first formed, there were many that hadn't heard of Jesus, and knew nothing about salvation.  I don't think that the fact the Amish people don't go around preaching everywhere makes them in error.  Most Christians don't go around as traveling evangelists.  In additon to that, the Amish people just living their lives are a witness.  People take note of how they live, and they want to know more, as I did.  Most of the Christian church today has become so much like the world, there is nothing to draw anyone to them.  You can't even tell them from your good moral unbeliever.  That is why I am also drawn to the family in Arkansas with the 19 children.  They are living their faith.  Others say they are Christians, and they do have a form or religion, but you don't see that saltiness or light.  The Amish people are truly a light in a world of darkness.   

 

 

 

That is true.  No one forced them and that is the point.

 

Yes.  I most definately and absolutely believe there are men, women and children who do not know and have not heard.  And more so all of the time.

 

Most people do not evangelize?  Well then  who is going to tell their neighbor?  Our neighbors know what we believe...the lady next door went to church ALL her life but never

accepted Jesus until a few weeks ago because someone from my home witnessed to her.  There are churches every where but many no longer preach the gospel

 

I'm not taking it further with you Butero because we both know where that will lead.  Suffice it to say that the Bible does not tell us to hide away, live in communes or legalize

Christianity so that some can be better Christians in their own eyes than others.

 

Seriousl, that is my only response to your post.

 

If we stay focused, perhaps we can avoid the usual conflicts?  You mentioned evangelizing in light of people we come in contact with.  The Amish people are no differen't in that respect.  They have the people in their own community, as well as all those who visit their businesses.  In that way, they are really no differen't than any of the rest of us.  They do have chances to share their faith, and as I said, their lives show their faith.  It is like the old saying that a person may be the only Bible some will ever read.  I see Jesus in them, and it is obvious others do as well. 

[alphaparticle]

 

I've noticed several people holding up the amish a some kind of  model community lately, and I have to admit, I find this baffling. This is a group that shuns those who leave the community, that demand adherence to a strict set of complicated rules to be in good standing at the community and the thought that God will allow them into heaven based on how well they do at following these rules. There are rules about how men have to wear their beards, the allowed color of clothing, against belts. Their young people are poorly educated, so that if they do want to leave, they are at a huge disadvantage. Not to mention, they do not evangelize as we are commanded to. I also find it strange that these people are lauded as a model on an internet forum, which they are forbidden to use. It's not a matter of personal choice here, they are forbidden to by their community if they want to remain in the place they grew up, around their family, for the only life they were really prepared for at all. What is so fantastic about this? If you crave simplicity, why not just create that? If you feel that wearing simpler more covering clothes would be better, why not just do that? I don't think holding this group up though is a good idea.

 

Check out this below:

http://web.missouri....udduthfs00.html

 

"Indeed, the Amish believe that the entire purpose of this life is to prepare for the life to come by overcoming their corrupt human nature. Not only does this process take most people an entire lifetime to complete, one's salvation must always be in question (Hartman). A person overcomes his or her sinfulness by yielding to the church authority structure, a concept known as Gelassenheit (Kraybill 102). If one obeys the church leaders, who are God's mouthpieces, or the rules those leaders establish under divine guidance, one is disobeying God Himself. To borrow a Buddhist term, the church is the Mahayana, or "great vehicle," used to bring people to salvation, and all those not on board have no hope of achieving eternal life. It is only available through the guidance and authority of the Amish faith."

 

One obeys church leaders, if they don't, they are disobeying God Himself. This is disturbing.

I have spent a lot of time looking into the Amish beliefs.  There have been times I have considered converting to being Amish, or at least Beachy Amish.  Recently I watched a video at YouTube about the Amish that was produced by the BBC.  There was one Amish family that consented to allowing them to be filmed because they felt like they should spread the faith.  This was in opposition to the elders opposition to being filmed and put them at risk of being put out of the church. 

 

For the most part, I agree with the way they live.  What surprised me was that they all knew their Bible.  Even the children were smart in the Word.  The family was in Biblical order.  When I started watching the program, my first concern was over the family choosing to disobey the elders, as that is rebellion, and rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft.  At the same time, the reason they disobeyed the elders was to obey Christ's command to share the gospel, and Christ is higher than human leaders. 

 

There are reasons for what they teach.  I don't necessarily agree all of these things are necessary to salvation, but there is nothing wrong with them.  I have always opposed compulsory education, so I have no issue with Amish children not always being that far along in their studies, but I would point out that I went to school with High School seniors that could barely read, yet they still got a Diploma.  They just put those struggling into easy classes, and push them along.  They don't have cars for two reasons.  One reason is that they feel it is better that everyone be a close knit community, and limiting the distance they can easily travel keeps them that way.  The other reason is so they won't be prideful over their automobile.  Do I feel this is necessary?  No, but neither do I have an issue with it. 

 

The Amish people don't have electricity, and that protects them from the bad influences of the media, as well as time wasting activities.  I come in contact with Amish people while traveling in Ohio, Indiana and Pennsylvania, and I have a great deal of respect for them.  I do believe the way they live is much more Biblical than the way most people live.  Yes, they do put people out of the church for rebellion against the authorities, and they are not to eat with those people or have close contact with them, but they know the rules.  None of this comes by surprise.  My view is that any church has a right to place any rules on the congregation they want, and this is a free nation and if we don't like them, we can go elsewhere.  If we choose to be part of a strict community like the Amish, then we should abide by their rules. 

 

I mentioned the distinction with them and the Beachy Amish.  They have many of the same standards, but don't shun all modern conveniences, like cars and electricity.  I feel like I would be more likely to join that type of Amish if I was to go that far.  They also do believe in evangelizing, unlike the older order of Amish.  You say you don't understand people admiring the Amish because of a list of things you don't agree with.  In my case, I have no problem with any church being extremely legalistic, and even find it preferable to the liberal churches.  In my case, the things that bother you don't bother me. 

 

The part that I find offensive about 'legalism' is when the following of minutiae is tied up with salvation. If people choose to do such and such, go off the grid, whatever, that is their business. When they form communities that demand that everyone do that, or that they might go to hell, I have a problem with that.

 

I also find the linking between shunning technology with 'saltiness' or 'light' or 'fruits'. These seem, on the surface, fairly unrelated to me.

[Guest Butero]

 

 

I've noticed several people holding up the amish a some kind of  model community lately, and I have to admit, I find this baffling. This is a group that shuns those who leave the community, that demand adherence to a strict set of complicated rules to be in good standing at the community and the thought that God will allow them into heaven based on how well they do at following these rules. There are rules about how men have to wear their beards, the allowed color of clothing, against belts. Their young people are poorly educated, so that if they do want to leave, they are at a huge disadvantage. Not to mention, they do not evangelize as we are commanded to. I also find it strange that these people are lauded as a model on an internet forum, which they are forbidden to use. It's not a matter of personal choice here, they are forbidden to by their community if they want to remain in the place they grew up, around their family, for the only life they were really prepared for at all. What is so fantastic about this? If you crave simplicity, why not just create that? If you feel that wearing simpler more covering clothes would be better, why not just do that? I don't think holding this group up though is a good idea.

 

Check out this below:

http://web.missouri....udduthfs00.html

 

"Indeed, the Amish believe that the entire purpose of this life is to prepare for the life to come by overcoming their corrupt human nature. Not only does this process take most people an entire lifetime to complete, one's salvation must always be in question (Hartman). A person overcomes his or her sinfulness by yielding to the church authority structure, a concept known as Gelassenheit (Kraybill 102). If one obeys the church leaders, who are God's mouthpieces, or the rules those leaders establish under divine guidance, one is disobeying God Himself. To borrow a Buddhist term, the church is the Mahayana, or "great vehicle," used to bring people to salvation, and all those not on board have no hope of achieving eternal life. It is only available through the guidance and authority of the Amish faith."

 

One obeys church leaders, if they don't, they are disobeying God Himself. This is disturbing.

I have spent a lot of time looking into the Amish beliefs.  There have been times I have considered converting to being Amish, or at least Beachy Amish.  Recently I watched a video at YouTube about the Amish that was produced by the BBC.  There was one Amish family that consented to allowing them to be filmed because they felt like they should spread the faith.  This was in opposition to the elders opposition to being filmed and put them at risk of being put out of the church. 

 

For the most part, I agree with the way they live.  What surprised me was that they all knew their Bible.  Even the children were smart in the Word.  The family was in Biblical order.  When I started watching the program, my first concern was over the family choosing to disobey the elders, as that is rebellion, and rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft.  At the same time, the reason they disobeyed the elders was to obey Christ's command to share the gospel, and Christ is higher than human leaders. 

 

There are reasons for what they teach.  I don't necessarily agree all of these things are necessary to salvation, but there is nothing wrong with them.  I have always opposed compulsory education, so I have no issue with Amish children not always being that far along in their studies, but I would point out that I went to school with High School seniors that could barely read, yet they still got a Diploma.  They just put those struggling into easy classes, and push them along.  They don't have cars for two reasons.  One reason is that they feel it is better that everyone be a close knit community, and limiting the distance they can easily travel keeps them that way.  The other reason is so they won't be prideful over their automobile.  Do I feel this is necessary?  No, but neither do I have an issue with it. 

 

The Amish people don't have electricity, and that protects them from the bad influences of the media, as well as time wasting activities.  I come in contact with Amish people while traveling in Ohio, Indiana and Pennsylvania, and I have a great deal of respect for them.  I do believe the way they live is much more Biblical than the way most people live.  Yes, they do put people out of the church for rebellion against the authorities, and they are not to eat with those people or have close contact with them, but they know the rules.  None of this comes by surprise.  My view is that any church has a right to place any rules on the congregation they want, and this is a free nation and if we don't like them, we can go elsewhere.  If we choose to be part of a strict community like the Amish, then we should abide by their rules. 

 

I mentioned the distinction with them and the Beachy Amish.  They have many of the same standards, but don't shun all modern conveniences, like cars and electricity.  I feel like I would be more likely to join that type of Amish if I was to go that far.  They also do believe in evangelizing, unlike the older order of Amish.  You say you don't understand people admiring the Amish because of a list of things you don't agree with.  In my case, I have no problem with any church being extremely legalistic, and even find it preferable to the liberal churches.  In my case, the things that bother you don't bother me. 

 

The part that I find offensive about 'legalism' is when the following of minutiae is tied up with salvation. If people choose to do such and such, go off the grid, whatever, that is their business. When they form communities that demand that everyone do that, or that they might go to hell, I have a problem with that.

 

I also find the linking between shunning technology with 'saltiness' or 'light' or 'fruits'. These seem, on the surface, fairly unrelated to me.

 

They don't seem to tie their lifestyle to salvation, at least to the point of saying everyone outside their community is lost.  It is not the shunning and lack of technology in and of itself that is salt and light to me, but the fact they have really come out from among the world, along with the heathen culture.