Anyone curious about real Amish??

[Guest P_W]

I decided to add one more point that goes along with this Scripture.  The Amish do not believe they are to rely on others in any way and this includes the government.  They do pay taxes, but they do not draw Social Security, and it would be shameful to them to take food stamps, or any kind of government assistance.  They pay into the system, but never take back.  They have a strong belief in obeying all laws and to always carry their own weight, never being a burden to anyone else.  

 

In their communities, when there is a need, they rally together and take care of each other.  It is not surprising to see a group of Amish men building a barn together, or joining together to fight fires.  They would never use things such as nursing homes, as this would also go against their beliefs, and some of them have trouble understanding why many Christians seem to abandon their aged to the care of strangers.  They have a remarkable system of community and seeing to the needs of others.  I think this is much like the habits of the early church that we read of in our Bibles.

 

Shalom, Prair

[ajchurney]

prairwarur,

About the German, Amish do not speak the common German language, but what they call "dutch" which is not the dutch of Netherlands, but "Pennsylvania dutch", the word dutch as a derivative of Deutche (German). My son is a German language major in college and he can assure you that the two dialects are vastly different. In the Amish schools, they actually teach a little bit of the High German, but not enough to grasp a large portion of the vocabulary in the German Bible. Even the supposed experts in High German anongst the Amish are not as well versed as my son is in the language. The situation bears similarity to how the Roman Catholics once read all Bible passages in the church in Latin. The Catholic schools taught some Latin, but not enough for the Bible readings to be truly edifying and fully understood.

Please allow me to agree with you that there are many absolutely godly and wonderful Amish people. Your story is one of many I have both heard, and been involved in. I drive some Amish folks to visit with English people that they have met and stay in contact with. Many Amish folks are kind and very pleasant to be around. It is not good people that I have any problem with, it is bad religion.

I am sorry if you disagree with my pointing out of specific Amish doctrines which I believe are false, legalistic in the extreme, or oppressive. I believe that I stated before that I am not against Amish people, but only against false doctrine and practice which exists. I would not even criticize those things, if it were not for the fact that they are being taught and enforced in the name of Christ, and that makes it the true universal church's job to point it out. Being Amish as a culture in and of itself is quaint and unusual. The issue is that one is forced out of the Christian Church of the Amish for breaking ranks on purely cultural points. One person in particular feels that this behavior is fine, and it matters nothing at all how controlling and legalistic church leaders want to be. I heartily disagree, but that is part of the reason we have discussion forums, isn't it?

The truth is that knowing a couple of nice Amish families tells you about as much as knowing a couple of nice mormon, muslim, or scientology families. I know that Amish are German Baptists at their root, and adhere to orthodoxy concerning Christ. My point in comparing them to those false religionists is that there are nice, kind, friendly people of all persuasions. Since I am much more familiar with the actual doctrines and practices of the Amish church, I can tell you some things you may not want to hear, but they are true. I live in the center of a huge Amish community and most of my closest friends grew up Amish. I work with and for them. 

Edited March 14, 2014 by ajchurney

[ajchurney]

I decided to add one more point that goes along with this Scripture.  The Amish do not believe they are to rely on others in any way and this includes the government.  They do pay taxes, but they do not draw Social Security, and it would be shameful to them to take food stamps, or any kind of government assistance.  They pay into the system, but never take back.  They have a strong belief in obeying all laws and to always carry their own weight, never being a burden to anyone else.  

 

In their communities, when there is a need, they rally together and take care of each other.  It is not surprising to see a group of Amish men building a barn together, or joining together to fight fires.  They would never use things such as nursing homes, as this would also go against their beliefs, and some of them have trouble understanding why many Christians seem to abandon their aged to the care of strangers.  They have a remarkable system of community and seeing to the needs of others.  I think this is much like the habits of the early church that we read of in our Bibles.

 

Shalom, Prair

Prair,

again, if I fail to mention the positive aspects of the Amish community, I apologize. The Amish are a very tight-knit group. They also have their own system of health insurance where everyone chips into a fund, and very often have fund-raising dinners and such to help needy people, usually medically oriented. There are things that they do which the more "modern" churches can learn from, even be shamed by, as far as the strength of community that is evidenced. It was not my intention to negate these sort of things with the negative aspects that came up. Amish culture is complicated, mostly because of the use of scripture to justify their particular choices. 

Thanks for your insightful comments, Andy

[Guest Butero]

Lets suppose that you are right, and the Amish people have positions that are "false, legalistic in the extreme and oppressive."  I am not saying I agree with that assessment, but only playing devil's advocate.  Even if that is the case, who is to say that it is wrong for people to choose to voluntarily place themselves in such a religion?  Who is to say that people can't be happy choosing to live in a religion like that?  Everyone doesn't think alike, and what makes one person happy doesn't make another person happy.  I have read a lot of posts attacking legalism, and the negative ways it has effected them, but did it ever occur to anyone that there might be people that look favorably on legalistic churches and want to be part of them? 

 

There was an atheist who used to be a member of WB.  I spoke to him behind the scenes, and he told me that he was once a Christian, and part of a very strict church.  After years of being in that church, and believing the message being preached, the minister did a 180 and went away from what people would call legalism, and became very liberal.  I can relate to that because I experienced the exact same thing.  This caused him to completely lose his faith, and abandon the faith.  In my case, I lost faith in the church, not God, and I tried to tell him that the problem wasn't God, but people.  There was no evidence he ever came back to God, and this was the result of a move away from something he believed in to reach more people.  As for me, I never quit God, but I have no confidence in the modern church.  Had my Pastor remained legalistic, I would still be in his church to this day, if he was still Pastoring.  In his case, his change didn't work, and he no longer has a church. 

 

There is no one size fits all church.  I will never attend a liberal, come as you are church.  People can preach it's virtues, and attack legalism all they want, and it won't sway me.  The only kind of church I will ever attend will be what is considered legalistic, with traditional hymns, formal dress and a KJV Bible.  I couldn't care less if anyone agrees with me on that or not.  If I can't find that kind of church, I won't go, period.  I am not trying to rid the world of churches that are liberal, sing praise songs on the wall with the same lyrics over and over for half an hour, where people dress like the world and use modern Bibles.  If that is your thing, so be it, but I want no part of it personally. 

 

On to the Amish.  People that were raised in that religion likely want to remain in it.  Are there some who want out?  I expect there are.  There is no one size fits all religion for everyone, and I don't believe it is my place to call them out for being false, legalistic in the extreme and oppressive."  There is no perfect Christian church, and where you might feel your church is superior to the Amish in one place, I am sure the Amish are better in other areas.  Everyone likes to point to Romans and how we aren't to judge another man's servant, but they fail to notice how that if a person esteems something unclean, when they abstain from that thing, they do so as unto the Lord and are accepted by God.  It is a two way street. 

[ajchurney]

Butero,

Your devotion to legalism and oppressive leadership is duly noted. There are indeed all kinds of preferences in Christianity, including yours. 

[Guest Butero]

Butero,

Your devotion to legalism and oppressive leadership is duly noted. There are indeed all kinds of preferences in Christianity, including yours. 

Would it be fair to also think there are people that are happy in the Amish community living under what you call extreme legalism? 

[ajchurney]

 

Butero,

Your devotion to legalism and oppressive leadership is duly noted. There are indeed all kinds of preferences in Christianity, including yours. 

Would it be fair to also think there are people that are happy in the Amish community living under what you call extreme legalism? 

 

Actually.....YES!! People are happy in many situations. There are happy prostitutes, happy Roman Catholics, happy Methodists, happy Buddhists......what is your point here? Some men are comfortable in a prison cell, does this mean that is their best situation and without "bondage"? There is never an excuse to violate the instruction of scripture and "lord it over" the flock of Jesus Christ. Each man's head is Christ, and not some other fallible man. We encourage, instruct, and lovingly correct one another, but NEVER EVER are we to control, manipulate, or oppress another into doing the "right thing". God ordained human government to "bear the sword". The NT church has been given a clear process of discipline to follow, and I do not see control and manipulation in any of it. Again, you obviously have every right to your own opinion, as completely unbalanced and extreme as it is. I am NOT a libertine, nor a proponent of cheap grace. I condone no violation of true interpretation of scripture. Neither do I condone expecting others to go BEYOND the scope of scripture "just to be safe". That is as dangerous as the other, but you fail to see it, and I obviously am futile in my effort to point out this danger. It is foolish to think you are saved by grace, then kept by your own legalistic system of works and rules, and not by the same empowering Spirit of grace that saved you (against the Love of God there is NO LAW). The point of Christianity is to strive to submit your whole self to the influence of the indwelling Spirit and live by His leading and empowerment, not by outward rules and laws. This is why the New Covenant is superior to the Old. Oppressively controlling people form the outside is antithetical to them being empowered by New Life within them. We are here to encourage and exhort one another to GOOD WORKS, not to be the judge and jury of minutia of minor details of lives. All I can say is that those with a "legalistic" approach to the faith had better be found encouraging and exhorting the good works more than they criticize the perceived shortcomings of the brethren. I also believe that those who extol the "freedom" aspects of the Gospel had better do the same, as Paul pointing out that freedom is NOT (may it never be!) in order to continue in the old way of the sinful flesh, but always to walk by the Spirit, in the new man, with a renewed mind, so as not to fulfill the lusts of the flesh (which you obviously and rightly detest, Butero!). I believe in true holiness and sanctification, but not some man-made hypocritical religious facade of it!! 

I hope that you and I can somehow find agreement in these things, as we both, I believe, genuinely love God and want to follow Christ. 

Let me say one more thing concerning the Amish. I DO NOT want to bring truth to the Amish that dictates anything to them about how they dress, drive, or any of that. All I am interested in is that they KNOW God and KNOW His Holy Spirit working mightily and effectively in their lives...PERIOD!!! When the outward rules hinder and suppress the Person and Work of the Holy Spirit among them, then there is a serious problem. If you think you know enough about the doctrine and practice of that organization to speak with real knowledge on the subject, then great. I hear you on your general thoughts on legalism. What are your thoughts on banning prayer meetings, discouraging individual  or small group study of scripture, forbidding tongues, interpretation or prophesy, and the suchlike? Do you not think that NT is also quite clear on these things (do NOT forbid tongues, do NOT quench the Spirit, do NOT despise prophesies....)?

Edited March 15, 2014 by ajchurney

[Guest Butero]

I was content to leave things be with your last post, but then I saw you asked me a direct question, so I will try to answer it.  My personal view on prayer meetings and Bible studies are they are good.  I never have nor would I ever discourage anyone from studying scripture.  I have always encouraged it.  I have always encouraged people to check to see if what I say is Biblical.  I am full gospel, so I believe in speaking in tongues, and interpreting them if we are speaking of the gift of tongues.  That is my personal opinion.  Even so, I can't impose that on others.  I know a lot of Baptists that believe tongues have passed away and they would likely put someone out of the church for speaking in tongues.  I have heard stories of that very thing happening.  I don't believe like that, so my advise to such a one who is thrown out of such a church is find a church to your liking.  The same thing applies to Bible studies.  If you believe God is leading you to have one, and your church forbids it, find another church.  What is stopping anyone from leaving?  Yes, there is pressure to conform, but people still have a choice.  I am only supporting the choice. 

 

A long time ago, I came up with this idea where everyone could learn to accept our differences and stop being judgmental on either side.  Have one huge church in each city with many auditoriums.  For an example, the church of Charlotte.  In that single Christian Church, you could have services to everyone's liking, from the most formal and tradition to the most casual and modern.  There could be services for the most legalistic and the anti-legalists.  In doing so, you still have one Christian church, where everyone belongs, but nobody is forcing their own convictions on everyone else.  The wheat and the tares can dwell side by side, along with the wolves and the sheep.  God will do the sorting at the final judgment.  Of course, this will never happen, but the point is to stop trying to make everyone else into your image and just accept the differences.  I will never like contemporary Christian music, casual dress services, replacing traditional hymns with worship choruses, and new Bible translations.  Others will never like southern gospel music, formal dress services, traditional hymns and the KJV Bible.  No amount of fighting will ever change that.  If one side takes over a church, they won't keep the entire congregation in tact. 

 

Lets take a look at "Lording over God's people."  If I am in a church that insists I go along with new Bible translations, contemporary worship services, and casual dress, they are doing the exact same thing the churches labeled as legalistic are doing in reverse.  They are running the church in that fashion, and saying it is my way or the highway.  Again, I only want to be able to decide for myself which church to follow, and which path to follow.  I believe the Amish people have that same right. 

[ajchurney]

I am actually in agreement with your post. I do not think that you sufficiently answered the "Lording over" question, however. perhaps this should be addressed om a different thread altogether. I am glad for the discussion, as I actually do understand where you are coming from much better. My disagreement is in the area of HOW this control is carried out, I guess. 

[Guest Butero]

That is a good question.  We know a church has the right to go so far as to turn one over to Satan if they get out of line.  We know God gave people positions of authority in the church.  I don't know exactly what the line would be where someone would be guilty of lording over God's people?  One could make the case that any control whatsoever with any threat of punishment or being put out of the church was a violation of that teaching, but that would mean Paul went too far himself.  Anything short of complete anarchy could bring this charge.  I am not sure where you would draw the line.  It is kind of like the cult label some have been throwing around.  One can make the case that nearly any religion is a cult, when you base it on the Dictionary definition of a cult.  The same thing can be done here with the term "lording over."