1525-2025: 500 years of the Anabaptist movement

[Sudsy]

Why not go one or two steps further and hire a pastor who has no Christian or Canadian background (say an Indian Hindu) but who has no issue with Christian beliefs? And then only hold on to one or two cultural distinctives and treat everyone the same as humans? If the goal is to be all-inclusive...

I think you know the answer to that.

[Soloist]

We know what Christ said about hirelings…. Won’t find anything in regard to the historic or Anabaptist church participating in paid pastors. So you lost us right there, Sudsy.

Not true as probably the largest Anabaptist churches have paid pastors.

Size is an indicator of apathy in my experience.

[Sudsy]

We know what Christ said about hirelings…. Won’t find anything in regard to the historic or Anabaptist church participating in paid pastors. So you lost us right there, Sudsy.

Not true as probably the largest Anabaptist churches have paid pastors.

Size is an indicator of apathy in my experience.

Agree. Those who are apathetic about soul winning will remain small.

[Soloist]

Not true as probably the largest Anabaptist churches have paid pastors.

Size is an indicator of apathy in my experience.

Agree. Those who are apathetic about soul winning will remain small.

I think you know what I meant.

Your idea of soul winning doesn’t win them to the Kingdom.

There is a certain Tampico group I’m thinking of with a church of 800 odd. I would hazard a guess you would decide that wasn’t the right kind of soul winning.

[Sudsy]

Size is an indicator of apathy in my experience.

Agree. Those who are apathetic about soul winning will remain small.

I think you know what I meant.

Your idea of soul winning doesn’t win them to the Kingdom.

There is a certain Tampico group I’m thinking of with a church of 800 odd. I would hazard a guess you would decide that wasn’t the right kind of soul winning.

And how would you describe how my idea of soul winning does not win them to the Kingdom ? What method are you using and what are the results ?

[Soloist]

And how would you describe how my idea of soul winning does not win them to the Kingdom ? What method are you using and what are the results ?

We’ve been over this before and I don’t really see a point. You harbor unrepentant sin and you see no need to repent of it.
Leading people into following an idea of Jesus without true repentance will not result in Jesus being their King nor enter into the kingdom.

I’m sure you agree with my second point to some degree and then the argument ends up being how no one obeys perfectly. I agree but that isn’t an excuse to disobey.
Sudsy, you have eyes for a different kingdom then I and we will continue to disagree.

[Judas Maccabeus]

By 1550, the majority of Anabaptists believed and practiced...
1. love towards enemies (non-resistance)
2. separation unto God (non-conformity)
3. sharing extra resources with the poor as well as for the promotion of the Gospel (non-accumulation)
4. a voluntary but disciplined association of believers (pure church)
5. separation of church and state (two-kingdoms)
6. taking the Gospel to those who have not yet heard (evangelism/missions)
7. baptism upon confession of faith and walking in newness of life (believer's baptism)

Few others at that time period adhered to all seven of these points.

I think all seven of these are alive and well in various pockets of Anabaptist descendants today. But unfortunately, many Anabaptist churches today allow members in the church who do not embrace all these tenets. I think this is very sad. I'd like to see more renewal movements taking place among Anabaptists.

In reality. 1 and 2 (and to a lesser extent 4 and 5) are our "distinctives." You will find the others in various other movements , but by and large if you start expressing a belief in 1 & 2 (particularly 1) in most of the so called "Bible Believing" church, you will find yourself an outcast, and very quickly. Maybe not officially, but certainly socially.

In my experience, this 'outcast' thing was not evident. I have been part of local churches that have an influx of believers that are non-resistant in their belief and that has not been a big issue socially. Perhaps because there is more tolerance in some churches for varied beliefs from what is deemed to be essential beliefs. Currently our city has a influx of Mennonites into a local Baptist church where they are being welcomed and given roles in the church. They are socially accepted but they also are not wearing conservative type Mennonite clothes or trying to get converts to their non-resistant belief, so this might be different if they were.

When I first joined an Evangelistic Baptist church, there where some Mennonites that joined about the same time and they, too, were socially welcomed and given roles. There was no effort to get them to change their non-resistance belief but there was a certain effort by some to pursuade them of the TULIP Calvinist view. I don't recall any conversions to that view. It was not a big deal as the church was focused on reaching the lost.

We have a friend who was a faithful Presbyterian church member and her church recently closed. Some joined the Baptist church and she decided to go UMC. My wife recently asked her how this was working out and she had a very positive reply and especially mentioned how she felt so welcome.

I recall home bible studies where aside from what was deemed to be a salvation issue there was open discussion and varying views that did not break fellowship. I think it depends on how dogmatic one believes on certain beliefs and whether they are essential beliefs or not.

You have got to be Canadian. If you walked into an SBC church in the US, and even hinted at nonresistance you would likely be given the cold shoulder. It would be similar in most churches of this sort. The evangelical church is one of the most fertile recruiting ground for the military. Veterans are publicly honored for “their service “ numerous times during the year.

If people with such divergent views exsist in a congregation, what does it teach without stepping on someone’s toes?

My take on it is “not much.”

[Josh]

You could make a “multicultural” church and it would appeal to about 3% of people. There is nothing wrong with that. But it should be obvious that 29 out of 30 churches are not going to be multicultural, because most people aren’t comfortable with that.

If I want to be a missionary to, say, Congo, I don’t go there and then try to plant a “diverse” church, and complain that too many Congolese are attending, and then try to recruit some Canadians, some Poles, a Chinese person, an Uzbek family, and then go ahead and conduct services in English instead of French for the sake of “diversity”. Even if I did get such a church established, it wouldn’t survive past several generations (unless DR Congo transforms into a Canadian-Polish-Sino-Uzbek society, which seems unlikely). Best case it would become some kind of weird ethnic ghetto.

[NedFlanders]

We know what Christ said about hirelings…. Won’t find anything in regard to the historic or Anabaptist church participating in paid pastors. So you lost us right there, Sudsy.

Not true as probably the largest Anabaptist churches have paid pastors.

In context of this thread I was speaking of the 1525-1550 Anabaptist’s. Now if you could find any proof of one paid pastor from that time period or the early church I would be very shocked.

[Ken]

In reality. 1 and 2 (and to a lesser extent 4 and 5) are our "distinctives." You will find the others in various other movements , but by and large if you start expressing a belief in 1 & 2 (particularly 1) in most of the so called "Bible Believing" church, you will find yourself an outcast, and very quickly. Maybe not officially, but certainly socially.

In my experience, this 'outcast' thing was not evident. I have been part of local churches that have an influx of believers that are non-resistant in their belief and that has not been a big issue socially. Perhaps because there is more tolerance in some churches for varied beliefs from what is deemed to be essential beliefs. Currently our city has a influx of Mennonites into a local Baptist church where they are being welcomed and given roles in the church. They are socially accepted but they also are not wearing conservative type Mennonite clothes or trying to get converts to their non-resistant belief, so this might be different if they were.

When I first joined an Evangelistic Baptist church, there where some Mennonites that joined about the same time and they, too, were socially welcomed and given roles. There was no effort to get them to change their non-resistance belief but there was a certain effort by some to pursuade them of the TULIP Calvinist view. I don't recall any conversions to that view. It was not a big deal as the church was focused on reaching the lost.

We have a friend who was a faithful Presbyterian church member and her church recently closed. Some joined the Baptist church and she decided to go UMC. My wife recently asked her how this was working out and she had a very positive reply and especially mentioned how she felt so welcome.

I recall home bible studies where aside from what was deemed to be a salvation issue there was open discussion and varying views that did not break fellowship. I think it depends on how dogmatic one believes on certain beliefs and whether they are essential beliefs or not.

You have got to be Canadian. If you walked into an SBC church in the US, and even hinted at nonresistance you would likely be given the cold shoulder. It would be similar in most churches of this sort. The evangelical church is one of the most fertile recruiting ground for the military. Veterans are publicly honored for “their service “ numerous times during the year.

If people with such divergent views exsist in a congregation, what does it teach without stepping on someone’s toes?

My take on it is “not much.”

I've been in a lot of those churches.

They would probably say: "well, Bless your heart, what are you, some kind of northern liberal?"