1525-2025: 500 years of the Anabaptist movement

[Sudsy]

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.

I see you avoided my second question especially.

If it is your belief that I 'harbor unrepentant sin' and I 'see no need to repent of it' (and I take this to refer to D&R) then it would follow that in your opinion I am not saved and will end up in hell for all eternity, right ? Is this how you regard my salvation ? Yes or no ? We probably do have eyes for a different kingdom if you believe no D&R professing believer will enter the Kingdom.

[Sudsy]

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.

I don't know where you come up with your stats, Josh, like ' about 3% of people' and '29 out of 30 churches' . I guess here in our area we are real exceptions when we have a blend of races and cultures that come together all recognizing one another as children of God and believe our walk with the Lord rises above these 'comforts' and cultural distinctives. To me, it is a little taste of heaven.

It is amazing what God can do to bring His children together if they are willing to let go of their earthy distinctions. Perhaps it is a matter of how heavenly minded we are and willing to begin experiencing here and now a taste of what heaven will be like.

[Valerie]

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 go to what is considered a mega evangelical Church. Mega because it grew from originally a Bible study of business men that got together. In the earliest days of the church (the book of Acts) reported as many as 3000 souls being added to the Church in one day upon hearing Truth. God has no problem with large growth as long as Truth is taught there. Today of course there is an allowance for the various interpretations predominantly spun off out of Reformation era.

I don't think "we" can know how the thousands upon thousands of Evangelical churches conduct themselves. I can say I've gone and been active in Evangelical congregations small _ large, in California & Ohio. Many churches in 50 years since I first made decision to follow Christ. I can honestly say not ONE of these churches hinted AT all of being a recruiting ground for military. Never encouraged. They did not interpret Scripture exactly same as Anabaptist which I don't think make the claim of being infallible. The ONLY time in any of these churches military attendees were thanked for being willing to lay down there lives for our free country was the Sunday before Memorial Day.

My present church does not fly American flags

We cannot, any of us, profess to know about thousands of churches because your statement is dead wrong in ALL my experience. Am I so rare I just happened to stumble on the handful of churches that do not fit your description? That would be so odd.

[Soloist]

I see you avoided my second question especially.

If it is your belief that I 'harbor unrepentant sin' and I 'see no need to repent of it' (and I take this to refer to D&R) then it would follow that in your opinion I am not saved and will end up in hell for all eternity, right ? Is this how you regard my salvation ? Yes or no ? We probably do have eyes for a different kingdom if you believe no D&R professing believer will enter the Kingdom.

I don’t believe that adulterers will enter the kingdom of God and I stand by the words Jesus spoke.

Your second question, I don’t keep track of numbers and numbers indicate a belief that salvation is a 1 time event that I don’t agree with. You are saved, you are being saved, and you will be saved.

Mat 28:19  Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
Mat 28:20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

I’ll stick with this.

[Sudsy]

I see you avoided my second question especially.

If it is your belief that I 'harbor unrepentant sin' and I 'see no need to repent of it' (and I take this to refer to D&R) then it would follow that in your opinion I am not saved and will end up in hell for all eternity, right ? Is this how you regard my salvation ? Yes or no ? We probably do have eyes for a different kingdom if you believe no D&R professing believer will enter the Kingdom.

I don’t believe that adulterers will enter the kingdom of God and I stand by the words Jesus spoke.

Your second question, I don’t keep track of numbers and numbers indicate a belief that salvation is a 1 time event that I don’t agree with. You are saved, you are being saved, and you will be saved.

Mat 28:19  Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
Mat 28:20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

I’ll stick with this.

I agree that Jesus said adulterers will not enter the kingdom of God. I also believe in forgiveness and do not agree with being in an unforgiven state of 'perpetual adultery'. This is one area where we differ. Although we agree that salvation is past, present and future, we likely do not agree on the security of a believer. I believe the only way to forfeit your salvation is to totally quit believing in what Jesus did to save us from our sins. My guess is that you believe there are a number of sins we can commit and without seeking forgiveness, these will also keep us from the Kingdom. I suspect killing another person for whatever reason, D&R and perhaps other things you understand as sinning will cause a believer to forfeit eternal life.

I, too, 'stand by the words Jesus spoke'. It is our understanding and convictions on what Jesus spoke that differs in some areas. We could both refer to various scriptures to support our views. That, in itself, does not mean we have 'rightly divided the word of truth'.

Well, nuf said for me on this. Regarding the list being assembled of Anabaptist beliefs I agree with most of them but like the first one what is stated in brackets is not how I understand what is meant by 'love your enemies'.

[Soloist]

I agree that Jesus said adulterers will not enter the kingdom of God. I also believe in forgiveness and do not agree with being in an unforgiven state of 'perpetual adultery'. This is one area where we differ. Although we agree that salvation is past, present and future, we likely do not agree on the security of a believer. I believe the only way to forfeit your salvation is to totally quit believing in what Jesus did to save us from our sins. My guess is that you believe there are a number of sins we can commit and without seeking forgiveness, these will also keep us from the Kingdom. I suspect killing another person for whatever reason, D&R and perhaps other things you understand as sinning will cause a believer to forfeit eternal life.

I, too, 'stand by the words Jesus spoke'. It is our understanding and convictions on what Jesus spoke that differs in some areas. We could both refer to various scriptures to support our views. That, in itself, does not mean we have 'rightly divided the word of truth'.

Well, nuf said for me on this. Regarding the list being assembled of Anabaptist beliefs I agree with most of them but like the first one what is stated in brackets is not how I understand what is meant by 'love your enemies'.

As I said, we have gone over this before.

Rom 7:3  So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man.

No clause “unless you say sorry, then you can remain”

[Ernie]

Here is my revised list. Thanks for your suggestions. Feel free to keep helping me tweak this...
-----------------------------------------------

By 1550, most Anabaptists believed and practiced...

1. returning good for evil, including love for enemies (non-violence/non-resistance)
2. separation unto God by separating from the world (non-conformity)
3. sharing extra resources with the poor and with preachers & teachers of the Gospel (non-accumulation)
4. the church as a voluntary but disciplined association of believers who walk in newness of life (pure church)
5. separation of church and state (two-kingdoms)
6. spreading the good news of the Kingdom of God (evangelism/missions)
7. baptism upon confession of faith and willingness to suffer for Jesus (believer's baptism)
8. the study and application of scripture, with an emphasis on following the teachings and example of Jesus who is the Head of the Church (Christocentrism)
9. normatives in the NT church based on the teachings of Jesus and the Apostle’s should be normative for Christians today. (orthopraxy)
10. living in communities that integrate peoplehood, family, and Christian-cultural values, that in turn produces multigenerational churches, and former unbelievers being added to the church. (God-designed community)

Few other groups in this time period adhered to all ten of these points.
Unfortunately, over the last 500 years, many Anabaptist communities struggle to keep all ten of the above tenets alive and well. However, in little pockets around the globe, there are communities that work hard to make all ten of these tenets a reality. This is often the result of renewal efforts among those who have been handed a godly heritage, but noticed that heritage weakening in some ways.

There is one tenet that I think Anabaptists and other faithful traditions should be known for, that they have not been known for here-to-fore. I'd love to see Anabaptists and other faithful Christians respect, cooperate with, and commune with those who hold to the ten basic tenants above, but practice these tenets a bit differently. I'm not thinking of some sort of ecumenism with churches who are in the process of losing these tenets, but rather collaboration with churches that truly embrace these principles. In order for this to happen, I think that churches in the same region need to work together for the sake of the kingdom, rather than follow the trend of establishing "national or international dealerships" that churches can get “franchises” with if they wish. This trend, which began with John Oberholtzer in 1847 and picked up momentum in the 1960’s and 70’s, only feeds suspicion and competition in the body of Christ from my vantage point.

[Ernie]

In the coming weeks, I plan to take each of the ten tenets above and give examples of how these tenets can be weakened by succeeding generations who begin to lose a vision for these foundational concepts.

[barnhart]

I'm looking forward to that Ernie.

[Neto]

re:
5. separation of church and state (two-kingdoms)

At least for the Dutch 'baptism-minded", I don't think that this is exactly correct. I suspect that this wording came much later, actually as a modification of the anabaptist belief, by 'Evangelical fore-runners", probably here in North America. (Maybe the feeling that the original idea was co-opted by the founders of the American Revolution for political ends is what causes me to recoil from using it myself.)

I would agree with a wording like "separation of the believer from state", or perhaps "Fidelity to a single kingdom, the Kingdom of God". (Modern wording, but I think that it accurately captures the early belief.)

I understand what is meant by the term "two kingdoms", but I don't think that is the perspective of at least the early Mennists. If the Swiss Brethren used that terminology, I would like to see a reference. Obviously, however, I also realize that none of these men spoke or wrote in English, so there is the matter of translation to consider as well.

Perhaps a question would be a better form of "push-back", in a request to define the terms, especially 'state'. Maybe better yet (but much more so 'modern-speak') would be "separation of the Christian from the world system, as manifested in the governance model."

Thank you for the efforts you have made to clearly express these beliefs in such a brief form.