Anabaptist Evangelism

[silentreader]

This opinion about the great commission has been presented several times in this thread.

By the proper principles of study of Scripture for the purpose of application, what we call "The Great Commission" was actually intended for the immediate audience.

Quoting from Matthew

Therefore, as you go, disciple people in all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to obey everything that I have commanded you.

The great commision says to teach everything that I have commanded you. That would include this commision itself is to be taught.

[Wayne in Maine]

By the proper principles of study of Scripture for the purpose of application, what we call "The Great Commission" was actually intended for the immediate audience.

But I am an Anabaptist, I read in the scripture what Jesus plainly says, not what some "proper principle of study of Scripture" makes Him say.

[silentreader]

By the proper principles of study of Scripture for the purpose of application, what we call "The Great Commission" was actually intended for the immediate audience.

But I am an Anabaptist, I read in the scripture what Jesus plainly says, not what some "proper principle of study of Scripture" makes Him say.

Wayne, you for one are intelligent enough not to cut off a hand or gouge out an eye in order to deal with temptation, unless you have never been tempted in those ways, perhaps.

[Wayne in Maine]

By the proper principles of study of Scripture for the purpose of application, what we call "The Great Commission" was actually intended for the immediate audience.

But I am an Anabaptist, I read in the scripture what Jesus plainly says, not what some "proper principle of study of Scripture" makes Him say.

Wayne, you for one are intelligent enough not to cut off a hand or gouge out an eye in order to deal with temptation, unless you have never been tempted in those ways, perhaps.

Not literally gouging out one's eye is not a matter of avoiding the plain words of Jesus in scripture, it's a matter of rationally interpreting what Jesus said.

I simply cannot find any plain, direct way to negate Jesus' command to His disciples to continue to propagate the good news and make more disciples of all nations (with the implication that they are likewise to make more disciples). "Proper principles of study of Scripture" sounds like a method of negating something Jesus plainly said and certainly implied in His ministry. It certainly is contradictory to what the early Anabaptists believed and practiced.

[silentreader]

By the proper principles of study of Scripture for the purpose of application, what we call "The Great Commission" was actually intended for the immediate audience.

But I am an Anabaptist, I read in the scripture what Jesus plainly says, not what some "proper principle of study of Scripture" makes Him say.

There is a slight chance I am being misunderstood, so I will attempt to clarify.
I am not advocating against evangelism, I hope you all understand that, but I don't believe that the 'Great Commission' was a blanket command for all individual believers in all time periods.
A clear reading of Matthew 28:16 suggests that He gave the clear command to the 11, and this command was then recorded so that we can form a practice from that, if you will.
Notice, however that there was a qualifier added later. In Acts 1.

The Promise of the Holy Spirit
1 In the first book, O Theophilus, I have dealt with all that Jesus began to do and teach, 2 until the day when he was taken up, after he had given commands through the Holy Spirit to the apostles whom he had chosen. 3 He presented himself alive to them after his suffering by many proofs, appearing to them during forty days and speaking about the kingdom of God.
4 And while staying[a] with them he ordered them not to depart from Jerusalem, but to wait for the promise of the Father, which, he said, “you heard from me;5 for John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days from now.”
The Ascension
6 So when they had come together, they asked him, “Lord, will you at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?” 7 He said to them, “It is not for you to know times or seasons that the Father has fixed by his own authority. 8 But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you, and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth.”

Despite the express command, and despite the fact they had been under His teaching for 3+ years, even their command to fulfil the 'Great Commission' was on temporary hold.
And understanding by a clear reading of Scripture that we, as individuals, did not receive the Holy Spirit's direction, I believe that we, like them, should allow the Holy Spirit to give direction as to who among us in the Body is called to serve as an evangelist, and who is called to serve in other ways.

I expected this subject would raise some hackles, and I really have no need to insist my opinion is the perfect understanding in this matter, I recognize that there are differences of opinion.

[Josh]

I have a hard time choking down the idea that Christians shouldn’t be sharing the good news of Jesus’ resurrection, and then discipling those who hear that good news and choose to obey it and follow Jesus.

I have an even harder time with the idea one should be busy discipling one’s one children, younger than the age of accountability. The end result is a dead church with infant baptism. If that’s the end goal, let’s just give up on Anabaptism now and become Catholic or Orthodox.

[Wayne in Maine]

By the proper principles of study of Scripture for the purpose of application, what we call "The Great Commission" was actually intended for the immediate audience.

But I am an Anabaptist, I read in the scripture what Jesus plainly says, not what some "proper principle of study of Scripture" makes Him say.

There is a slight chance I am being misunderstood, so I will attempt to clarify.
I am not advocating against evangelism, I hope you all understand that, but I don't believe that the 'Great Commission' was a blanket command for all individual believers in all time periods.
A clear reading of Matthew 28:16 suggests that He gave the clear command to the 11, and this command was then recorded so that we can form a practice from that, if you will.
Notice, however that there was a qualifier added later. In Acts 1.

The Promise of the Holy Spirit
1 In the first book, O Theophilus, I have dealt with all that Jesus began to do and teach, 2 until the day when he was taken up, after he had given commands through the Holy Spirit to the apostles whom he had chosen. 3 He presented himself alive to them after his suffering by many proofs, appearing to them during forty days and speaking about the kingdom of God.
4 And while staying[a] with them he ordered them not to depart from Jerusalem, but to wait for the promise of the Father, which, he said, “you heard from me;5 for John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days from now.”
The Ascension
6 So when they had come together, they asked him, “Lord, will you at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?” 7 He said to them, “It is not for you to know times or seasons that the Father has fixed by his own authority. 8 But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you, and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth.”

Despite the express command, and despite the fact they had been under His teaching for 3+ years, even their command to fulfil the 'Great Commission' was on temporary hold.
And understanding by a clear reading of Scripture that we, as individuals, did not receive the Holy Spirit's direction, I believe that we, like them, should allow the Holy Spirit to give direction as to who among us in the Body is called to serve as an evangelist, and who is called to serve in other ways.

I expected this subject would raise some hackles, and I really have no need to insist my opinion is the perfect understanding in this matter, I recognize that there are differences of opinion.

That does make things clearer - more-or-less.

Clearly Jesus gave that command to the assembly - the corporate body of disciples - the church. I do not hold to the idea that each individual follower of Jesus is to individually go on the road to preach and teach and baptize, but I do hold that Jesus's mandate to the church is to make disciples outside of one's family and ethnic group. While that does not preclude raising one's children in a manner that hopefully makes following after Jesus an attractive option for their lives, it certainly means the church is failing when it is only making church members in the same manner as any religion does - by socializing its progeny.

[Joy]

The great commision says to teach everything that I have commanded you. That would include this commision itself is to be taught.

I started to voice the exact same thing last night.

[Wade]

Maybe sometimes evangelism also consists of many indirect efforts too. When having a single income large family while trying to be a wise steward in investing in eternal things it doesn't leave much left over at times. So when you have one old broken down vehicle or your stuck at home while your wife has a child in emergency, it so happens that others may need to drive your vehicle to help out.
My father-in-law got to listen to some David Bercot when driving our vehicle because of this recently.
And today I had the sound off when driving to the mechanic shop, but after the mechanic took our vehicle for a long test drive he came back with a David Bercot CD turned up quite loud...

[Sudsy]

Since some here are not allowed youtube access to view the OP I will refer to this article. Generally speaking I don't think Anabaptists are confrontational in their evangelism. We can be pretty confrontational amongst ourselves about our practises but more of a 'softer' approach to evangelizing. Is that a fair statement that this is generally true ?

So, approaches like 'The Way of the Master' would not be a common Anabaptist approach or would it ? Telling people they are hell bound just doesn't sound Anabaptist to me. In this article the consideration is that Jesus approach was different than the 'Way of the Master' approach. Not that the the Way of the Master, is a wrong approach and has not worked with some people.

Greg suggests that when Jesus and Paul dealt with the unchurched that this is how he sees it unfolding -
http://reknew.org/2008/01/what-do-you-t ... vangelism/

Your thoughts ?