Anabaptist Evangelism

[Roger]

It really bothers me though when people knock groups: Amish, Hutterites, and some Mennonites for not "reaching out" when these groups are retaining their young people and their population is booming. If you have real faith, I think your kids will want the same, right? Or am I being too simplistic. For me, this is proof that the faith is alive and well.

It's actually quite easy to retain one's children in their culture and religion. That is why few people of any religion are converted to a religion different from that of their parents. It is not at all proof of any healthy living faith. If so then Islam and Mormonism are healthy living faiths.

I don't recall Jesus, at any point in His mission among us, suggesting that we should restrict our children's contacts, language, education, or style of clothing in order to make disciples. But he did say "Go and make disciples of all nations..."

Maybe we need to differentiate what "faith" we're talking about here, faith of our fathers, aka traditions and culture, is NOT the same thing as the "faith once delivered to the saints" that Paul talks about. For a church group to point to their ability to keep their young people as proof of a living faith, can be quite misleading, as Wade alluded to. Many times, those same groups would ostracize their young people if they would ever leave, so are they staying because of the healthy living faith, the saving faith of Jesus Christ, or simply because they'd be too scared to go elsewhere?

[Sudsy]

I don't know this Simon Fry fellow Anabaptist but I ran across his site while trying to find more on Anabaptist Evangelism. He asks these questions -

What is it about our churches, though, that tends to keep others out rather than “bringing them in”? What needs to change for us to make an impact on the harvest waiting to be gathered?

Here is his article - https://simonjfry.wordpress.com/2016/08 ... vangelism/

Comments ?

[CADude]

I don't know this Simon Fry fellow Anabaptist but I ran across his site while trying to find more on Anabaptist Evangelism. He asks these questions -

What is it about our churches, though, that tends to keep others out rather than “bringing them in”? What needs to change for us to make an impact on the harvest waiting to be gathered?

Here is his article - https://simonjfry.wordpress.com/2016/08 ... vangelism/

Comments ?

I don't know Simon Fry either, but I did appreciate his article and tend to agree with it. It seems sometime like there's a bit of an internal struggle going on within the broader Anabaptist community. On one hand we hold discipleship very highly and often have strict ideas about what it is. We are also very reluctant to give up our Anabaptist identity because when you do that you become "lost in the world". On the other hand, at least some of us realize that our identity is to be Christ only and that discipleship is about Christ, not traditions or church rules. Now how can we fulfill the great commission, have strong churches and strong families, practice discipleship, and all the other things that are so important to Anabaptist theology, and yet not become traditional, "dead", and even offensive and engage in marginalization of or condescension towards those believers who for one reason or another are not like us?

[Sudsy]

I don't know this Simon Fry fellow Anabaptist but I ran across his site while trying to find more on Anabaptist Evangelism. He asks these questions -

What is it about our churches, though, that tends to keep others out rather than “bringing them in”? What needs to change for us to make an impact on the harvest waiting to be gathered?

Here is his article - https://simonjfry.wordpress.com/2016/08 ... vangelism/

Comments ?

I don't know Simon Fry either, but I did appreciate his article and tend to agree with it. It seems sometime like there's a bit of an internal struggle going on within the broader Anabaptist community. On one hand we hold discipleship very highly and often have strict ideas about what it is. We are also very reluctant to give up our Anabaptist identity because when you do that you become "lost in the world". On the other hand, at least some of us realize that our identity is to be Christ only and that discipleship is about Christ, not traditions or church rules. Now how can we fulfill the great commission, have strong churches and strong families, practice discipleship, and all the other things that are so important to Anabaptist theology, and yet not become traditional, "dead", and even offensive and engage in marginalization of or condescension towards those believers who for one reason or another are not like us?

Referring to your question bolded above - Anabaptism, imo, sure needs some radical reforms. In my recent searches I came across this site - https://radi-call.com/

which is probably not new to many of you but along with this Simon Fry site, it would appear that there is a few Anabaptists who are not willing to let Anabaptism go off and die or be represented as a culture of split groups that don't approve of one another let alone non-Anabaptist folk. This is encouraging to me and frightening to others who see change as a slippery slope that can only turn out bad.

I wouldn't be surprised to see the term 'Anabaptism' and 'Mennonite' disappear as the younger generation look into engaging the world taking the better parts of Evangelical, Anabaptist and other beliefs and a whole different approach to church rules to make disciples. Back to the early days when the Holy Spirit in operation meant something different than the way He is regarded today. I enjoy Greg Boyd and Bruxy Cavey and others who are preaching an Anabaptist theology but in modern day ways to reach the lost around them. So glad our MB church is going in that direction and our teaching pastor is just starting a new series on Jesus parables and application for today. 8 weeks of exploring how to be a modern day Christ follower.

Anyway, with where the majority of interest is here on this forum I'd be surprised if your question gets much input.

[silentreader]

I'd like to give my understanding and opinion concerning evangelism, including why it has become ineffective among us. I realize my opinion is not a popular one and will probably be sneered at and rejected, but that is OK, I am more used to being considered as a 'deplorable' than an 'elite'.
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.
However, evangelism is also an important function of the Body, as well as, in a different way, for each member of the Body.
The first part may be illustrated by what Paul said in

Ephesians 4:11-16 English Standard Version (ESV)
11 And he gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the shepherds and teachers, 12 to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, 13 until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ, 14 so that we may no longer be children, tossed to and fro by the waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by human cunning, by craftiness in deceitful schemes. 15 Rather, speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ, 16 from whom the whole body, joined and held together by every joint with which it is equipped, when each part is working properly, makes the body grow so that it builds itself up in love.

This was more than just about numbers, it was more about quality than quantity.
I believe one of the reasons our evangelism is ineffective, is that first of all our discipling within the Body is ineffective, or maybe close to non-existent sometimes?
Remember that those who were directly given "The Great Commission" had been discipled by the Master Himself for a few years. And as we read of some of their interactions we can see that it was not an easy thing. And discipling is never easy.
And yet it must be done in order to send out effective evangelists.

The second way of evangelism that I had mentioned earlier for members of the Body who were not expressly given as evangelists can be perhaps best expressed by what Peter says;

1 Peter 3:13-17 English Standard Version (ESV)
13 Now who is there to harm you if you are zealous for what is good? 14 But even if you should suffer for righteousness' sake, you will be blessed. Have no fear of them, nor be troubled, 15 but in your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect, 16 having a good conscience, so that, when you are slandered, those who revile your good behavior in Christ may be put to shame. 17 For it is better to suffer for doing good, if that should be God's will, than for doing evil.

Every believer's life is to be a possible instrument of evangelization, and every believer's word is to be available at any time as an instrument of evangelization.

[Wade]

I don't know this Simon Fry fellow Anabaptist but I ran across his site while trying to find more on Anabaptist Evangelism. He asks these questions -

What is it about our churches, though, that tends to keep others out rather than “bringing them in”? What needs to change for us to make an impact on the harvest waiting to be gathered?

Here is his article - https://simonjfry.wordpress.com/2016/08 ... vangelism/

Comments ?

I don't know Simon Fry either, but I did appreciate his article and tend to agree with it. It seems sometime like there's a bit of an internal struggle going on within the broader Anabaptist community. On one hand we hold discipleship very highly and often have strict ideas about what it is. We are also very reluctant to give up our Anabaptist identity because when you do that you become "lost in the world". On the other hand, at least some of us realize that our identity is to be Christ only and that discipleship is about Christ, not traditions or church rules. Now how can we fulfill the great commission, have strong churches and strong families, practice discipleship, and all the other things that are so important to Anabaptist theology, and yet not become traditional, "dead", and even offensive and engage in marginalization of or condescension towards those believers who for one reason or another are not like us?

I believe evangelism and discipleship are completely backwards as far as I have seen in the Mennonite world. We attended instruction class and took council from Mennonites but since we were never accepted into the church I don't consider that discipleship at all. You can't hold people outside the body and disciple people because it takes being together in the body for true discipleship to take place - I imagine... Keeping them seperate keeps them from proper accountability and acceptance of the authority of the church. Times of proving can compound this by forcing newcomers to be alone.
Start evangelizing by the direction you see in people rather than the plateau you are looking for people to attain and tell them before they join that they will be discipled and be held accountable after they join. Certainly be open of what will be expected but understand that before they join you are mistaken if you think you are discipling.

Again, I firmly believe, discipling doesn't work without a submission to anothers authority or direction and so if the church doesn't submit to allowing the person to be put under that authority by them being one with the body and be allowed to be a member; you could rather likely be pushing people away more than in, even when you see growth.

[silentreader]

I don't know this Simon Fry fellow Anabaptist but I ran across his site while trying to find more on Anabaptist Evangelism. He asks these questions -

Here is his article - https://simonjfry.wordpress.com/2016/08 ... vangelism/

Comments ?

I don't know Simon Fry either, but I did appreciate his article and tend to agree with it. It seems sometime like there's a bit of an internal struggle going on within the broader Anabaptist community. On one hand we hold discipleship very highly and often have strict ideas about what it is. We are also very reluctant to give up our Anabaptist identity because when you do that you become "lost in the world". On the other hand, at least some of us realize that our identity is to be Christ only and that discipleship is about Christ, not traditions or church rules. Now how can we fulfill the great commission, have strong churches and strong families, practice discipleship, and all the other things that are so important to Anabaptist theology, and yet not become traditional, "dead", and even offensive and engage in marginalization of or condescension towards those believers who for one reason or another are not like us?

I believe evangelism and discipleship are completely backwards as far as I have seen in the Mennonite world. We attended instruction class and took council from Mennonites but since we were never accepted into the church I don't consider that discipleship at all. You can't hold people outside the body and disciple people because it takes being together in the body for true discipleship to take place - I imagine... Keeping them seperate keeps them from proper accountability and acceptance of the authority of the church. Times of proving can compound this by forcing newcomers to be alone.
Start evangelizing by the direction you see in people rather than the plateau you are looking for people to attain and tell them before they join that they will be discipled and be held accountable after they join. Certainly be open of what will be expected but understand that before they join you are mistaken if you think you are discipling.

Again, I firmly believe, discipling doesn't work without a submission to anothers authority or direction and so if the church doesn't submit to allowing the person to be put under that authority by them being one with the body and be allowed to be a member; you could rather likely be pushing people away more than in, even when you see growth.

I agree, in the situation you are referring to, "discipling" is a contradiction in terms. I'm not sure what we could call it, indoctrination perhaps?

[Sudsy]

I'd like to give my understanding and opinion concerning evangelism, including why it has become ineffective among us. I realize my opinion is not a popular one and will probably be sneered at and rejected, but that is OK, I am more used to being considered as a 'deplorable' than an 'elite'.
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.
However, evangelism is also an important function of the Body, as well as, in a different way, for each member of the Body.
The first part may be illustrated by what Paul said in

Ephesians 4:11-16 English Standard Version (ESV)
11 And he gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the shepherds and teachers, 12 to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, 13 until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ, 14 so that we may no longer be children, tossed to and fro by the waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by human cunning, by craftiness in deceitful schemes. 15 Rather, speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ, 16 from whom the whole body, joined and held together by every joint with which it is equipped, when each part is working properly, makes the body grow so that it builds itself up in love.

This was more than just about numbers, it was more about quality than quantity.
I believe one of the reasons our evangelism is ineffective, is that first of all our discipling within the Body is ineffective, or maybe close to non-existent sometimes?
Remember that those who were directly given "The Great Commission" had been discipled by the Master Himself for a few years. And as we read of some of their interactions we can see that it was not an easy thing. And discipling is never easy.
And yet it must be done in order to send out effective evangelists.

The second way of evangelism that I had mentioned earlier for members of the Body who were not expressly given as evangelists can be perhaps best expressed by what Peter says;

1 Peter 3:13-17 English Standard Version (ESV)
13 Now who is there to harm you if you are zealous for what is good? 14 But even if you should suffer for righteousness' sake, you will be blessed. Have no fear of them, nor be troubled, 15 but in your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect, 16 having a good conscience, so that, when you are slandered, those who revile your good behavior in Christ may be put to shame. 17 For it is better to suffer for doing good, if that should be God's will, than for doing evil.

Every believer's life is to be a possible instrument of evangelization, and every believer's word is to be available at any time as an instrument of evangelization.

Thankyou. I certainly am not one to sneer at your views and I doubt few others here do also.

Anyway, this brings up the question in my mind of where one draws the line with what does apply and does not apply beyond the immediate audience when looking at NT texts. If I look at the 'Great Commission' (a term not used until the 1600s) in Mathews account I view this more as an emphasis on discipleship (making disciples over time) more than introducing people to Jesus, although this is involved. In Marks account, he adds supernatural signs that will follow those who believe. Many today would then take Mark's account and say we should not expect these signs to now be active. Others would disagree and say it is due to our weak belief today (lack of faith in the supernatural occurring) that we don't have these signs that caused people to note this was not just another religion. Just saying we can make our Christianity fit into what is happening and perhaps miss what should be happening.

I bolded in blue what you thought could be the problem with being ineffective in making new converts. If I got it right it is a quality of disciple making in the church. Could you expand on this ? When that text says 'and he gave', I take that to mean that these are spiritual gifts that cannot be attained through some kind of training. We need those gifted in 'evangelism' in our churches to be both missionaries both home and abroad that we can support. And imo, I believe scripture commands us to seek after spiritual gifts. In other words, someone may have an exceptional burden for the lost and therefore should be prayed for and should seek after the gift of an 'evangelist'. So, I suspect our ineffectiveness is a lack of spiritual gifting and this could be due to a lack of faith that God still works in this dynamic way.

That doesn't mean some don't already have that gift or that we all are to be ready to share our faith. I have gone thru various 'soul winning' courses but tend to trust that God knows the heart of everyone and what is their stumbling block area and if we trust Him, He will give us the words and timing to be a means to draw others to Himself. Always being prepare to provide answers, to me, is being spiritually in tune and ready along with knowing what we believe. Seems to me we treat it too much like an intellectual issue when in fact God works through those the world would not expect to have answers.

Anyway, got to go for supper. Glad to have some conversation on this and will get back to respond to others.

[silentreader]

I'd like to give my understanding and opinion concerning evangelism, including why it has become ineffective among us. I realize my opinion is not a popular one and will probably be sneered at and rejected, but that is OK, I am more used to being considered as a 'deplorable' than an 'elite'.
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.
However, evangelism is also an important function of the Body, as well as, in a different way, for each member of the Body.
The first part may be illustrated by what Paul said in

Ephesians 4:11-16 English Standard Version (ESV)
11 And he gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the shepherds and teachers, 12 to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, 13 until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ, 14 so that we may no longer be children, tossed to and fro by the waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by human cunning, by craftiness in deceitful schemes. 15 Rather, speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ, 16 from whom the whole body, joined and held together by every joint with which it is equipped, when each part is working properly, makes the body grow so that it builds itself up in love.

This was more than just about numbers, it was more about quality than quantity.
I believe one of the reasons our evangelism is ineffective, is that first of all our discipling within the Body is ineffective, or maybe close to non-existent sometimes?
Remember that those who were directly given "The Great Commission" had been discipled by the Master Himself for a few years. And as we read of some of their interactions we can see that it was not an easy thing. And discipling is never easy.
And yet it must be done in order to send out effective evangelists.

The second way of evangelism that I had mentioned earlier for members of the Body who were not expressly given as evangelists can be perhaps best expressed by what Peter says;

1 Peter 3:13-17 English Standard Version (ESV)
13 Now who is there to harm you if you are zealous for what is good? 14 But even if you should suffer for righteousness' sake, you will be blessed. Have no fear of them, nor be troubled, 15 but in your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect, 16 having a good conscience, so that, when you are slandered, those who revile your good behavior in Christ may be put to shame. 17 For it is better to suffer for doing good, if that should be God's will, than for doing evil.

Every believer's life is to be a possible instrument of evangelization, and every believer's word is to be available at any time as an instrument of evangelization.

Thankyou. I certainly am not one to sneer at your views and I doubt few others here do also.

Anyway, this brings up the question in my mind of where one draws the line with what does apply and does not apply beyond the immediate audience when looking at NT texts. If I look at the 'Great Commission' (a term not used until the 1600s) in Mathews account I view this more as an emphasis on discipleship (making disciples over time) more than introducing people to Jesus, although this is involved. In Marks account, he adds supernatural signs that will follow those who believe. Many today would then take Mark's account and say we should not expect these signs to now be active. Others would disagree and say it is due to our weak belief today (lack of faith in the supernatural occurring) that we don't have these signs that caused people to note this was not just another religion. Just saying we can make our Christianity fit into what is happening and perhaps miss what should be happening.

I bolded in blue what you thought could be the problem with being ineffective in making new converts. If I got it right it is a quality of disciple making in the church. Could you expand on this ? When that text says 'and he gave', I take that to mean that these are spiritual gifts that cannot be attained through some kind of training. We need those gifted in 'evangelism' in our churches to be both missionaries both home and abroad that we can support. And imo, I believe scripture commands us to seek after spiritual gifts. In other words, someone may have an exceptional burden for the lost and therefore should be prayed for and should seek after the gift of an 'evangelist'. So, I suspect our ineffectiveness is a lack of spiritual gifting and this could be due to a lack of faith that God still works in this dynamic way.

That doesn't mean some don't already have that gift or that we all are to be ready to share our faith. I have gone thru various 'soul winning' courses but tend to trust that God knows the heart of everyone and what is their stumbling block area and if we trust Him, He will give us the words and timing to be a means to draw others to Himself. Always being prepare to provide answers, to me, is being spiritually in tune and ready along with knowing what we believe. Seems to me we treat it too much like an intellectual issue when in fact God works through those the world would not expect to have answers.

Anyway, got to go for supper. Glad to have some conversation on this and will get back to respond to others.

I was actually referring to the discipling of new or young believers to better prepare and perhaps stabilize them for an effective gifting. The gift itself still needs to come from the Holy Spirit, but sometimes there may be a preparation necessary which is the responsibility of others in the Body, just as Paul seems to have spent some time with other Christians between his conversion and baptism and the beginning of his public ministry.

As far as the immediate audience thing is concerned, I think it is important that we are sensitive to this, even though it is not always easy to discern. There are usually principles that we can grasp and apply even if the detail is not applicable to us.
Consider what Jesus said to the rich young ruler, compare that to what Zacchaeus did of his own volition.
The young ruler's case was such that the only way he could follow Christ was if he got rid of everything. Zacchaeus' case seems to have been different.

[JimFoxvog]

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.