The Anabaptist Vision unmasked

[Bootstrap]

It’s wrong to speak out about “injustice” that is in complete alignment with a dominant political ideology.

Shouldn't the Bible be our guide when we think about what is actually injustice? Whether or not any particular secular ideology agrees with it?

I mean, if secular ideologies are against adultery, I can still speak out against adultery, can't I?

But we can never put Jesus and the Kingdom at the center by insisting that conversations adopt secular political framing.

[Sudsy]

Is there, or should there, not be a difference in inviting people to the Kingdom of God, than inviting people to become part of our local churches ? It seems to me the inviting of people to the Kingdom of God was predominantly done out where sinners habit. Outside the local church. It does say in one of the Corinthian letters that sinners may visit a local church (and on that specific activity in the church be convicted of their sinning) but it also indicates the local church is primarily a place for Christians to gather in worship and learning. When sin was being tolerated in the Corinthian church, they were told to deal with it and without repentance, remove that person from fellowship as they could have an adverse affect on other Christians.

So, it would seem to me, the local church is both a welcoming site for unbelievers but at the same time if a professing believer has become part of the church and refuses to repent of obvious sinning, then there is instruction to remove them as far as being part of the brotherhood in that local church. This is handled well by some, not so good by others and in many cases today is ignored in Anabaptist and other Christian local churches.

I was raised in an evangelical minded church and on a Sunday, the morning services was geared to believers only. Same for mid-week meetings. Sunday evening was focused on inviting unbelievers and the message was primarily about the Kingdom of God and how one becomes a citizen of that Kingdom. Now it was put in a different way (your sin is sending you to hell preaching) and although this is not my preferred way of explaining the Gospel, looking back, it resulted in conversions that stuck. For one, my parents conversion. Other things lead up to this repentance that were outside the church but often the invitation to repent was given and this is when their new life began.

In the Anabaptist church I most recently attended, this 'start point' (conversion time or whatever one likes to call it) was not like the evangelical 'altar calls' but rather more of a wait and see what happens when an unbeliever keeps coming and hearing about Kingdom life. And with that approach, there are those who will come desiring to be part of the group, for various reasons other than turning their lives over to Christ. Sometimes these need to be confronted as their life style is against Kingdom living as understood by that local church. There is danger in allowing them to remain as the scripture says 'a little leaven leaveneth the lump'.

What I think is one of the main problems in Anabaptism is the focus has been too much on the internal community side of things (navel-gazing) for some and for others tolerance of sin 'in the camp' and not enough dealing with sins explicitly stated in the scriptures. In both cases, focus on reaching the lost where they habit and growing the church outside the dominant ethnic church, is missing. The main mission of The Church which is achieved beyond church walls where we all are to be engaged, is not what can be seen as happening and not getting results of any scale. And this 'soul winning' mission is lost in other groups besides Anabaptists also. Some who attempt increasing numbers, we see as not resulting in Kingdom transformed lives and are easy targets for criticism. But the best way is not in endless criticism but rather in showing how it should be done and let the fruits of repentance be the proof of what entering and living the Kingdom life is about.

In my experience, a local church that has a good balance of 'everyone a soul winner' and true Christ following is a radical change in how we live our lives, is something I have experienced in 2 church settings out of 6, and neither were Anabaptist. I am currently looking for that kind of balance somewhere but this may be too much to seek.

Anyway, I hope this is not taken as a slam against Anabaptism. From what I have read early Anabaptism spread quite rapidly with the balance I mentioned above. It would be great to be part of that focus once again and no doubt, it would bring persecution with it as Jesus said it would.

[Josh]

It’s wrong to speak out about “injustice” that is in complete alignment with a dominant political ideology.

Shouldn't the Bible be our guide when we think about what is actually injustice? Whether or not any particular secular ideology agrees with it?

I mean, if secular ideologies are against adultery, I can still speak out against adultery, can't I?

But we can never put Jesus and the Kingdom at the center by insisting that conversations adopt secular political framing.

You brought up George Floyd, not me. I’m asking how central beliefs about this person are to what you see as the Anabaptist vision.

When one’s ideology completely aligns with secular ideology, that personally actually just has a secular ideology, not a kingdom one. I’m not saying you are doing this, but I think this is what you are pointing to. And this is something people on both left and right are terribly guilty of.

[Josh]

Y
It’s a mess and a big distraction from what Anabaptism is about. If you’ve been able to steer clear of this stuff consider yourself blessed.

We'll see what happens when the congregation actually discusses the homosexual issue. I fear a split may be possible; there are people who feel strongly on each side. I expect that's why we've been avoiding the discussion. Do you think we should continue to avoid the issue?

Unless you want to leave your church, I would avoid the issue for as long as possible, from a perspective of your own personal happiness.

One strategy is to proactively look for a like minded community and try to go there before a split or open conflict happens.

[Ken]

Is there, or should there, not be a difference in inviting people to the Kingdom of God, than inviting people to become part of our local churches ? It seems to me the inviting of people to the Kingdom of God was predominantly done out where sinners habit. Outside the local church. It does say in one of the Corinthian letters that sinners may visit a local church (and on that specific activity in the church be convicted of their sinning) but it also indicates the local church is primarily a place for Christians to gather in worship and learning. When sin was being tolerated in the Corinthian church, they were told to deal with it and without repentance, remove that person from fellowship as they could have an adverse affect on other Christians.

I can recall as a teen when our youth group would be sent out to places like the County Fair to hand out religious tracts to passers by. It seemed that they deliberately did NOT have the name, phone number and address of our local church on them. Because I guess we didn't want the wrong types just walking in the door who might not be a "good fit". As a questioning teen I found that very hypocritical at the time.

We also put up Burma Shave style roadside signs with gospel messages that didn't have any contact information either.

Is that what you are talking about?

[Sudsy]

Is there, or should there, not be a difference in inviting people to the Kingdom of God, than inviting people to become part of our local churches ? It seems to me the inviting of people to the Kingdom of God was predominantly done out where sinners habit. Outside the local church. It does say in one of the Corinthian letters that sinners may visit a local church (and on that specific activity in the church be convicted of their sinning) but it also indicates the local church is primarily a place for Christians to gather in worship and learning. When sin was being tolerated in the Corinthian church, they were told to deal with it and without repentance, remove that person from fellowship as they could have an adverse affect on other Christians.

I can recall as a teen when our youth group would be sent out to places like the County Fair to hand out religious tracts to passers by. It seemed that they deliberately did NOT have the name, phone number and address of our local church on them. Because I guess we didn't want the wrong types just walking in the door who might not be a "good fit". As a questioning teen I found that very hypocritical at the time.

We also put up Burma Shave style roadside signs with gospel messages that didn't have any contact information either.

Is that what you are talking about?

What I was thinking when I wrote this is more of a personal, one on one, evangelism where we talk to people wherever they are, outside church doors, hoping to lead them to the Kingdom way whether or not they end up in our local church. The goal is not to add to our church membership but rather to add to the members of the Kingdom.

I have given out thousands of Gospel tracts also and these might have planted seed or watered seed planted by someone else but I agree they should best be given with some follow up contact information. We had church contact information and stamped each tract but not always. I know some who had their own stamp with personal information for more direct conversation. I think this is the way to go and it allows for more experience in one on one evangelism.

What seemed to happen in my youth church is that Christians, more and more began thinking it was up to the church pastor to get people saved and we were just to try to get them to church. There were these week of evangelistic services held periodically to invite folks to. We didn't have preferred Christian attitudes as our church was primarily people from out of the world from varied backgrounds. But only a few took on the Great Commission as a job for each one of us to our neighbours.

Seems the attitude today is that most in North America have been exposed to some rendition of the Gospel so if anyone wants to know more, they know were our local church is. The compassion for lost souls is missing in so many places as churchianity and what it does for me seems most important.

Well, I better stop here as this is a topic that I really think needs exploring especially in our Anabaptist churches.










on a stamp this on a stamp we used

[Bootstrap]

You brought up George Floyd, not me. I’m asking how central beliefs about this person are to what you see as the Anabaptist vision.

I was responding to someone else who brought up BLM, which arose as a response to George Floyd's killing.

Let's take this back to Jesus. There were zealots out in the hills killing people and trying to organize a revolution. There were Roman soldiers killing various people for just and unjust reasons. There were tax collectors shaking people down for more than the owed. There were Pharisees and Sadducees who cooperated with the Roman government while running the temple and King Herod who ... well, was a corrupt and cruel leader.

I don't see Jesus or the New Testament writers dwelling on this. These things do come up ... the injustice of the crucifixion is one important part of the story, John the Baptist speaks to solders who were shaking down the locals, Jesus calls Herod a fox (which is not a nice thing to call someone in that culture). And Jesus never condemns people for speaking out against the injustice. But he doesn't take up these causes, either.

Still, there does seem to be some relationship between the coming of Jesus and the unjust military occupation.

“My soul magnifies the Lord,
and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior,
for he has looked on the humble estate of his servant.
For behold, from now on all generations will call me blessed;
for he who is mighty has done great things for me,
and holy is his name.
And his mercy is for those who fear him
from generation to generation.
He has shown strength with his arm;
he has scattered the proud in the thoughts of their hearts;
he has brought down the mighty from their thrones
and exalted those of humble estate;
he has filled the hungry with good things,
and the rich he has sent away empty.
He has helped his servant Israel,
in remembrance of his mercy,
as he spoke to our fathers,
to Abraham and to his offspring forever.”

Back to Josh ...

When one’s ideology completely aligns with secular ideology, that personally actually just has a secular ideology, not a kingdom one. I’m not saying you are doing this, but I think this is what you are pointing to. And this is something people on both left and right are terribly guilty of.

I agree, people on both the left and right are terribly guilty of this. We can usually see the problem on "the other side" better than we can on our own. On the left, liberation theology is a common example of this. On the right, I think Trumpism can go just as far. On both sides, the notion that the whole world revolves around Trump, one way or another, is an example.

So how do we focus on biblical thinking? I think we have to keep going back to the Bible and relating it to our times.

[Josh]

I think I start is to quit thinking that “our times” even needs relating to. Most of the political divisions people think are important have very little to do with the kingdom.

For example, I have yet to have discussed riots in Minneapolis with people from church. The topic simply isn’t relevant. Most of us would do well to focus more on what’s within 20 miles of us and very little on what’s 2,000 miles away.

The left and right wing rage and division machines rely on engaging everyone around whatever their latest cause is, which is usually quite far from most people’s actual life.

[Bootstrap]

I think I start is to quit thinking that “our times” even needs relating to. Most of the political divisions people think are important have very little to do with the kingdom.

For example, I have yet to have discussed riots in Minneapolis with people from church. The topic simply isn’t relevant. Most of us would do well to focus more on what’s within 20 miles of us and very little on what’s 2,000 miles away.

The left and right wing rage and division machines rely on engaging everyone around whatever their latest cause is, which is usually quite far from most people’s actual life.

In fact, MennoNet is the main place that I find myself embroiled in these topics. Which is kind of ironic.

[Josh]

I think I start is to quit thinking that “our times” even needs relating to. Most of the political divisions people think are important have very little to do with the kingdom.

For example, I have yet to have discussed riots in Minneapolis with people from church. The topic simply isn’t relevant. Most of us would do well to focus more on what’s within 20 miles of us and very little on what’s 2,000 miles away.

The left and right wing rage and division machines rely on engaging everyone around whatever their latest cause is, which is usually quite far from most people’s actual life.

In fact, MennoNet is the main place that I find myself embroiled in these topics. Which is kind of ironic.

There’s always a choice to disengage from that. You may have noticed I chose to quit engaging with Valerie, temporal1, and MaxPC on this forum a while ago. Instead I’ve looked for common ground with them.

I’ve had to “let a lot go” of bogus statements and misinformation.