Anabaptist perspective of the Creation narrative?

[MaxPC]

What is the Anabaptist perspective of the Bible's Creation narrative?

[Soloist]

It wasn't in dispute when the Anabaptists came about. They would have believed God created everything in 6 days through Jesus and the world was not pre-existent to the creation account. No Anabaptist was ever accused on heretical views by the Catholics or Protestant's on creation.


Apparently it is now but the conservative Mennonites and other conservative Anabaptists by in large believe the creation story exactly how it is written. As for the rest of the Anabaptists, they believe many different things, some outright heretical and others just weird.
I would say though that you would have to go very liberal to hear a sermon preached suggesting other then the Creation account.

[Neto]

If someone had the time, they could easily create a fictional account as an addition to the Martyrs' Mirror, one where a liberal church or secular official was interrogating an "anabaptist" (or, as they were called in the Spanish Netherlands, where most of the accounts in MM come from, the "baptism minded") answers with "Show me in the Scriptures, and I will admit my error, and believe as you do."

[Wayne in Maine]

I don't think the early Anabaptists wrote on the issue. I'm sure though that the well educated founders of Swiss Anabaptism were quite aware of the fact that the earth is a sphere (not a flat surface) and that the planets and stars do not move about on a domed surface above it (as the author of Genesis describes the cosmos), so they probably would have similarly been open to the more recent discovery that the earth is much, much older than 6000 years.

[Ken]

I would say that there isn't a uniquely Anabaptist perspective on creation.

There are some topics such as non-resistance, church and state, and two-Kingdom theology, in which Anabaptist tend to stand apart from the larger streams of Christianity.

However there are many other areas of theology in which Anabaptists generally follow mainstream Christian (or at least Protestant) doctrine.

I would say that the creation narrative falls into the latter category. Conservative Anabaptist churches that adhere to biblical inerrancy will interpret all of Genesis literally including the two creation narratives, and will adhere to belief in a literal 6-day creation that happened several thousand years ago. More liberal Anabaptist groups that adhere to more of a philosophy of biblical inspiration follow other mainstream Christian groups that do not take the 6-day creation narrative as a literal description of creation that is in conflict with modern science.

For example, here is the MCUSA Confession of Faith on creation, which neatly steps around the subject by emphasizing God as the creator, but does not emphasize an exact narrative or timeline for creation, and completely avoids the creation vs. evolution discussion:

https://www.mennoniteusa.org/who-are-me ... rovidence/

We believe that God has created the heavens and the earth and all that is in them, and that God preserves and renews what has been made. All creation ultimately has its source outside itself and belongs to the Creator. The world has been created good because God is good and provides all that is needed for life.

We believe that the universe has been called into being as an expression of God’s love and sovereign freedom alone. Creation witnesses to the eternal power and divine nature of God, who gives meaning and purpose to life and who alone is worthy of worship and praise.

We acknowledge that God sustains creation in both continuity and change. We believe that God upholds order in creation and limits the forces of sin and evil for the sake of preserving and renewing humanity and the world. God also works to save human beings and the world from death and destruction and to overcome the forces of sin and evil.

We therefore are called to respect the natural order of creation and to entrust ourselves to God’s care and keeping, whether in adversity or plenty. Neither the work of human hands, nor the forces of the natural world around us, nor the power of the nations among which we live are worthy of the trust and honor due the Creator on whom they depend.

and....

We believe that God has created human beings in the divine image. God formed them from the dust of the earth and gave them a special dignity among all the works of creation. Human beings have been made for relationship with God, to live in peace with each other, and to take care of the rest of creation.

We believe that human beings were created good, in the image of God. As creatures according to the divine likeness, we have been made stewards to subdue and to care for creation out of reverence and honor for the Creator. As creatures made in the divine image, we have been blessed with the abilities to respond faithfully to God, to live in harmony with other human beings, and to engage in meaningful work and rest. Because both Adam and Eve were equally and wonderfully made in the divine image, God’s will from the beginning has been for women and men to live in loving and mutually helpful relationships with each other.

We are grateful that God patiently preserves humanity and faithfully remains with us even through death. God has made provision for the salvation of humanity and the redemption of creation. We believe that the image of God in all its fullness has been revealed and restored in Jesus Christ, in whom we find our true humanity.

[MaxPC]

I don't think the early Anabaptists wrote on the issue. I'm sure though that the well educated founders of Swiss Anabaptism were quite aware of the fact that the earth is a sphere (not a flat surface) and that the planets and stars do not move about on a domed surface above it (as the author of Genesis describes the cosmos), so they probably would have similarly been open to the more recent discovery that the earth is much, much older than 6000 years.

Wayne, how interested are Anabaptists in pursuing fields of science? E.g. would they have built their own observatory? Or would they simply enter the field under someone else's aegis?

[Wayne in Maine]

I don't think the early Anabaptists wrote on the issue. I'm sure though that the well educated founders of Swiss Anabaptism were quite aware of the fact that the earth is a sphere (not a flat surface) and that the planets and stars do not move about on a domed surface above it (as the author of Genesis describes the cosmos), so they probably would have similarly been open to the more recent discovery that the earth is much, much older than 6000 years.

Wayne, how interested are Anabaptists in pursuing fields of science? E.g. would they have built their own observatory? Or would they simply enter the field under someone else's aegis?

Which Anabaptists? Few ethnic descendants of Anabaptist seem interested in science (which I think is too bad). Second generation Anabaptists, except for Hutterites in their Golden Age, were unable to pursue more than survival on marginal agricultural land (Early Hutterites even trained their own physicians). The first generation were too busy preaching the good news of God's Kingdom and being killed by Roman Catholic and Lutheran authorities to settle down to scientific pursuits.

I don't think Anabaptism, as a world view and hermeneutic, really is suitable to building astronomical observatories. Nevertheless, I believe authentic Anabaptism was not / is not hostile to scientific discoveries, such as a spherical earth or a very, very old universe.

[joshuabgood]

Re OP.
God created the world and everything in it. Exactly how and when he did the whole of it no one can really fully explain.

That doesn't seem surprising to me considering we are mere humans.

[Sliceitup]

That doesn't seem surprising to me considering we are mere humans.

This. I’ve never quite understood why people are so insistent on the 6 day creation story. Especially when Gen 1 and 2 seem to have contradictory information. Why not allow it to be something we can’t fully explain?

Humanity has always attempted to create stories or explanations for things it doesn’t understand. Does it not seem likely that is how much of the Creation story came about? Why not view it as a beautiful testament of a people to their God? I think the beauty of faith is in not knowing all the answers, not in some surety that we know it all.

[ken_sylvania]

That doesn't seem surprising to me considering we are mere humans.

This. I’ve never quite understood why people are so insistent on the 6 day creation story. Especially when Gen 1 and 2 seem to have contradictory information. Why not allow it to be something we can’t fully explain?

Humanity has always attempted to create stories or explanations for things it doesn’t understand. Does it not seem likely that is how much of the Creation story came about? Why not view it as a beautiful testament of a people to their God? I think the beauty of faith is in not knowing all the answers, not in some surety that we know it all.

If we are to conclude that Genesis was dreamed up by mankind in an attempt to explain the origin of the world, shall we also conclude that the account of Jesus' birth, life, suffering and death was also dreamed up by humans to give themselves hope for the future?