In 1517, Martin Luther nailed his ninety-five theses on the door of the Castle Church in Wittenburg, Saxony. For many, this marked the beginning of the Reformation of the Church. Zwingli and Calvin were also considered to be fathers of the Reformation.
Out of that Reformation, the Anabaptist Movement (to baptize over again) was born. One difference between the Anabaptist movement and the and the rest of the Reformers was that most of the reformers were willing to stand up and fight for what they believed and the Anabaptists were willing to lay down their lives for what they believed– and many did.
The Anabaptists were considered radicals because they believed in taking the whole Bible literally. Regardless of severe persecution (or maybe because of), the movement grew and spread throughout the world.
Mennonites and Amish trace their roots to this movement within the Reformation. Many changes have happened to these groups through the centuries–some of these changes were good, but some of them have caused a bondage of legalism, fear, and rejection of others.
Perhaps its time to take a step back and examine where we are at. Is it time for a new reformation among our people? Not that we need to throw out our heritage– but to take a closer look at some of the things we do that aren’t lined up with Scripture and reform our ways.
If the reason the Anabaptist movement began was because we wanted to adhere to Scripture in all areas, then do we still care deeply about doing that? Or, have we moved away from Scripture because of our traditions that we have accumulated through the centuries that are now more important to us than what the Bible says?
Could it be time for another Radical Reformation among the Anabaptists?
Another Radical Reformation 
Simon, I just now read through your posts here. Well done! You are raising important questions, presenting useful historical and biblical evidence, and writing engagingly, with stories and passion.
I look forward to hearing more from you. Yes, may God help us all to be reformed more closely according to the pattern laid out for us in the New Testament.
For Christ and his Church,
Dwight Gingrich
LikeLike
Thanks for taking the time to stop by to read and comment!
LikeLike
You are welcome! There’s a chance I might be asking you to direct me to some sources for a couple of your historical comments yet, when I return to editing my essay on ordinances. (Btw, I do encourage you to cite historical sources and even quote them from time to time, as it gives your writing more credibility for the scholars among us.) Blessings!
LikeLike
I’d be glad to direct you to my sources. I have stuff scribbled down in my notes, but citing stuff is still a new realm for me. I attempted to do a little of that on the last post I have (Radical Baptism), but I’m not sure if I did it correctly. I may go back and edit that one a bit by adding some direct quotes yet.
LikeLike
I just read over all your posts. Agree on pretty much everything. We, a Swiss family lived in Canada for two years2011/12. Since i had a prfound interest on Anababtist belief we visited the local (conservative) Mennonite church and kept on attending it trough all our time in Canada.
We just loved the welcoming , friendly people there, and got more and more ‘into’ the Mennonite ‘lifestyle’.
I guess if we would have stayed on, we would have eventually asked for Membership.
On the other hand we got a few times irritated about exactely the points you mentioned. Why could we nor partake in communion since we both have been believers for years and have been babtised long ago(me even rebabtised,(Infantbabtism)
Or the emphasis on a certain type of dress. This was especially a question for my husband. ( how come that the ladies are to wear those dresses while the men seem to have an easier ‘lot’?
I personally started wearing a covering while attending the Mennonite church. The dear sisters there helped me to put this commandment into practice. I agree that the type of covering is not the #1 important thing. Since there is no such thing as an conservative Anababtist church in my country it would not make much sense to wear a distinct type of covering. Rather i feel it is important to wear something that suits the purpose but is not too ‘offending’ in our culture here.
We loved (and still love) ‘our’ Mennonites but we also felt that there is a tendency on adding to the scripture and taking to much emphasy on ‘guidelines’.
But again, if we ever move back to Canada we would attend one of your churches again and try to become good Mennonites because we feel it is a higher calling to life that way. BUT it has to start
in the heart or it will all be vain in the end. The Goal MUST always be Walking ever closer to the Lord Jesus.
Hope your thoughts will be read by many and will considered with a meek Spirit.
Blessings Ruth Lauber from Switzerland
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hello Ruth,
Thank you for taking time to read and comment. Yes, the Anabaptists are doing a lot of good things and I think there are a lot of beliefs that are right within our churches. But there are also a number areas that I think we are no longer aligned with Scripture. Many people get frustrated and just walk away all together. I was at a point where I was ready to do that, but as I looked back at history, I began to realize that many of the things that I was frustrated with were not a part of the earliest Anabaptists’ teachings. The early Anabaptists had a lot of things right. So what caused the change? When did we start doing things differently? This is what I have been reading, studying, and writing about. It’s been an interesting journey.
Thank you for your prayers. I want to be sensitive to the Holy Spirit’s guidance through all I do or say and my prayer is people will hear, consider, and seek God’s face as well.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes, the first Anababtists where really sincere servants of the Lord Jesus.
But many still are. ‘Our’ Mennonite church is a outreach church and we admire their testamony.
It has to be the highest goal of a Christian to align his life with the bible. And to have a close relationship with the Lord Jesus. Then it will be no big deal to have spiritual unity with people from other denominations either. Blessings Ruth
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m looking to start an online Mennonite blog directory –nothing fancy (nor would it take a lot of time to participate). If you have any interest in joining, you can go http://goo.gl/6xesBK for more information or email me a short bio of your blog and photo at ultimatemetaphor@gmail.com. Thanks for considering it! Tabitha
LikeLiked by 1 person
Simon, I saw your post on Radical Shepherding hit my Facebook feed multiple times and had to go check it out. Very impressed with what you shared there and in some other blog posts. I’m a board member of PROCLAIM!, an organization that is focused on providing pastors with resources to help them become better expositors and teachers. Currently we’re developing an e-newsletter, with a website coming a bit later. Eventually, we want to have a conference geared toward helping pastors, particularly those from Anabaptist roots, become better undershepherds. We’re looking for material to share with our readers, sometimes as reprints, reblogs, or just links to helpful articles on the author’s site. We also have begun a series of practical videos on our YouTube channel. If you’d like to know more about us, email us at proclaim.cmfva@gmail.com. Thanks for sharing your passion with your readers.
LikeLike
Hi Paul, thanks for taking the time to read and comment. Your organization sounds like a good one. I’ll try to check it out sometime.
LikeLike
As a former Conservative Mennonite, I’ve been reading your blog with great interest. Have you considered opening a corresponding Facebook page? It would provide an easy way for your readers to follow, discuss, and share your posts.
LikeLike
I thought about it once. But then realized that would mean I would actually have to be on Facebook. 🙂
I’m not entirely averse to the idea, but since I really don’t particularly like Facebook, at this point I haven’t made any plans to.
Thanks for reading and commenting!
LikeLike
Hello Simon,
I belong to an out reach Anabaptist type church that has deep traditional roots. I am German Baptist to be specific and transparent and I look and dress somewhat like an Amish man. While I can relate to many of your frustrations, I find you over-simplify the whole subject of culture. When the Gospel swept through cultures that we consider pagan, we need to remember that ancient pagan cultures were communities that were hierarchical in construct, submitted to elders and worked hard to sustain their survival. Most of the people I have been involved in discipling can fall back on government programs, can live very independently and uncooperative, due to technology and modern conveniences, and still make slapstick radical comments. One of the reasons I believe God is working so mightily among the Muslims, is because, in spite of their wrong understanding, they have a social construct that still makes them thirsty for the Gospel and able to receive it better then our modern western culture. Jesus makes it clear in his parable of the sower, that the soil greatly determines the success of the seed. Recognizing that there are vastly different soil types is an area I think we need to get honest about, and furthermore, it takes a deep and open minded searching to understand how we ourselves are being affected.
The subject of culture is a very deep subject. When people say things like, “the church should only discipline for things that are sin, and not for cultural requirements” I hear shallowness. I would suggest that the church should discipline for fruit and not for sin. An orchardist that only gives attention to weeds and pests and fails to prune is going to have a bum crop. There is a common idea that runs deep in contemporary Protestant minds, that sin is simply moral failure and the Bible is a list of what is morally wrong and morally right. That is more of a Muslim concept than a Christian concept. Orthodox Christianity teaches that self rule and self love and not moral failure is the source of sin. The Bible is a deep narrative, and reveals our deep propensity for idolatry that in turn produces every imaginable sin. Sin is systemic and cultural as well as personal. Peter commanded his audience to “save yourselves from this untoward generation”. It is my understanding that we not only need saved from God’s wrath but from a culture that is systemically at odds with Jesus Christ. Therefore sin, runs deeper than a paradigm of naughty and nice and the Bible treats it much deeper as well.
God carefully and intentionally birthed Christianity out of Judaism. While we often need renewal, roots as well as renewal are both results of the activity of Jesus Christ himself.
Blessings and don’t be afraid to keep searching deeper in your understanding of church and culture.
Anthony Hess
LikeLike
Anthony,
Thank you for engaging and sharing your thoughts.
I agree with your description of today’s Western culture. Whether this culture is completely different from other past pagan cultures, I don’t know.
The subject of culture could probably have miles of writing and never get done. I view culture as a neutral thing. Every nation, every city, every neighborhood, every church has some of its own culture. The reason I take a stand in saying that the church should not discipline for cultural requirements–only for sin–is because if we begin to discipline for things that are not sin, we are adding to Scripture.
I would agree with your summary of “self-love” and “self-rule” being the source of sin. I think it is easy to begin to think of Christianity as a set of rules and regulations and forget that it’s about a relationship with the One Who can change our desires away from sin.
You speak of “disciplining for fruit and not for sin” to counteract the wrong view that “the Bible is a list of what is morally wrong and morally right”. While that might sound good in theory, it doesn’t work out too well in practice.
The problem is that we as humans cannot see people’s motives. We can only “judge” what is actual sin.
Galations 5 gives us a list of “good fruit”. Should we discipline people for not having enough good fruit in their lives? Who decides if someone is not loving enough if they have enough joy or peace? If I don’t speak as kindly as another brother does, should I be disciplined? If the church can discipline for “fruit” that is not sin, where do we draw the line?
There are many attitudes and wrong thoughts and wrong motives–even in good things we do. I might help my neighbor because it will make me look good if I do. Should the church discipline me if they suspect it? Should the woman who has great pride in how plain she dresses also be disciplined?
My point is simply, if we begin to discipline for fruit rather than sin, where do you stop? We cannot see people’s hearts or motives, so we can’t see what God does. When Paul wrote the church at Corinth and reprimanded them for tolerating sin, he mentions some specific sins in verse 11 (chapter 5). The church was told to discipline regarding these specific sins. All too often, I have seen our people disciplining for outward appearance and cultural practices but are willing to overlook some of the very sins listed here.
Dressing a certain way does not save you, nor does it keep you saved. Could dressing a certain way be sinful? Sure. However, we could also dress completely in accordance to our cultural standards and have a heart that is filled with bad motives and sinfulness in it. But since we cannot see others’ heart motives, the church can only discipline for known, unrepentant sin.
You mention that an “orchardist that only gives attention to weeds and pests and fails to prune is going to have a bum crop.” That is a good point. But who is the orchardist?
I think Jesus gives us this answer in John 15. He says that the only way we would bear fruit is by being connected to the vine. He also says that the Father is the husbandman and He alone does the pruning. That is not given to the church to do.
You say we need to be saved from “a culture that is systemically at odds with Jesus Christ”. Do you mean any culture that is not Anabaptist or do you mean any culture that is not a follower of Jesus?
When we become a follower of Jesus, we are no longer a part of the world regardless of what culture we are in. In John 17, Jesus prays for His disciples and He says, “I pray not that thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that thou shouldest keep them form the evil. They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.” (15-16)
The world hates Christians regardless of what their culture is. And yet Christians all over the world have different cultures. If the church disciplines for cultural issues, they will view any other Christian culture that is different than their own as being an enemy–forgetting that they are part of the same body.
God’s blessings to you as you continue to impact the community around you.
LikeLike
Greetings and Blessings in Jesus Name,
Thank you for your response. I agree to a point with much of what you say. I believe sin and pride can attach itself to any standard. However, I am fascinated that you view culture as a neutral thing. I think you will find that most leading theologians in both Catholic and Protestant traditions would say it is not. Andy Crouch is the editor of Christianity Today and he has a lot of very useful works on this subject that I think you would find interesting.
When I use the word “discipline”, I mean it in a fuller sense of “training” with punishment being only an aspect of discipline. Therefore, as Christians, we want to “train” for fruit and not just the elimination of sin. I am sure you would agree.
As far as disciplining for “sin” only and not for cultural rules, I think we need to take a deeper look. We would not allow one of our church members to own slaves. However, if I was a 1st century Roman Christian, I would want to treat a slave the way Christ calls me to. In spite of our modern abhorrence for slavery, it did have a different cultural connotation in those days. Slaves were not paid wages, along with Workman’s Compensation and Health Benefits. They were not the exact same thing as an employee. Paul gave instruction on the treatment of slaves but did not immediately ban slavery.
Here is another example of cultural standards impacting morals. If a young member of our church liked to drive recklessly on the left side of the road and he was involved in a car accident, we would consider that to be a sin of the heart. If he drove on the left side of the road in England we would have no issue with it.
Likewise if one of our members publicly used the F-word, we would consider that a wrong thing to do even though the connotation in that four letter word is entirely cultural based. It is our culture that has attached meaning to the F-word and not the Bible. On the other hand, if one of our children picked up the use of bad language from the neighbor and had no idea what it meant, we would not punish them because their heart was not evil but ignorant. Which gets me to my main point. The heart takes time and wisdom to discern but as Christians, the heart is the only thing that ultimately matters and when judging sin, it is the heart of my brother or sister that I want to discern or judge.
What would you do if a brother decided to turn the four letter F-word into a positive meaning? When you challenged him on it, he informed you that the immoral meaning meant nothing to him and was purely cultural. How would you respond if he said he had sanctified its meaning and it was your own legalism that was bringing you into bondage?
Since most of the gripes about Anabaptist culture often center around clothing, I would like to share with you where I am at on that. I believe that clothing is like language, it is the culture itself that attaches the meaning and there is not intrinsic evil or good in most clothing, just as there is no intrinsic evil in driving on the left side of the road or using most four letter slang words. It is the cultural agreed understanding that gives sinful value to a word. Since we don’t speak Hebrew or where robes, we do in fact allow culture to ascribe definition. The argument is not, do cultures create definitions, but rather, do these definitions reflect Christian values?
We live in a culture where fashion designers are usually very ungodly and very intentional. Since the Industrial Revolution, there is major name brand identity culture as well as a constant changing of cool and uncool. I believe that fashion designers in the last 20 years have done well at creating more gender neutral fashions that reflect the current sexual revolution. Men are looking less macho and more feminine, i.e. skinny pants. I don’t consider myself to be bigoted as I have had at least three personal friends who were or are homosexual. However, I have firm convictions about homosexual behavior and I intend to be very alert and aware of cultural impact on my faith.
I want to be a part of a Christian community that trains the hearts of men and women to have victory over the prevailing cultural norms and value systems. Jesus said in Matthew 5:30, “if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off”. I doubt anyone is so legalistic as to believe that that teaching only applies to your right hand and not your left hand. I believe Jesus is teaching a principal. That principal is simply this, “make the necessary sacrifice to get victory”. I believe we have permission as Christians to covenant together to overcome cultural pressures in areas where standing alone doesn’t seem to be powerful enough. I realize that a church can become spiritually dead and communicate false righteousness to its members by creating a false value system. If someone finds themselves in that situation, my advice is too carefully and prayerfully, submit to every standard you can, until choosing another fellowship if God wills. I have yet to see the Holy Spirit bless a church member who casually or arrogantly ignores the request or expectation of their church.
I want to belong to a church culture that is training,”disciplining” its members to have victory over prevailing cultural values. The world’s leaders in entertainment and fashion are very intentional and I want to belong to a church that is equally intentional in creating Christian culture.
I want to be charitable here, but I believe many Anabaptist pitch their traditional values, not because of asking too hard of questions but because they do not ask hard enough questions. I believe many pitch their traditions, not because of too much exposure, but because of a lack of exposure. I would strongly encourage you and any Anabaptists who follow your blog to expose themselves to other Christian thinkers outside of Anabaptist circles, both Catholic and Protestant, who study the impact and power of culture.
Blessings on your day,
Anthony
LikeLike
Thank you for your thoughts, Anthony.
When I say that culture (customs, traditions, beliefs of a racial, religious, or social group) is neutral, I mean it is not inherently sinful or inherently good. Anabaptists tend to have a mindset that our culture is inherently good, and all other cultures are sinful. We tend to believe our culture is as close to purity and perfection in God’s eyes as it can get and if someone leaves our culture and joins another, they are sinful even if they are not disobeying anything in Scripture.
Every culture has sinful things in it because all humans are sinful. However, we can’t say that all Mexican culture is sinful or that all of Anabaptist culture is good or that all Southern Baptist culture is evil. All cultures have good and evil in it. So maybe neutral isn’t the best word, but I’m not sure what to replace it with. What I mean to convey is that being of a certain culture does not mean you are inevitably good or inevitably evil.
I agree that cultural actions and words can mean different things in different cultures. In some cultures, having the bottom of your foot pointing towards someone while sitting is considered extremely insulting. That is a neutral action but if I do it deliberately with the intention of insulting someone, it can be sinful. When someone else does it not knowing what it means to the same person, it is not sinful for him. (James 4:17) There are things in our culture that we can look down on others about or judge them for and completely miss the lack of evil intent on the other person’s part. That is why God is the judge on those things. We cannot always see what God sees in the heart.
“Kingdom Culture” is always good and cultivating a culture that loves, forgives, and exhibits Godly fruit definitely impacts the world in a good way. It is being salt and light. But “Kingdom Culture” can be found within many different cultures in the world, not just in the Anabaptist culture.
You speak of disciplining with “training” for fruit and elimination for sin with “punishment being only an aspect of discipline”.
I discipline and train my children using rewards and punishment because that is given to me to do as a parent, but I’m not sure that is what the church is supposed to do with its members. Perhaps you are thinking more of discipleship? Jesus did not discipline and train his disciples to eliminate sin, nor did he train them for fruit. He taught in John 15:4-5 “…As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye except ye abide in me. I am the vine, ye are the branches; He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing.”
From these verses I would say that if we think we can train for fruit, we contradict Jesus. Bearing fruit is a natural result of “abiding in the vine”.
Jesus taught, admonished, and warned his disciples, but he did not discipline by punishment when they failed (think of Peter and Judas).
You brought up Jesus’s words in Mat. 5:30. I agree with your summary of that verse, “make the necessary sacrifice to get victory”. I would like to point out though that it does not say, “if you notice someone else’s right hand is causing them to sin, cut off their hand. “
We cannot eliminate sin from in someone else’s life. We can admonish and rebuke for known sin, and follow scriptural directives if there is no repentance, but we cannot forcibly remove sin or cause them to grow fruit. Even if we’re able to temporarily modify someone’s behavior by punishment, we cannot change their hearts. We can, however, teach and disciple and point them towards abiding in Jesus who is the only One who can change sinful hearts and produce godly fruit.
There is much more that I could say in regards to culture, but for lack of time, I will end here. I would suggest reading Acts 15 where there was a cultural clash and difference in opinion of what the different groups thought should be a requirement for living. If ever there was opportunity for cultural requirements to be demanded of Christians, it would have been included here. And yet, verses 28-29 outline very simple requirements from their culture. Peter’s rebuke to the believers who belonged to a party of the Pharisees in verses 7-11 could just as easily be given as rebuke to many Anabaptist groups today.
Thank you for your interaction and blessings on your week!
LikeLike
Something that I haven’t seen discussed that you might want to tackle in a future post (perhaps you already have, but I haven’t read it yet) is evangelization.
I know some Mennonites in my community, but there is a group of Mennonites from several towns over who will sometimes come to my town to hand out tracts and talk with people. So far, I have never been handed a tract that tells me I need to get rid of my colored car and buy a black or white one, stop wearing all jewelry, and that women shouldn’t wear pants or cosmetics or bright colors, and should make sure their skirts are long and their hair is covered. Instead, the tracts have been about the reality of God and the gospel message.
Once a Mennonite couple was approaching me, and the woman was in front. She thrust out a tract at me, and I smiled and said, “Thanks, but I’m already saved,” and tried to hand back the tract so she could give it to someone else. She gave me a look of utter disgust and refused to take it back and kept walking. The man behind her watched this exchange and looked me standing there frozen in shock with my hand still holding out the tract. I could tell he was embarrassed by her behavior. “So, you know the Lord?” he asked, taking the tract from my hand. “Yes, I’ve been a Christian for a long time now,” I said. He told me to have a nice day and we parted. I was astounded at her rudeness, and it shook me as I walked home.
We are to know a tree by its fruit. What I experienced wasn’t just some woman being rude. When we analyze the situation, we can see that it was the bad fruit borne of extra-Biblical rules. The reason the woman felt free to be rude to me was because she thought my confession of belief didn’t match my appearance, and decided that I’d better keep the tract and read it again because in her estimation I wasn’t at all saved. Why would she think that? Because I am a woman who does not wear the Mennonite uniform.
Her rudeness and contempt stemmed from pride. She felt she had the authority to be rude to me and treat me with contempt, because she felt superior to me and entitled to look down on me. This is what pride looks like in religious people. The prideful and religious congratulate themselves for the rules they follow, and feel entitled to behavior they would acknowledge as sinful in almost any other context. As it says in Psalm 36, “There is no fear of God before his eyes. For in his own eyes he flatters himself too much to detect or hate his own sin.” This is an excellent description of what pride does to us. It kicks against the goads of the Holy Spirit convicting us of sin.
However, her sin which is actually relevant to this discussion is the sin of hypocrisy. She hands out tracts to people ostensibly because she wants them to become reconciled to God and become Jesus’ disciples. The tracts contain enough Biblical truth for this to happen. Or do they?
Do Mennonites truly believe that salvation lies in the information given in the tracts they had out, or do they believe it also lies in their cultural practices? They can’t say “both” without making themselves a cult. And they can’t say it’s possible to become a Christian and disciple of Jesus Christ through their tracts alone, without making themselves hypocritical if they also think believers need to adopt their practices to be in good standing in God’s eyes. They must choose between the two. They cannot choose the sin of hypocrisy without consequence. If they cannot with a clear conscience print and hand out tracts urging people to give up their red cars and red skirts and wedding rings, and urging them to don cape dresses and caps, what should that tell them? Jesus said the gospel should be preached from the rooftops. If you feel the need to conceal your church’s message until you’ve pulled people into the community, consider that your church’s message is not the gospel.
I sometimes wonder about that couple. I wonder if the man spoke to that woman about her behavior when he caught up to her. I wonder if he spoke to her about her rudeness and contempt, and I wonder if she ever agreed her behavior was wrong. But the real issue they should have discussed is her underlying belief, and not just her behavior. Because it is the belief that informed the behavior. As long as there are Mennonites who believe that Christians who don’t live and dress like them are inferior or deceived about their salvation, they will behave wrongly towards them.
LikeLike
Thanks for your comments. Her behavior was certainly disappointing and your assessment may be accurate. I happen to have an Old Order background that is sympathetic towards universalism or final restoration. Those from my background who are Old Order tend to disdain the use of tracts in all cases. My point is, don’t put all traditional dressing people in the same category because it’s more complicated than that.
LikeLike
To Anthony Hess — as I said, I know people in the community locally, and that woman was from a distant community. I am well aware that there is a spectrum of behavior and beliefs amongst the Mennonites. My experience was not about the pros and cons of using of tracts — it was about the gospel message used to evangelize. What is the gospel? Are you converting people to your subculture? Or are you proclaiming the good news and making disciples of Jesus Christ? What is necessary for salvation?
The point of my mentioning my experience goes to the heart of why Simon started this blog. It isn’t about complaining. It’s about pointing the authority of the word of God, and showing the bad fruit that occurs when Christians deviate from the word and start trying to exalt man-made cultural norms to the level of Scripture. When that happens, people equate a refusal to follow a cultural norm to sin, and they equate the following of cultural norms to obedience to God. Neither is correct. We are explicitly told to beware of human tradition.
“Let he who boasts, boast in the Lord.” Our pride and identity needs to be in Jesus. When we know we’re sinners saved by grace and Jesus is our all in all, our attitude of humility will allow us to be objective about things that go wrong amidst our congregations and groups. If we’re so proud of being a Southern Baptist or a Mennonite, etc., that we can’t hear any correction to church practices and consider them embarrassments that must be hidden, we’re not glorifying Christ. We’re being prideful. In Jesus’ letters to the churches in Revelation, 5 of the 7 are given correction and rebuke. Jesus tells us to die to ourselves every day, and to take his yoke upon us and learn from him. Humility and correction should be familiar ground for Christians. Jesus said his sheep know his voice, and he carries both a rod and a staff.
We need to point to the truth while pointing out what is crooked, and Simon is trying to do that here. My experience confirms his observations.
LikeLike
Thanks for your reply,
I can believe that the Mennonite lady you described was not having the proper respect towards other faith traditions and failed to understand how limited her own perspective might be. I can certainly relate to that. I am still learning to give more respect to other faith traditions.
However, I am uncomfortable with the over simplification of saying that there is a sharp division in Christianity between those who follow the Word of God and those who follow the Tradition of Man. Two thousand years after Christ’s advent, I think we all need the humility to admit that we are ALL impacted by extra-Biblical traditions.
I will give you three examples of extra-Biblical tradition to think about:
Example #1 Most of us in the west can trace our Christian heritage to the conversion of the pagan tribes of Europe. They were converted through the work of men like St Columba of Ireland. He nd his men lived by a Rule of Life that included things like getting lashes on the wrist by a leather strap for being disrespectful to superiors. According to the historian Os Guinness, no other Christian movement next to the Early Church has impacted Western culture so much. Is it strange God should bless those men?
Example #2
The Bible you hold in your hand was canonized towards the end of the 3rd century without any Scriptural command do so. Is it strange that God should allow that?
Example #3
The assumption that the world “Salvation” is primarily about going to Heaven when you die instead of Hell may be an extra-Biblical tradition. If you look at all the sermons in Acts, they barely focus on Heaven and Hell at all. Most Gospel tracts do.
Some would say that this emphasis became strong in medieval Catholicism, was reinforced in the Reformation, and is at the center of the Revivalism of the last several hundred years.
My concern and my observation is, that many times Anabaptists, frustrated with their own tradition, unknowingly adopt other views that are just as extra-Biblical in the effort to flee their own. The subject is deep and needs to be treated thoughtfully and prayerfully. May God have mercy on us all.
LikeLike
Thank you thank you for your post! I appreciate it! As I live near a Mennonite community and they don’t believe my testimony of how the Lord saved me and changed me since I don’t wear Mennonite dress and am married to someone who is divorced. I would say the way the women dress and the head covering has become an idol to them. As I have gotten to know them they have shared with me even the pastors wife that she doesn’t have assurance and neither does her husband. How terrible, yet that doesn’t stop them for thinking that the lord couldn’t possibly save me. Well if he is not the savior of sin and can’t save to the uttermost as he says then can he only save those that have sinned very little? Thank you for the post and sharing your experience with that Mennonite couple. I at times wonder what it is they are offering to a lost and broken world. Is it a lifestyle or is it that you can be saved from your sins and be made into a new creature in Christ Jesus.
LikeLike
Anthony, you are making things more complicated than they need to be. With respect, your “examples” aren’t the illustrations you think they are. If we accept that the Bible translations we have access to are accurate, that’s all the basis each of us needs for critiquing the things we face. The word of God is active, and we should read it as much as possible, and the Holy Spirit brings what we’ve read to mind. Access to the word of God is what brought about the Reformation. When the Bible was kept in the hands of only a few, the masses had no idea what the truth was. The printing press and the translations into peoples’ native languages was transformative, along with leadership of men and women willing to die for the truth.
Trying to start a debate over any benefit coming from “what God allows” isn’t going to get anyone anywhere. When people were preaching the gospel for financial gain, Paul rejoiced that the gospel was being preached, and trusted that God was going to deal with the false apostles and their wicked motives. (Phil. 1:18) I myself was presented with the gospel as a child by a mentally ill family member. To this day she is angry that I became a Christian as a result of things she said to me as a joke. What God uses is the presentation of the truth — not the motives of the person saying it. I’ve known people who got drunk when they were teenagers and witnessed to people at parties, and those people became Christians. That doesn’t mean God approves of drunkenness — it means the truth of the words spoken were light shining in the darkness of the listening soul. “God used it” is often a defense of the immature, who wish to cling to sin, and understand little about redemption. Your example #1 falls into this category. God did NOT bless those men with their unsound doctrine of beatings— what he blessed was the spread of the Bible’s words.
Your second example isn’t strange at all, nor extra-Biblical. God told the prophets to write things down, and he told John to write down his visions. Paul wrote letters to the different congregations, and they were circulated. The Jews had the TNK for millennia, and Jesus quoted it as authoritative. The church gathering everything up together and praying about what to include makes sense. The church was growing and spreading around the world, and all the congregations needed access to all the letters, writings, prophets and gospels. For thousands of years, copies of the TNK were in synagogues, and the writings of the early church were added to them by the early believers. God never told the Jewish people to start putting it all the writings together with the law, but they did anyway because they recognized their value and His inspiration, so he didn’t have to tell them. The same with the early church. The value of the word was priceless, and people cherished it without needing to be be told to gather it together.
When I used the word “salvation,” I wasn’t using it in any sense other than its use in Scripture. The Bible makes clear salvation is necessary for humanity. The fact that there are horrible tracts out there does not excuse us from our ministry of reconciliation, nor Jesus’ command to go and make disciples for him. We are required to search the Scriptures carefully like the Bereans in order to discern whether or not what we are hearing is the truth. Evangelization is not an extra-Biblical tradition, and no one should be using tracts with unsound doctrine, if they choose to use them at all.
Your points are all distractions from the issues Simon raises. There is no reason to cling to error, even if a lot of truth is mixed in. Cults thrive on that mentality.
When someone asks you something like, “Do you think a Christian man without facial hair is being disobedient to God?” You need to answer the question. If you say “yes,” you are in error because you equate a tradition of culture with the word of God. If you believe it is fine to think that but a mistake to say so out loud, you add hypocrisy to your error. And if you think you can keep your belief to yourself, you are mistaken because God sees your heart and your children are listening to your teaching. I was once in a car with Mennonites and a child made a snarky comment about people who weren’t “true believers.” I asked him what he meant and his parents were alarmed.
If Christians have opinions they need to hide about what constitutes the gospel message and salvation, they have a problem, because it’s supposed to be proclaimed for all to hear. Human traditions need to be acknowledged as just that, and not put on the level of Biblical mandates and used as justification for excluding people or putting them under obligation for adherence.
LikeLike