Response to Accusations Against Anabaptists
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Response to Accusations Against Anabaptists Anabaptists are not monolithic. In other words, one cannot say that all Anabaptists believe such and such. Actually the movement is quite diverse, from very liberal Anabaptists who support abortion and homosexuality (like some in the Mennonite Church USA) to very conservative Anabaptists (like the Old Order Amish). Obviously, we cannot group all of the teachings of Anabaptists together and say that all Anabaptists believe such and such. In fact there are many "Anabaptists" who embrace much of what Protestant theology teaches. (By the way, the term Anabaptist literally means "re-baptizers" and it refers to the groups during the time of the Protestant Reformation who rejected their infant baptism and were re- baptized as adults.) For the sake of clarity, when I use the term "Anabaptist," I am using it to refer to those who would describe themselves more as "Kingdom Christians." For a description of what a Kingdom Christian is, please go to the link below: Scroll Publishing - What is a Kingdom Christian Kingdom Christians would include people such as David Bercot, Finny Kuruvilla, Dean Taylor, John D. Martin, David Robertson, Dale Heisey, and Ernest Eby. This is a specific subset of Anabaptism that I identify with and whose views I can fairly well summarize and generalize. Accusation: Anabaptists teach that God changed his mind with respect to things like swearing oaths. Response: Anabaptists would say that the New Covenant is not God changing his mind so much as it is God revealing his ultimate plan for his people. God permitted certain things in former times, which have now been set aside with the perfect revelation of God’s will in Christ. Accusation: The Anabaptist teaching that the spirit is necessary to faithfully interpret scripture leads to cult-like thinking. Response: Anabaptists teach that we require the spirit to interpret Scripture correctly, but we exercise humility in recognizing that we are imperfect and may not always be hearing the spirit perfectly. The alternative is to teach that we do not require the spirit to faithfully interpret the Bible, and I don't think any of us believe that. Accusation: Anabaptists do not consider Paul's words to be inspired Scripture. Response: Anabaptists believe that all of Scripture is inspired by God, including the words of Paul. But when one tries to interpret Paul apart from the foundational teachings of Jesus Christ, that person is liable to misunderstand Paul’s teachings. The same is true for the Old Testament. Jesus provides the interpretive framework for understanding the entirety of Scripture. 1 Accusation: Anabaptists teach that the New Covenant supersedes and undoes the Old Covenant. Response: Yes, this is largely true. Anabaptists teach that Jesus brought the Old Covenant to fulfillment and instituted the New Covenant. We are not bound by the terms of the Old Covenant, but rather we are bound by the terms of the New Covenant. Otherwise, none of us should be eating pork, and all of us men should be circumcised. Accusation: Anabaptists consider the Ante-Nicene Fathers to be inspired or deuterocanonical. Response: Anabaptists do not consider the Ante-Nicene Fathers (ANF) to be inspired nor do they believe that the ANF got everything right. The ANF display a diversity of views on some topics. At the same time, because they are so close to the Apostles in time and culture and because they demonstrate uniformity on many key points of faith and practice, they are valuable in guiding our interpretation of Scripture and discerning the historic Christian faith. They are in a much better position to do so than those who lived more than 1400 years later. However, the writings of the early church are not to be held up as somehow deuterocanonical or inspired. Accusation: Anabaptists don't really believe that Scripture is sufficient but think that Scripture is made sufficient only by the writings of the early church. Response: Scripture is sufficient, but none of us are. That is why we need the help of the wisdom of the church and faithful believers both past and present to interpret Scripture. Accusation: Anabaptists teach that the group that was persecuted must be right. Response: Persecution in and of itself does not qualify someone to be an interpreter of Scripture. But people who are persecuted because of their faithful love and obedience to Christ are blessed, and we should consider whether what they have to say about Scripture is perhaps more true than what is commonly accepted by theologians who condoned the persecution of other Christians. Those who were persecuted and then later persecuted others show that they were not walking according to the commandments of Christ, and the scriptures tell us to mark such people and not use them as examples. Accusation: Anabaptists pride themselves in not doing "theology," but in reality they are doing theology. Response: There is definitely some truth in this statement. I think David Bercot and others would do well to be more discerning in how they use the word “theology” and “theologian.” I think what David Bercot means by the word “theologian” is someone who is introducing innovative theological teaching that does not align with the historic faith of the early church. But the reality is that we are all participating in theology whenever we attempt to understand what Scripture says. Accusation: Anabaptists think that all Protestants are condemned and unregenerate. Response: Anabaptists do not teach that all Protestants are condemned and unregenerate. They also do not teach that all Catholics or Orthodox are condemned and unregenerate. They do teach that some Anabaptists are indeed condemned and unregenerate. For example, there are those on the progressive end of the Anabaptist spectrum who disregard the authority of scripture as well as those on 2 the most conservative end who teach for doctrine the commandments of men. What matters is not a person’s denomination, but whether that person is walking in an obedient love-faith relationship with Christ. Accusation: Anabaptists are opposed to the Protestant gospel of salvation by grace alone. Response: Anabaptists teach that we are saved by grace through faith. They recognize that there is no Scripture that says that we are saved by grace alone or by faith alone. I preached a sermon on this exact point a couple of months ago, which I have posted on the FTP site for anyone who would like to review it. Saved By Grace - Judged By Works Accusation: Anabaptists believe that Protestantism is a part of the system of Antichrist. Response: David Bercot has a specific teaching message on the Antichrist, and nowhere is this mentioned. I personally have never heard this teaching, and I do not believe that Protestantism is a part of the system of Antichrist. Accusation: When Anabaptists ask the question, "What if Jesus really meant every word he said?" it means that we can only interpret Jesus's words super-literally. Response: I find the question, “What if Jesus really meant every word he said?” to be extremely helpful in cutting through all of the interpretations that say, “When Jesus said X, what he really meant was Y.” At the same time, we have to understand Jesus according to the genre of how he spoke. For example, when he speaks according to the apocalyptic genre, we should seek to understand his words that way. When he speaks with hyperbole, we should seek to understand his words that way. In other words, this question helps us to take everything Jesus said very seriously. Very often, but not always, this leads to a straightforward, literal interpretation. Asking this question is not helpful if it turns the words of Jesus into a legalistic set of rules that misses the spirit and heart of his message. For example, if I am a baseball player who is at the plate to hit, and my coach says, "Crush the ball." I do not literally take the ball and crush it into pieces. But neither do I ignore the intent of my coach's words and his desire that I hit the ball really hard. When my coach says, "Crush the ball," he really means what he says, and I seek to understand it in the way that he means it. I don't write it off simply because it should not be interpreted literally. Accusation: In Anabaptist theology, the cross becomes unnecessary. Response: Anabaptists believe that Jesus died for our sins, and that we could not be cleansed from sin and set free from sin, death, and Satan without Jesus's atoning sacrifice on the cross. Nor can God's forgiveness be brought to fruition apart from the cross. Without the cross there is no hope for salvation. Written by Adam Boyd… 2018 3 .