POPULARITY
Conrad Grebel was a significant figure in the founding of the Anabaptist movement. Who was he? What did he teach that was so radical that it resulted in literal burnings at the stake? And how can his life and writings inform us today? Conrad Grebel: Son of Zurich book: Funeral Service for Harley Wagler: Episode with John Roth: This is the 251st episode of Anabaptist Perspectives, a podcast, blog, and YouTube channel that examines various aspects of conservative Anabaptist life and thought. Sign-up for our monthly email newsletter which contains new and featured content!Join us on Patreon or become a website partner to enjoy bonus content!Visit our YouTube channel or connect on Facebook.Read essays from our blog or listen to them on our podcast, Essays for King JesusSubscribe on your podcast provider of choiceSupport us or learn more at anabaptistperspectives.org.The views expressed by our guests are solely their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of Anabaptist Perspectives or Wellspring Mennonite Church.
Marcus Shantz, president of Conrad Grebel University College, discusses 60 years of Grebel and the way its guiding principles inform its course offerings and student life. President Vivek Goel releases his annual winter holiday video. A new campus status page provides real-time status updates for each campus in the event of severe weather. We tell you where to find out what's open and closed over the break. Links and resources: Holiday video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TxksIM73-4I https://uwaterloo.ca/news/presidents-news/what-university-waterloo-made Severe weather: : https://uwaterloo.ca/secretariat/policies-guidelines-signing-procedures/weather-closing-guidelines https://uwaterloo.ca/campus-status Daily Bulletin: https://uwaterloo.ca/daily-bulletin Conrad Grebel University College: https://uwaterloo.ca/grebel/
The Swiss monk Huldrych Zwingli, a contemporary with Luther, started preaching from the Bible instead of the Church Doctrine. Others like Felix Mantz, George Blaurock, and Conrad Grebel, and later John Calvin attempted to reform the Roman Catholic Church of its doctrine. The preaching of the gospel separated themselves and their communities from the Catholic Church. The gospel continued to spread.
Conrad Grebel, Felix Mantz, and the best of the Anabaptists
Tidak ada kompromi, Berani, berpendirian kuat, tahu dan yakin pasti apa yang dibela
On Sunday, February 16, 2020, Mr. John West lead a discussion on the historical events in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries that lead up to and culminated in the Protestant Reformation. Church History, Week 7: Difficult Topics of the Time (AD 1400-1600) 1408: John Wycliffe’s English version of the Bible published; 1415: Jan Hus—Burned at the stake; 1439: Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Church leaders agree to a reunification under Rome, Kevian Rus (Russia) forms new Russian Orthodox Church; 1453: Fall of Constantinople, end of the Eastern Roman Empire; 1456: Gutenberg produces first printed Bible; 1478: The Spanish Inquisition begins; 1492: Spain’s monarchs, Ferdinand and Isabella, give Jews three months to convert or be banished. Columbus departs west for China; 1497: In Scotland, children are required by law to attend school. 1502: Johann Tetzel appointed by Cardinal Giovanni de Medici, later Pope Leo X, to preach the Indulgence; 1512: Michelangelo completes the Sistine Chapel ceiling; 1517: Martin Luther posts his Ninety-Five Theses; 1521: Diet of Worms, Luther refuses to recant; 1523: Zwingli begins the Swiss Reformation; 1524: William Tyndale travels to Germany and in two years releases first printed English New Testament; 1525: Anabaptist movement begins with Conrad Grebel. Influences Menno Simons, founder of the Mennonites;1527: Michael Sattler and Anabaptist leader is martyred for the Schleitheim Confession of Faith; 1529: Protestants emerge at the Diet of Speyer; 1531: League of Schmalkalden formed, Protestants against Rome; 1534: Henry VIII—Church of England established via the Act of Supremacy; 1536: Institutes of the Christian Religion published by John Calvin; 1549: Thomas Cranmer, Archbishop of Canterbury produces the Book of Common Prayer; 1555: Charles V agrees to the Peace of Augsburg, granting Lutheranism official status within the empire; 1559: Establishment of the French Protestant Church, later known as the Huguenots; 1560: Scots Confession ratified by the newly recognized sovereign parliament of Scotland; 1562: Frederick III encourages the development of the Heidelberg Catechism by Olevianus & Ursinus; 1563: Thirty-Nine Articles of Religion are issued summarizing the official doctrine of the Church of England; 1572: 24 August, St. Bartholomew’s Day, 3,000 Protestants massacred in Paris. Within three days, 10,000 Huguenots are killed across France; 1589: Moscow becomes an independent Patriarchate, recognized by the Eastern Orthodox Church as the fifth most honored office; 1590: William Shakespeare begins publishing plays with the Taming of the Shrew; 1598: Edict of Nantes by Henry IV ends religious wars in France by decreed tolerance between Catholics and Protestants.
For episode 3 of the "50 Baptists You Should Know" series, listen to hear about the birth of the Anabaptists with three men, Conrad Grebel, George Blaurock, and Felix Manz, who defended their position against Huldrych Zwingli in Zurich, Switzerland at the Great Disputation of 1525.
Se puede rastrear con bastante certeza el origen del anabaptismo en la ciudad de Zurich, en medio de la comunidad de reformadores que seguían a Ulrico Zuinglio. Un grupo de creyentes que analizaban las Escrituras y que encontraban puntos de divergencia entre lo que pedía la Biblia y la práctica de la iglesia que se estaba reformando, trató de instar a Zuinglio de aplicar reformas más estrictas. Ante la imposibilidad de Zuinglio de adelantar reformas más profundas, probablemente por las limitaciones políticas del reformador, este grupo se organizó en una especie de hermandad, entre quienes conformaban este grupo estaban Wilhelm Reublin (1484–1559), Felix Manz (1498–1527), John Brotli (1494–1528), Georg Blaurock (1492–1529) y Conrad Grebel (1498–1526). Lo primero que hicieron al iniciar la comunidad fue aplicar el bautismo. Georg Blaurock, un ex sacerdote católico, le pidió a Conrad Grebel, un joven humanista de familia noble que hacía poco había vuelto de la Universidad de París, que lo bautizara. Una vez que Blaurock fue bautizado, hizo lo mismo con otros hermanos. Pronto se le dio el apelativo a este grupo de "anabaptistas" o "rebautizadores". Este apelativo fue impuesto por aquellos que veían con escepticismo el hecho de que el grupo no considerara el bautismo infantil como válido. Mientras el grupo de anabaptistas crecía, empezaba a despertar una gran oposición tanto por católicos como por los reformadores. El pacifismo extremo que practicaban los anabaptistas se convirtió también en una molestia para quienes querían mantener el orden social y político. Las posturas iniciales que diferenciaban a los anabaptistas de los protestantes y católicos era el hecho de que creían que las autoridades seculares no debían gobernar o interferir en los asuntos de la iglesia. Pero la persecución oficialmente empezó en 1525, cuando los cantones suizos católicos empezaron a condenar a los anabaptistas con la pena capital. A esto le siguieron los cantones protestantes. En 1521, Carlos V decretó pena de muerte contra los anabaptistas y en 1529 se promulgó un decreto imperial contra el grupo. La cantidad de anabaptistas que murieron en este periodo fue enorme. Fueron quemados, torturados y ahogados, como una especie de condena por el hecho de “rebautizar”. Pero no todos los anabaptistas fueron pacifistas. Después de que la primera generación del movimiento pereció en la persecución, los anabaptistas se hicieron cada vez más radicales. Thomas Müntzer (1489–1525) unificó varias doctrinas anabaptistas con las ansias de justicia de los campesinos y lideró un movimiento que fue suprimido por los príncipes alemanes en 1525. Muchos anabaptistas siguieron su ejemplo, entre ellos Melchior Hoffman (1495–1544). Hoffman empezó a anunciar en Estrasburgo que la venida del Señor estaba cerca, que él sería encarcelado durante seis meses, que vendría el fin y que Estrasburgo sería la Nueva Jerusalén. Abandonó el pacifismo e instó a sus seguidores a luchar contra sus oponentes. Finalmente Hoffman es encarcelado, lo que incrementó su popularidad. Luego Hoffman dijo que la Nueva Jerusalén no sería ya Estrasburgo sino Munster. Pronto llegaron la suficiente cantidad de anabaptistas para tomar el control de la ciudad. Una de sus primeras medidas fue expulsar a los católicos. Pero finalmente las fuerzas católicas lograron retomar el control de la ciudad y los líderes anabaptistas fueron arrestados y ejecutados. Así concluyó el principal brote de anabaptismo revolucionario. Pronto, dentro del movimiento se empezó a considerar que el fracaso del movimiento estaría en el abandono de sus posturas pacifistas.
Unity of God and Unit in God, Sheikh Dr Shomali, Conrad Grebel College, 28th Feb 2018 by Sheikh Dr. M. A. Shomali
Les anabaptistes ont émergé de la réforme à Zurich dans les années 1520. Dans cet épisode, nous verrons comment les alliés et proches collaborateurs de Zwingli se sont séparés de lui pour suivre leur conviction en vue d'une réforme plus radicale que celle qui leur était proposée. L'émergence des anabaptistes soulève des questions fondamentales d'ecclésiologie et du rapport entre le chrétien, l'Église et la société.
Les anabaptistes ont émergé de la réforme à Zurich dans les années 1520. Dans cet épisode, nous verrons comment les alliés et proches collaborateurs de Zwingli se sont séparés de lui pour suivre leur conviction en vue d'une réforme plus radicale que celle qui leur était proposée. L'émergence des anabaptistes soulève des questions fondamentales d'ecclésiologie et du rapport entre le chrétien, l'Église et la société.
Learn about the Swiss Reformation, spearheaded by Ulrich Zwingli in Zurich as well as the formation of the sect of Anabaptists known as the Swiss Brethren, including Conrad Grebel, Felix Manz, and George Blaurock. Key events covered in this episode include: 1519 Ulrich Zwingli begins Reformation in Zurich 1529 Zwingli and Luther part ways over Read more about 118 Zwingli and the Swiss Anabaptists (Five Hundred 3)[…]
Learn about the Swiss Reformation, spearheaded by Ulrich Zwingli in Zurich as well as the formation of the sect of Anabaptists known as the Swiss Brethren, including Conrad Grebel, Felix Manz, and George Blaurock. Key events covered in this episode include: 1519 Ulrich Zwingli begins Reformation in Zurich 1529 Zwingli and Luther part ways over Read more about 118 Zwingli and the Swiss Anabaptists (Five Hundred 3)[…]
Conrad Grebel is known as a “radical Reformer” — a leader who took the movement one step further by insisting on separating church from state.
Pastor Jeff Williams: July 24, 2011 Going Beyond, Part XIII, “Beyond Our Differences.” (A video is played at the beginning of the service that is shown in two parts. The link to Part 1 can be found here: http://www.sermonspice.com/bundle/27225/the-source-one-bundle.) We're going to talk about that this morning. We only have one week left in the “Going Beyond” series. Next week, we'll be talking about “Beyond Death,” and then that's it. We will be moving on to other things. This morning, I'm going to tell you a story about a man who was flying his airplane and got lost. He ended up having to land the airplane in the ocean near a deserted island where no man had ever set foot. There the plane sunk into the ocean. He swam to shore and lived there for decades until he was discovered. The rescuers came, and he gave them a tour of the island. He said, “Over here is my house. I built that with my own hands with the things I found on the island. It survived storms and all kinds of things. I've lived there for over 20 years. Here's the church I built. I thought it was important to worship God, so I built a church with my own hands. I would go there and pray, sing, and worship the Lord.” The rescuer asked, “Well, what's that third building over there?” He said, “Oh that. That's where I used to go to church.” Even when you're on an island by yourself, apparently there are splits in the church, ha? That's where I used to go to church. I laugh about that story; it's funny, but when we really see division in the church, it's ugly. It's far from the cry of Jesus, the prayer of Jesus, that the church is one. One thing that really saddened my heart was years ago, we had the Day of Compassion. That's not what saddened my heart; that was a good thing. We pooled together a lot of churches from the area. We, as a church, were very involved. I served as a coordinator to bring together volunteers and also to sign new churches up and get churches involved. We had many, many churches from Rock County join us. We fed like 6,000 people. They had checkups, screenings, and haircuts. They took food home, and it was a wonderful thing. As we had our rally to kick things off, there was a gentleman out there handing out a brochure made specifically for the Day of Compassion. It was a rebuke basically saying, “Shame on you, bible-preaching churches, for fellowshipping with churches that are here like the Presbyterians who believe that you cannot lose your salvation. Shame on you for associating with Lutheran churches here. They baptize infants, and you should have nothing to do with the Lutherans. Shame on you for having Catholics here. Shame on you for associating with the Catholics.” On and on the list went of all the groups we should not be in fellowship with. It read that we should not have been joining together to help the poor and feed the hungry, and it said how wrong that was. I read that tailor-made brochure for that event and just shook my head. I thought, “How blind. How wrong that is!” Today we're going to talk about “Going Beyond Our Differences.” When differences lead to division and destruction, it's always because we have taken the secondary and put it in the place of the primary. We take the secondary, take the lesser, and put it at equal or greater than that which is most important. We see this in life. We'll talk about theology for a moment, but we see that happen in life. Whenever you see it happen in life, you see bad results come from it. Let me give you some examples from it. Let's start with some trivial things-well, it's trivial for some of us. For some of us, it's really important. One: [We see it when] players and owners put their own personal interests over the sport they represent, and we're seeing that right now and wondering if we're going to have football season or a basketball season this year. You say, “Put the game first. Don't put your pocketbook first.” Two: We see it with curiosity over safety. What's more important? Your safety or curiosity? We heard the tragic story in the news this week of the woman who just became so curious about what it would be like to step into the water at Yosemite. She lost her footing and two others came in to save her and lost their footing, and down the Falls they went. We were at Yosemite this past week, in fact, just a few days before that happened. We rafted in the Merced River. I can tell you: we got stuck on a little tree, and I had to get out of my raft to get us loose. I was only in a few inches of water, and I could feel the power. It looked pretty calm, but when I got in it, I was like, “Wow! This is intense for not being very deep.” I got the raft loose and got back in. We had to climb out at a certain point before the River got treacherous. He said, “Stay to the left.” Man, I was staying to the left with everything I had while getting out of that raft. There are people who take chances and people who get to the edge because they want to see over and see what's down there. There are guard rails there, and they're there for a reason. Sometimes hikers will get over the edge, get over those boundaries, just to see. They're curious as to what it looks like down there. They'll lose their footing, and that's it. We put curiosity over safety. Three: Partisan politics over moving the country forward. What is more important: moving the country forward or your party, your district? What is more important? Yet, this happens. I think maybe the last time we saw this happen was in, what? 1954? Or was it yesterday? I think it was yesterday, and it's probably going to be tomorrow too. It's very discouraging for us to witness. Let's look at some more examples. I just put these in random order. Four: Parents put business over family. We're not to sacrifice our families on the altar of career ambition, yet many do. Business is there as a tool. It's there to provide for your family. It's not to become your family. It's not to become your spouse, so for many it consumes them. Family gets the leftovers, so that's a missed priority. Five: Pleasure of the palate over our health. I'm talking primarily about the 11 o'clockers who are going to come in. I know you guys have no problem with that. That late crowd-they're probably coming to church late because they're out eating somewhere. When we were on vacation, we found this chocolate brownie sundae. That was amazing! We felt like we were entitled to that every night. We all shared it. It was like a huge bowl, and we'd all eat out of it, but still… It was like, “Well, we know this isn't good for us to have every day, but we are on vacation.” Honestly, we make choices to put things in our mouths because they taste good, but it comes at the cost of our health sometimes. That's just a fact. Six: Pleasing to our eyes over staying within our means. Something looks good-that vacation in Europe looks good. “I don't have the money, so I'm going to take out a loan to go.” “Boy, that boat sure looks good.” “That convertible looks good.” Whatever it is that's tripping your trigger, “It looks good and I have to have it, but I can't afford it,” America does that very well. We're sky high in debt because we make decisions like this. Let's look at a couple more. Seven: Political ideology over the value of human life. That's right out of the headlines. [This week we heard] the terrible story in Norway of a man who, because of his political beliefs, felt it was necessary for him to take and kill innocent young people. How in the world do we get so twisted that we think our political ideology is more important than the life of a human being? It's hard to imagine. Eight: We come to matters of secondary doctrine over primary doctrine. That's where we see divisions; that's where we see churches split. That's where we see Christians fighting with each other and saying, “I'm not going to associate with you anymore. I'm not going to have fellowship with you anymore.” We take secondary doctrine and put it over primary. First of all, we have to understand what primary doctrine is. The Bible is very clear that there is primary doctrine. There is Truth that is the most important Truth. We're going to talk about what that is. It's clearly identified and defined for us in Scripture. Turn with me to 1 Corinthians 15:3 (page 1139 of pew Bibles). Paul says, “For what I received I passed on to you…” Whenever Paul says that-for what I received-we know from other Passages he is talking about direct revelation from Jesus Christ. He's saying, “I didn't get this secondhand. I wasn't taught this by man. I received this through direct revelation and understanding from the Lord Himself. What I'm about to say is from the throne of Heaven (Verse 3), “For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance…” In the Greek, it means of number one rank or number one priority. Paul is clearly defining that Truth that is most important. He is saying, “If you want to be a Christian, if you want to be counted as a New Testament believer, what I'm about to say is absolutely essential for you to understand and receive.” “For what I received I passed on to you…” that it's important you understand that the gifts of the Spirit ended at the time of the Apostles and there's going to be Pre-trib [ulation] Rapture. Is that what it says? No. What is the most important thing? “…that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that He was buried, that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that He appeared…” Paul says, “There are several things you need to understand. Number one, He is the Christ. He is the Son of the Living God, the Divine Son of God, the fulfillment of Old Testament prophesies. He is the Christ; He is the anointed One. He is the Messiah. He died for our sins. He is the Savior of the world. He rose from the dead. He really died and He really rose.” He said, “According to the Scripture,” he stressed that over and over again, “the Scriptures have divine authority in our lives. They are revelation from God.” Friends, that is the most important doctrine: 1.) Who is Jesus? 2.) What did He do? And 3.), understand that the Bible is the Word of God, and it's our authority. This is a special Book. It says, “The Holy Bible.” Do you know what the word Holy means? It means different. It comes from the root word hagios. It's a different Book because it was written by the hand of God. Paul makes it very clear: here is what is the most important. There are secondary doctrines as well. I think I'm safe to say that if we were to lay out all these secondary doctrines and discuss them, there are probably no two people in this room that are going to believe exactly the same about each of these secondary doctrines. The core doctrines that I've just read-the vast majority of us-somewhere in the upper 90 percentile-say, “Yes, I believe that. Yes, I stand on that.” But, in these secondary doctrines, sometimes it could be as much as 50/50 in this room. It might be “I'm this. I'm that.” Or, many of you would check, “I don't care. It's not important to me.” Let's look at some of those secondary doctrines. I'm not going to spend a lot of time on these. We're just going through them. 1.) Eternal Security. Can a Christian lose their salvation? Once saved, always saved. There are denominations that form over this. There are churches of the centuries. There are churches that have split over this doctrine. There are Christians that don't talk to each other over this doctrine. The second coming is really important to many people. “When is Jesus going to come back? How is He going to come back? Is there going to be rapture, or isn't there going to be rapture? Is there going to be a millennium? Isn't there going to be a millennium? Is Revelations symbolic? Is Revelations already fulfilled? Is it for the future? Is there an anti-Christ? Who is he?” There are all these questions about the second coming. Some churches will put it in their sign. “Welcome. Here are our service times, and here is what we believe about the endtimes.” It will be right on their sign. “If you want to be a member here, you have to believe this about the end times. It's extremely important.” Everything revolves around their views of the second coming. 2.) The gifts of the Spirit is another one. Are the gifts of the Spirit operational today, or were they only around for when the Apostles were here? Is there such a thing as a miracle today? Is there such a thing as the prophetic today? Does God still use the gifts of tongues? Does God still use words of knowledge? Does He still speak through the Spirit to the churches, or is that something that is gone? On each of these views we've mentioned so far, I know for a fact there are people who believe different things about these right here in this church and have been here for years. They're worshipping side by side the same Lord, and I think that's a strength. I know that's a strength of this church. We major in the majors. The gifts of the Spirit, are they operational today? There are divisions, denominations, and factions in churches over that issue. 3.) The sacraments-communion and baptism. Baptism-do we immerse all the way, or do we sprinkle? Is it for infants? Is it for adults? I remember a lady who had really long hair. She told me she had to be baptized seven times. I asked, “Why did you have to be baptized seven times?” She said, “Because my church believes that unless you're fully immersed, it doesn't count. The tips of the follicles of my hair would come out. They couldn't get me deep enough in the baptismal for all of my hair to go under.” People all around her were holding her hair down so it would count. There is an entire denomination that teaches that unless you are baptized and the minister says, “In Jesus' name,” during the baptism, it doesn't count and you're not saved. Going back to the gifts of the Spirit, there are people who believe that unless you speak in tongues, you're not a Christian and you're not saved. We're going to have baptisms today at our picnic. There are going to be some adults that are going to be baptized because they have repented of their sins. They have made a commitment to Christ. Did you know that what we're going to do today, centuries ago, Christians were killed for that? Did you know that? There was a reformation and a man by the name of Zwingli who got some guys named Conrad Grebel and Felix Manz. They were the founders of the antibaptists from which many of our denominations have sprung from. They said, “You know, Mr. Zwingli, we're not seeing infant baptism in the Bible. We don't remember it. We didn't give our permission. Why can't we get baptized again because of our faith?” They started to do that then. Antibaptist means to be re-baptized. They didn't like that term because they felt like it was their first baptism. That was their conviction. They got so up in arms that Zwingli ordered the execution of 5,000 Christians. Do you know how they died? They were drowned. Felix Manz and others were drowned because they were baptized as adults. That is so sad. Murder was committed in the name of Christ. It's hard to imagine. Communion-it should be something that unites us, right? Yet, there is division over communion. Is it the Body of Christ, or is it just symbolic of the Body of Christ? Is it just the power, the essence of Jesus in the elements; or is it just memorial? There are churches and denominations that have split on that topic. 4.) The role of women in the church. Should they teach in the church? Can they teach? Can they be pastors, elders, deacons? What is their role? Should they be silent in the church? We've had people leave our church and say, “You have women in positions of authority. I can't worship with you,” and they left our church. 5.) What is the nature of hell and demons? Can a Christian be possessed? Are there demons today? Do they possess people? I put etc because there are all kinds of other theological differences we have. Then there are other differences. Besides theological differences, let's take a look at that list. There are differences such as political points of view. Do you know that at Faith Community Church, we actually have Republicans, Democrats, and Independents worshipping together (congregation laughing)? There are educational-and I'm not going to tell you who is who-differences in this church. Some of us have degrees. Some of us dropped out of high school. What does the Bible say about our educational differences? There are socioeconomic differences. We have some who are affluent, most of us who are middle-class, and others who are really struggling. There are cultural differences. We bring out culture into our worship. I've worshipped with a few different cultures. I've appreciated them all. When I'm on vacation, we love to go to African American churches because they're so friendly. They're so lively, and their choir is powerful. The preaching is entirely different. I can't preach in that style. The congregation talks back. We're quiet in here; it's our culture, but they're talking back to their preacher. It's a conversation going on back and forth. It's not my thing, but I enjoy it. I enjoy being a part of it. One Sunday we were in a church in New Jersey. We were the only white people in the church. They said, “Any first time visitors today?” (Congregation is laughing.) We were sitting in the back, and everyone turned and looked at us and smiled. Then I smiled, and we had a great time. When we worship with the Haitians, they bring their culture. When we worship with the Dominicans, they bring their Latin culture. When we worshipped with the Swedes, they brought their culture-which was different than any of the above. It's one Body of Christ, but in some cultures, it affects how we dress. What is acceptable? Each culture is very different. In our culture today, there is fighting in the church among dress. There are churches that you have to wear a suit and tie to. You have to wear a nice dress because you have to look your best for God. I appreciate that. I understand where they're coming from. Others will say some people won't come to church because they don't want to come to a fashion show. The Bible doesn't talk about how we're supposed to dress when we come to church. It doesn't say anything about that. Maybe God didn't think it was that important. They say we can just come comfortably-dressed. There are two different schools of thought on that. What music do we have in our church? That's cultural. [There are churches where] all you can have is an organ, or you may have no music. Some churches have that culture-no instruments. Others say, “We can have guitar. We can have drums, but we just can't have it too loud.” Others are all out like you're going to a rock concert. I suppose one of these days some churches are going to have rap. That's where we draw the line right there! No rap in the church! I'm sure it's probably going on somewhere. We bring our culture. We have racially-different ethnic backgrounds. We have philosophical differences. How should we govern the church? What's our target audience? How do we reach that target audience? Where do we allocate our resources? There are all kinds of differences: theological, cultural, gender, socioeconomic. You name it, we have all these differences. How, then, do we overcome all those differences? By making the main thing the main thing-by keeping that which is primary, primary. I'd like us to look at some Scriptures this morning, and I want to read them in succession because I want you to see the commonality of these key Scriptures. First is Galatians 3:28 (page 1153 in pew Bibles). Paul writes and says, “There is neither Jew nor Greek…” It doesn't matter your nationality. “…slave nor free…” It doesn't matter your socioeconomic status. “…male or female…” It doesn't matter your gender. “…for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” Let's look at another in Colossians 3:11 (page 1167). The Apostle Paul writes these words, “Here…” in the Church. “…there is no Greek or Jew, circumcised or uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave or free, but Christ is all, and is in all.” Now what is a Scythian? A Scythian was a barbarian. This was identifying a particular kind of barbarian. When we think of barbarians, we think of Conan the Barbarian and axes and spears and blood and guts-at least I do. Really, the word or the title barbarian comes from how they talked. It used to be said that when they talked, it sounded like they were saying, “Bar, bar, bar, bar,” so that's how it came to be called barbarian. It sounds like they're babbling because they were uneducated, uncivilized. Barbarian was code for uneducated, uncivilized. The Scythians lived in the area that is now Russia. They were pretty much warrior nomads, and they were looked down upon, “You're not educated like the Jews and the Greeks. You're barbarians! You can't even talk correctly!” We talked about educational differences. Paul was saying at the cross the barbarian is welcome. At the cross, the uncivilized, the uneducated, can come and receive the same gift as the educated. Basically, he's saying, “God takes away all of those barriers and all those labels, and He replaces them with the words brother and sister when we are in Christ.” In the Book of Ephesians 4:4-6 (page 1158), there are powerful Verses that Pastor Jesse read. “There is one body and one Spirit-just as you were called to one hope when you were called-one Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.” What is the emphasis there? What is the key word in that Passage? One. There may be many denominations, but there is only one church. There may be many different splits of churches, offshoots, and factions, but there is only one faith, one universal faith. What we have in common is greater than our differences. As I look out over this sanctuary, I see all different kinds of people. There are people who are young, and there are people who are not so young. Some of us are thin; some of us are not so thin. Some of us are introverts; some of us are extroverts. Some of us are musical; some of us are mechanical. Some of us are athletic; some of us are creative, administrative. There are just all kinds of temperaments, all kinds of talents, all kinds of different passions; yet at the core of our very being, what are we? [We are] human beings made in the image of God and unique expressions of the living God. The same is true in the church. Each denomination or each group has a different expression of what the church is supposed to be. This group over here teaches us the value of reaching lost people. Every time they go in there, it's an evangelistic kind of message, and altar call. This group over here teaches us about the importance of reaching out to the poor and ministering to those who are victims of society. Then there is another group that teaches us the importance of holiness and quiet reverence and worship. There is another group that teaches us to celebrate and have joy. There is another group over here that teaches us the importance of rightly dividing the Word of Truth. There is another group over here that teaches us about the power of the Spirit. This group over here teaches us that we need to minister to the homeless and reach out to the sick. This group over here emphasizes community and loving one another. Friends, they are all unique expressions of the Body of Christ, and they're all important; but those differences we have should not divide us. It's okay to say, “This is my style preference, and I have this set of belief on this secondary doctrine.” But to say, “I will not fellowship with you,” or “our church will not work with you,” or “we don't see you as Christians even though you believe 1 Corinthians 15:3-5 with all of your heart and you're sincerely seeking to follow Christ, because I differ with you on this peripheral doctrine and this secondary doctrine; because you dress this way and worship this way, I must disassociate with you” is wrong and unbiblical. What you are doing is you are taking secondary doctrine and you are placing it over primary doctrine. You and I are saying what is different is greater than what unites us. What is different is greater than what we have in common is our belief in who Jesus is, what He accomplished, and the importance of Scripture. When we do that, friends, division, destruction, and ineffectiveness happen. We could do so much more together. The Day of Compassion is just one example of that. Could this church- 650 or 700 people-have fed that many thousands of people, shared the Gospel with that many thousands of people? We would have had to be in 100 percent, and I still don't think we could have done that. In fact, I know we couldn't have. It took all of those churches pooling their resources together. Love in the Name of Christ is an ongoing ministry that came forth from that. Still today, all these churches in the community are working together to accomplish the same objectives. We can do so much more together than we can apart. When we take that which is secondary and we elevate it above that which is primary, we are saying, “These things down here are more important than the things that God has said are the most important.” That's wrong, and that's unbiblical. That's not the kind of church we are. Let's listen now to the second part of this media as he wraps this illustration up and just ties this message together for us. Let's watch the conclusion now (here's the link to the second part of the video: http://www.sermonspice.com/bundle/27225/the-source-one-bundle.) Father, this message is something vitally important to the Body of Christ. Your prayer is that we are one. Lord, many times we are divided over things that should not divide us. We must focus on that which unites us, that which we have in common, that which is the greatest; that is our faith in who You are, what You did, and the fact that You are Lord. Father, I pray that we as a church would continue to form bonds with other believers to mend fences with believers where there has been division and shouldn't have been. I pray that we will make things right and be able to have unity in the midst of our diversity. Father, we thank You for the unique gift to the Body of Christ, what each group brings to the table, what they all teach us and how together we are unique expressions of a whole. For Christ cannot be separated; His body is One. Help us now to apply what we have learned and live it. In Jesus' name, we pray. Amen. (This is a link to the video played at the end of the service today: http://www.strengthteam.com/outreach/content/development).
I. A Long Voyage in the Scriptures Take your Bibles if you would and open to Romans chapter six, we're going to be looking this morning at the topic of Christian baptism. We're going to be starting in Romans 6:1-4, but actually our journey is going to take us in many different places today. A little bit more unusual approach to preaching than I usually do. But I think it's important for us to understand water baptism and what the Scripture says, and there's no better place in my opinion to begin than in Romans 6:1-4. One of the things that I'd like to accomplish this morning is to give you a sense of just what people in the past have suffered for this doctrine, the doctrine namely of believers' baptism. In 1526, two men, Conrad Grebel and George Blaurock baptized each other in a house in Zurich. In doing so, they immediately became outlaws. It wasn't long before the order went out from the city council that anyone that received what they considered to be re-baptism or Anabaptism would be drowned, executed by drowning. The idea was that the baptizer should be baptized themselves. "If they want water, let's give it to them." And so they were put under a death sentence, and yet these two were willing to stand up for what they believed, namely that the church should be comprised of believers. The church should be made up of regenerate people, and that baptism was not to be given to infants, but rather to those who have heard the Gospel and have made a creditable profession of faith. The whole incident started when Grebel refused to baptize his newborn child. And pretty soon we are going to have a newborn child and we will not be baptizing that child. I was raised in the Catholic tradition myself. And I have come to Baptistic convictions by searching scriptures. And that's the way it was also for Conrad Grebel and for Manz and a number of others that we call Swiss Anabaptists. And they were persecuted from pillar to post. Everybody persecuted them: The Roman Catholics did, the Lutherans did, the Reformed did. Everybody persecuted these believers, but they stood up for what they believed because they knew it was scriptural, namely that baptism, water baptism, was to be given to regenerate people, to born again people. And so we've come to that conviction that we are a Baptist church and we testify in the line of that conviction that it is believers, it is those who have been regenerated by the Holy Spirit, who have believed the Gospel, who are to be the proper subjects of baptism. But it's not just the Anabaptists of the 1600s or 16th century, it also is the English Baptists of the 17th century and on that did the same things. And time and time again, we're seeing the same thing, namely that people troubled by the issue of baptism would open up the scriptures and the New Testaments and they'd search and they would find no evidence whatsoever for infant baptism, but rather for believer baptism. And they came to understand what baptism was all about, water baptism. Adoniram and Ann Judson Two of my heroes from church history, Adoniram Judson and Ann Judson, got on a boat in 1812 along with Luther Rice and some others, and they were sailing over to the part of the world where God's work was being carried out by William Carey. William Carey was the first modern missionary from the Protestant world. Going to that part of the world, he was a Baptist and he had set up shop there and was ministering. And the news of his work had reached the shores of the new formed nation of the United States and the Judson’s were our first missionaries. They set sail from Salem…When Christi and I lived up there, we went and looked at the area, the pier where they took off from, and there's a little plaque there. And Adoniram and Judson set sail. Now, it's a long voyage to Burma, isn't it? And you've got all kinds of hours to spend on the ship, and what are you going to do with that time? There were no in-flight movies at that point such as we enjoyed recently on a long flight to the other side of the world. There was nothing but the books to read and prayer and fellowship together. And so as they were sailing, they began to investigate the scripture specifically on the issue of baptism. And the reason why is that they were congregationalists. They were sailing as congregationalists, they were sent out by congregational churches in New England and they were all infant baptizers. And so when they got on that boat, they believed in infant baptism. Well, they had time to begin to investigate and their whole purpose is that they wanted to prove William Carey wrong. And so they were searching through the scriptures so that they could prove that William Carey was wrong. Well, the opposite happened. As they were searching through scriptures, they came to realize that the preponderance of evidence is clear that it is only believers who are to be baptized in the water, not infants. Well as it went on, Adoniram Judson became more and more convinced of this, and Ann Judson became more and more anxious. So what are we going to do? Once we come baptist, they're going to cut off our support. We're going to be left all alone, none of our other missionaries are going with us, will fellowship with us. We'll be totally alone. And Adoniram Judson said that we have to follow the Scripture wherever it leads. And so he was willing at that point to be cut off from all financial support, missionary support. And Ann Judson, though she didn't really believe in infant baptism, she was willing to argue with him and fight against him until finally, she said, "I've got to read the scriptures myself." And so she searched it and she came to those same convictions. And so also did Luther Rice, and when they arrived there the three of them were baptized as well. Now, nowadays, I wonder sometimes if baptists still have those same strong convictions. If we be willing like Conrad Grebel to die for our beliefs on baptism or willing like the Judson's were to be cut off from all financial support, missionaries in a distant land with no network or support because of a doctrine. I wonder that sometimes I've been reading a book entitled, "Why I'm a Baptist," and in it, it talks about some attitudes toward baptism that have crept in even to the Baptist church. Harry Emerson Fosdick who was a liberal at the beginning part of the 20th century, said this about baptism, he said, "Why should baptism divide? If I had my way, baptism would be all together an individual affair. Anyone who wanted to be immersed, I would gladly immerse. Anyone who wanted to be sprinkled, I would gladly sprinkle. If anyone was a quaker and had conscientious scruples against any ritual, I would gladly without baptism welcome him into the church on confession of his faith, why not? Well that's what Fosdick said, why not? Because scripture says that's why. And that's why we will continue to uphold believer baptism despite what people are saying. Meanwhile Will Campbell who is a liberal Baptist wrote this, it's a testimony about his baptism of his infant grandson. This is what he said. "My daughter Bonnie asked me if I would baptize her three-year-old son Harlan on Christmas. My daddy was here, at that point he had been a Baptist Deacon for 60 years and I was afraid because in Baptists circles, infant baptism is quite a scandal particularly if not by immersion. So I asked in deference to him "Daddy do you believe in infant baptism?" And he said "Believe in it son? I've actually seen it." That was his way of saying, "Don't be silly, baptize your grandson." So we did at the breakfast table. Harlan got to giggling while we were doing this and when we got finished he said, (he called me Papa) "Papa what did you put on my head?" I said "Water." And he said "Why?" Bonnie was squirming she didn't want her three-year-old son traumatized by her daddy's horse and buggy theology, but it was a fair question I was glad to answer it. I talked about guilt and forgiveness. He said "What is guilt?" I said "You know that big lump you get in your throat when you and your mama quarrel." Well when I got through with the little homily he jumped down from the table wiped off the last of the runny egg with his biscuit and started off toward the door with the television room, then he came back and grabbed me around the knees and looked up and in the throes of a deep belly laugh said "Well well Papa thank you then." " Is that all baptism is? A little three-year-old who doesn't have the first idea about conviction of sin, doesn't know what Jesus did. Is that all baptism is meant to be? I think not. But in Romans chapter 6:1-4, baptism is held up as a symbol of a union with Christ in his death and also in his resurrection. II. Context in Romans Look with me at that text, Romans 6:1-4. "What shall we say then? Shall we go on sinning so that grace may increase? By no means. We died to sin how can we live in it any longer. Or don't you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death. We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life." Now Romans 6:1-4 is perhaps the chief doctrinal basis that many Baptists have for believer baptism, but I think it goes far deeper than that. I believe in context of Romans that what's being discussed here is an attitude that some may have toward the doctrine of justification by faith alone apart from works. Now we talked about that last time, but our gospel is the gospel of free grace is it not? It's a gospel in which God reaches down to us in our need there is nothing we can do for our salvation. There is no hope for us to be justified before a holy and righteous God, who has a full record of all of our sins and who for one sin cast Adam and Eve out of the garden (that is the holiness of God), and we have no hope before such a holy God for salvation, if God doesn't work it. And because God is looking for righteousness on Judgment Day and we have none we must receive an alien righteousness, a gift of righteousness coming to us through Jesus Christ. A righteousness purchased for us on the cross where Jesus took on our sins and suffered the wrath of God and died that death penalty that we might have eternal life. And Jesus stood in our place and the sins that we had were given to him, and the righteousness that he had was given to us. God made him who had no sin to be sin for us so that in him we might become the righteousness of God, and on the basis of that we will stand. And so therefore it is impossible to sin your way out of righteousness, sin your way out of God's justification, for where sin abounds grace abounds all the more. Well if that's the true gospel, what's the natural thing that pops in your mind? Well then let's sin all we want. What difference does it make if we're saved by grace, justified by something that someone else did, we can sin as much as we want right? And that's what Paul brings up here in Romans 6. He says: "What then, shall we go on sinning or continue to sin so that grace may abound, may it never be." he says. And then he says in effect, he puts it in question form but he says: "We died to sin, how can we live in it any longer?" We died to sin how can we live it in any longer, and then he brings up this image or this picture of baptism. Now in the Christian life there are two different ways of understanding baptism, there is water baptism and there is the baptism by the spirit. And it's so important for us to understand as Baptists, (those who believe in believer baptism that it is the baptism with the spirit), the union, the spiritual union we have with Jesus Christ that saves us, not the water. But that must come first. The public testimony that we have been justified through faith in Jesus Christ comes first and then the water comes next. So he says in verse 3: "Don't you know that all of us who are baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father we too may live a new life." III. New Testament History John the Baptizer Now in order to understand baptism we have to kind of go back in New Testament history. The first time that water baptism enters the scriptures with John the Baptizer. Now you know him as John the Baptist but I don't want you to misunderstand, he wasn't a Baptist the way we understand. He was a Baptizer, he was someone who came under command from God to baptize in water. And so it says in Mark 1:4-5, "And so John came baptizing in the desert region and preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins. The whole Judean countryside and all the people of Jerusalem went out to him confessing their sins. They were baptized by him in the Jordan river." And so this man John was sent by God. It says at the beginning of that verse, "And so John came." What does that mean? "And so John came." Well, he came in the direct fulfillment of prophecy. "It is written in the book of Isaiah the prophet, 'I will send my messenger ahead of you who will prepare your way' - 'a voice of one calling in the desert "prepare the way for the Lord, make straight path for Him."' And so John came baptizing." You see the water baptism came to prepare the way for the Lord Jesus Christ who was sent by God. The testimony in John 1 is clear that God sent John to baptize. John 1:29 and following it says this: "The next day John saw Jesus coming toward Him and said, 'Behold the lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world.' This is the one I meant when I said a man who comes after me has surpassed me because He was before me. I myself did not know Him but the reason I came baptizing with water was that He might be revealed to Israel." Then John gave this testimony: "I saw the spirit, descend like a dove and remain on Him. I would not have known Him except that the one who sent me to baptize with water told me the man on who you see the spirit come down to remain He is the one who will baptize with the Holy Spirit. I have seen and I testify that this is the son of God." A Baptism of Repentance And so John came baptizing with water and he preached it says, "A baptism of repentance." John preached day after day and people came out to hear him; people from all Jerusalem and Judea and all the whole countryside would come out to hear John the Baptist and he would preach and he would preach boldly, and he would preach a baptism of repentance. Now, this was rather shocking to the Jewish establishment, and why is that? Because up to that point baptism had only been done to gentile converts to Judaism. That's what it was used for. It's not a ceremony or commandment given in the Old Testament, but it's something that they had established that if a gentile wanted to come into Israel and become a Jew they would of course, if a male, had to be circumcised but also would have to go through this baptism to kind of purify them from sin. And so this was picked up by John the baptizer and he was saying you Jews have to be purified you're not truly Jewish. You're not living according to the commands of the law of Moses you were treated like gentiles you must come in in the same way. And so he was baptizing Jewish people, and it was shocking to people. They were very surprised. But it was a baptism of repentance. Now what is repentance? Repentance is a change of mind, a change of heart about sin. It's the very issue that Paul's dealing with in our passage in Romans 6. We're going to have a new attitude, a new relationship with sin, In Christ we died to sin. How can we live in it any longer. There's a new way of thinking about it. And so John was calling the people to a new way of thinking about sin; that they would hate sin; that they would fight against sin; that they would yearn to be righteous and free from sin forever. And so he preached the baptism of repentance and confessing their sins they were baptized. It was their way of saying, I want to be done with sin. I come with sin into the river. I want to leave the sin behind and come out pure and clean. And so it was he preached a baptism of repentance. Now true repentance always leads to a change life, doesn't it? Isn't that Paul's point here in Romans 6? If you died to sin you can't live in it any longer. You're going to live a changed life. Things will be different for you from now on. And so John preached the same way in John 3:7-9. Luke wrote, "John said to the crowds coming out to be baptized by him, 'You brood of vipers, who warned you to flee from the coming wrath? Produce fruit and keeping with repentance and do not begin to say to yourselves, we have Abraham as our father. For I tell you that out of these stones God can raise up children for Abraham. He axe is already at the root of the trees and every tree that does not produce good fruit will be cut down and thrown into the fire.'" And so he was calling on them to change their lives whether they were soldiers or tax collectors or any member of society that they were to live differently. There was to be a new life, a change of heart. They were to prove their repentance by their deeds. Now John's baptism, ultimately, was simply to prepare the way for Christ, to reveal Christ to Israel. And John 1:31, we already read. He said, "I myself did not know Him. But the reason I came baptizing with water was that Jesus Christ might be revealed to Israel." It was to get the people ready for Christ to come. And so in the midst of his preaching, in the midst of his baptism, he said, "Behold the lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world." It isn't this water baptism that takes away the sin of the world. It is Jesus and his blood and his ministry that takes away the sins of the world. And so therefore, he consistently denigrated. He considered his water baptism to be inferior to that which Jesus came to do. Said it over and over. He compared himself to Christ, and he said, "I am not worthy to stoop down and untie his sandals." That's what he said. "I'm not worthy to touch his feet." I just stop there and think about that. Sometimes I just think we're too familiar with Jesus. I think Jesus loves us with the love we just can't imagine, but John the Baptist said I don't even deserve to touch his feet. Jesus said John the Baptist was the greatest man that had ever lived up to that point. "I don't deserve to untie his sandals." And people were wondering about John. They were waiting expectantly. They were wondering in their hearts if John might be the Christ Luke 3:15-17, John answered them all. "I baptize you with water. But one more powerful than I is coming who's sandals I do not deserve to untie. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire. His winnowing fork is in his hand and he will clear his threshing floor, gathering the wheat into his barn but the chaff he will burn up with unquenchable fire." So Jesus comes bringing two baptisms. Doesn't he? The baptism of the Spirit and the baptism of fire. One of them for salvation and one of them for judgment. Water baptism is just a symbol. Jesus brings the real baptism. Baptism of the spirit and fire. Now it's amazing each of these four gospels underscores this very strongly. The water baptism of John was inferior to the baptism that Jesus brought; the baptism with the spirit. Now Jesus Christ himself submitted to water baptism. In Matthew chapter three we have the account Jesus came from Galilee to the Jordan to be baptized by John. John tried to stop him and said, "I don't deserve to baptize you. " "'I need to be baptized by you and you come to me?' And Jesus said, 'Let it be so now. It is proper for us to do this to fulfill all righteousness,' and then John consented. And as soon as Jesus came up out of the water…" And by the way every time it says that, I keep thinking about immersion but you don't need all this water if you're just going to be sprinkling... And so Jesus came up out of the water and at that moment heaven was opened and the spirit descended on him like a dove and a voice came from heaven saying, "This is my son whom I love." And so we believe Jesus received water baptism. And so Baptist tend to speak this way. We follow the Lord in baptism. Jesus was baptized with water. We follow him. And he was baptized with water too. Now, Jesus had no sins to repent from, did he? But he was showing his unity with us, and with John's message. Total identification with the purposes of God. We must fulfill all righteousness. And now it's reasonable for us to understand what baptism is. Baptism, the word literally means immersion. It means a complete immersion into something. It was a word used by someone who is dying wool or some kind of cloth. You're going to immerse it in the dye. If you're going to dye it purple or dye it blue, you would completely immerse it in the vat where the dye was. And so that's the word used. Baptism. Baptidzo. It's a total immersion. And so, Jesus in effect was immersing himself in righteousness. He was immersing himself in John's message. He was immersing himself in unity with us though he had no sin. And so in that same way, he spoke of his crucifixion as a baptism. In Luke 12:49-50, he says, "I have come to bring fire on the earth and how I wish it were already kindled. But I have a baptism to undergo and how distressed I am until it is completed." What is he referring to there? It's his crucifixion, his death. He would be completely immersed in the wrath of God. He would drink totally the cup of God's wrath for us so that we would not have to. Jesus was immersed in that. There was a time also in Mark chapter 10 when James and John, the sons of Zebedee came up to Jesus and they had a request. And Jesus said, "What is it you want me to do for you?" And they said, "Grant that one of these two sons of mine may sit at your right and one on your left." The mother made the request and then Jesus turned to the sons, James and John and says, "You don't know what you're asking." "Can you drink the cup that I'm going to drink or be baptized with the baptism I'm going to be baptized with?" "We can," they said, not knowing what they were speaking of. "Yes, we can be baptized with your baptism." Jesus said, "You will drink the cup I drink and be baptized with the baptism I'm baptized with. But to sit on my right or left is not for me to grant. Those places belong to those for whom they're prepared." Now how did James and John get baptized with Jesus's future baptism? Our text answers that question I believe. We are united with Christ in his death and we are united with him also in his resurrection. A total union between us and Jesus Christ. Paul put it this way, Galatians 2:20, "I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live." That's total identification. I've been immersed in Jesus's death. Totally one with it. His death is my death. And so also his resurrection is my resurrection. So just as I died with Christ to sin. So now I have been raised with Christ to a whole new life. And the water baptism is just a symbol of that, just a picture of that. But the real baptism is being baptized with the baptism with which Jesus was baptized. That death on the cross and also his resurrection. But Jesus also commanded not just did he receive water baptism himself and not just did he speak of his crucifixion as a baptism, but he wanted his disciples to do water baptism, to pick up with this symbol from John the Baptist and carried on into his ministry, into their ministry. In John chapter 3, this is recorded after this Jesus and his disciples went out into the Judean countryside where he spent some time with them and baptized, it says. John 3:26, some people came to John and said, "Rabbi, that man who is with you on the other side of the Jordan, the one you testified about. Well, he is baptizing and everyone's going out to him." And so the whole countryside was going and so baptism is being carried on around Jesus. Now I speak of it that way because we learn in John chapter 4 that Jesus himself was not baptizing, but his disciples were. Jesus didn't do the water baptism. He had a greater baptism to give, the baptism of the spirit and he would give that. But the disciples were to do the water baptizing and so they did. They baptized with water, John 4:1-2. And so he had it started early in his ministry. I assume it continued right on through and then he gave the command in the great commission. He said, "All authority in heaven and earth has been given to me. Therefore, go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the father and the son and the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I've commanded. And surely, I am with you always, to the end of the age." So water baptism was going to be part of the great commission. That the disciple-making would come alongside this symbol, this water baptism. Baptism into the name of the father and the son and the Holy Spirit. And then, finally, Jesus baptized his disciples with the Holy Spirit. In Acts 1:4-5, "On one occasion," it says, "while he was eating with them, he gave them this command, 'Do not leave Jerusalem, but wait for the gift my father promised, which you have heard me speak about, for John baptized with water, but in a few days you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit." And so it happened. On the day of Pentecost (Acts chapter 2), the Holy Spirit descended on that assembled body, 120 of them there. And the Holy Spirit came and they were baptized with the Holy Spirit. After the Holy Spirit came, they were filled with the spirit and they went out on the streets and Peter preached to a huge throng there. And this is what Peter said, "God has raised this Jesus to life and we are all witnesses of the fact. Exalted to the right hand of God he has received from the father, the promised Holy Spirit, and has poured out, which you now see in here." The Holy Spirit has been poured out. And so Jesus in baptism. And then the apostles continued that baptism in their ministry right that same day of Pentecost. Acts 2:37 and following, "when the people heard this [the message of the Gospel], they were cut to the heart." They were convicted, there was a conviction of sin, and they said, "Brothers, what shall we do?" There was a cry from the heart saying, "I want to be saved. The wrath of God is against me. I'm under my sins. Is there a refuge for me? Is there a place where I can go?" Yes there is, the blood of Jesus Christ has been shed for you. And he said, "Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ, for the forgiveness of your sins, and you also will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. The promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off, for all of whom the Lord our God will call. With many other words he warned them; and he pleaded with them, 'Save yourselves from this corrupt generation'." And, "Those who accepted his message were baptized." Just a moment. What did I just say? Those who accepted the message were baptized. No infants. Those who accepted the message, those who believed the message were baptized. And the number of disciples grew to about 3000 that day. So it was also with Philip and the Ethiopian eunuch. "Here's water. Why shouldn't I be baptized?" And so he was baptized. And Paul and Silas with the Philippian jailer. Water baptism. But yet the apostles consistently considered the baptism of the spirit more significant. That's what mattered more than anything else. In Acts chapter 10, Peter is speaking to the first Gentile convert, Cornelius. "While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit came on all who heard the message. The circumcised believers who had come with Peter were astonished that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on the Gentiles, for they heard them speaking in tongues and praising God. Then Peter said, 'Can anyone keep these people from being baptized with water? They have received the gift of the Holy Spirit just as we have.'" They'd already been united with Christ. They'd already believed, it had already happened. Let's do the water baptism because God's commanded it for us. You see the order? And so it was. Now, what do we learn from this survey? Well, first, water baptism is significant, isn't it? It's important. If it weren't important, Jesus wouldn't have been baptized. If it weren't important, Jesus wouldn't have commanded us to baptize in water. But it's not ultimately important. The baptism of the Spirit, the union that we have with Jesus Christ in his death and in his resurrection by the spirit, now that saves. That saves you from sin. So what is baptism, then? IV. What Baptism Is Baptism is a Symbol of Union with Christ Baptism is, number one, a symbol of union with Christ. A symbol. It's not reality. The Catholic church teaches that there is a reality about their sacraments. Something really happens to you when you go through their sacraments. So they believed that I, when I was baptized as a two-week-old infant or however old I was, I don't remember it, but I was baptized, that something happened to me. I became a Christian that day, so they teach. But we believe that water baptism is just a symbol. It's a symbol of an internal, spiritual union, isn't it? And what really matters is that internal spiritual union, it must come first. It's prior, it's more important. It's an immersion. We're baptized into the name of the father and the son and the Holy Spirit. We are united with him through faith. That's what it is. And water baptism is a symbol of that union. Romans 6:3-4. "Don't you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the father, we too may walk in newness of life." So if you're a Christian, you are united with Christ in death and united with him now in a new life. And therefore, you cannot sin that grace may increase. It's impossible for you. Water baptism, therefore, a symbol of union with his death, union in his resurrection, union by the Holy Spirit. But it's also a symbol of union with the body of Christ, with the church. Baptism is a Symbol of Union with Christ’s Body, the Church You don't baptize yourself, do you? Did any of you baptize yourselves? I need to talk to you afterwards. Baptism is done by someone else, isn't it? Someone baptizes you. And why is that? Well, it's because it's a symbol that you're coming into a community, into a fellowship of faith. There's a continuity, a sense of a growing church of Jesus Christ. And so it's a symbol of union with Christ's body. You're being baptized into a body, is what's happening. 1 Corinthians 12:13. Write that one down. It's an important verse. 1 Corinthians 12:13, it says in verse 12, "The body is a unit though it is made up of many parts, and though all its parts are many, they form one body. So it is with Christ. For we were all baptized by one spirit into one body." Did you hear that? "We were all baptized by one spirit into one body, whether Jew or Greeks, slave or free. And we were all given the one spirit to drink." What's really going on is the spirit baptism, a spirit drink. And by the spirit we are made into one body worldwide. Jew or Greeks, slave or free. It doesn't matter what nation you're from, it doesn't matter your national origin, it doesn't matter your gender. None of that matters, you are baptized all into one body by one spirit. There is "one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and father of all, who is overall, and through all and in all," Ephesians 4:5. So we are baptized into a body, the church. Pledge of a Good Conscience And then finally water baptism is the pledge of a good conscience. Now, in the days of John the Baptist, you came and you were saying, "I repent from sin. I'm turning away from sin. I hate it. I don't want to live in it any longer." Well, the same thing happens here, isn't it? When you come up to this baptismal font, in this baptistery here, you're coming in, you're saying, "I want to be done with sin. I want to live a new life. I repent, and this is a symbol of my repentance." It's the pledge of a good conscience toward God. 1 Peter 3:21-22, "Water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also, not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge of a good conscience toward God. It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ, who has gone into heaven and is at God's right hand with angels, authorities and submission to him." So you're making a pledge of a good conscience toward God who rules over all things. Not the removal of dirt from the body. V. What Baptism Is Not Not for Unregenerate But what is baptism not? Well, baptism is not for the unregenerate. It's not for the unbeliever. And so, Baptists have always had a procedure you have to go through before they'll baptize you. They want to know for sure whether you're born again or not. The point is not the water, the point is your eternal soul before God. That's what matters, want to be sure that you're saved, want to be sure that you're justified by faith in Christ alone, and that you will not have to bear the wrath of God on judgment day, but rather that you're free forever from sin through faith in Christ. And so, we are seeking, reaching out for believers, not for the unregenerate. Do you realize folks, you Baptists, that we're in the minority on this one? Roman Catholics, Orthodox, Lutherans, Methodists, Presbyterians, on and on. Are you also sure of this now? Are you so sure about believer baptism? Can you stand up and give a testimony for what you believe? We're in the minority, but we believe that the scripture is teaching that you hear the message, you repent and believe and then receive water baptism as a symbol of what's already happened in your life. But behind this is a larger ideal, isn't it? And that's what we call a regenerate church membership. What do I mean by regenerate church membership? I mean that the church, the local church should as much as possible be comprised of believers in Jesus Christ. You don't seem shocked. The church is meant to be made up of believers. And so we desire to see regenerate born-again people to be believers of this church and no others. That's our goal. But why is that? Because of the ultimate issues that we're facing here. We're facing the fact that apart from Christ, we're under the wrath of God, but furthermore because unregenerate church members affect the church life, don't they? They affect the way that things go around here and in other churches too. And so we seek only regenerate church members and believer baptism is the front door of that. So we're seeking people who have made a creditable profession of faith. Basically, the ideal is that no one should have a voice or a vote in this church if they're not born-again. That's a regenerate church membership. Believer baptism is the front door of that. Now these days, we have a kind of a problem in the Baptist circles. It's called baptizing children. We're always baptizing, it seems earlier and earlier and earlier all the time. I know actually of a southern Baptist church, this is not a joke. Southern Baptist church that has a red fire engine baptistery that children can use. And it's got little cannons on either side that shoot off confetti when the child gets lowered under the water and brought back up. Some of those kids are lining up to do it again and again. It looks like fun. This is tragic. Baptism is too serious for that. What are we saying we go into that water that we have been united with Christ in his death. We're done with sin forever. Does a child understand that? Does a child understand what it cost to be raised up out of that water? Raised up to newness of life in Christ. Does he understand the price that was paid? But what's happening is there is a pressure always to baptize earlier and earlier. And then guess what happens to these little ones? They grow up to bigger ones, don't they? And then what? They're still members of the church, and what's happening then? Unregenerate church membership, and it's affecting the life of the church. We don't want a red fire engine baptistery for children here. We want to be sure that everyone that we baptize is truly born-again. So baptism is not for the unregenerate. Not a Guarantee of Salvation It's also not a guarantee of salvation. Just because you've been baptized, doesn't mean that you're going to heaven. Just because you've received water baptism. There needed to be a life lived. There needed to be engrafting into the vine and then fruit flowing from that life. That's what Romans 6 is all about, we're going to keep talking about it. You show who's your master by how you live. So water baptism alone doesn't guarantee that you're going to heaven. Thirdly, it's not required for salvation. Not Required for Salvation There are groups out here that teach that baptism is required for salvation. They teach that you must be water baptized to be saved. As a matter of fact, they say it is the moment of salvation. The moment that you receive that water baptism, that you are saved, is that true? Absolutely not, we believe that regeneration precedes baptism. And that water baptism is simply a symbol of it. Was the thief on the cross baptized? And Jesus said, "Truly I say to you today, you'll be with me in paradise." And then Paul said in 1 Corinthians 1:17, "Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel. Not with words of human wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power." You put works like that on top of, you've emptied the cross of Christ of its power. "I didn't get sent," Paul said, "to baptize, but to preach the gospel." Let me ask you a question. Would Paul ever have said that if water baptism was required for salvation? No way. "Christ did not send me to baptize but to preach the gospel." He wouldn't have made a division. What he's saying is that water baptism does not save you. Not to be Disregarded And then finally water baptism is not to be disregarded. The great commission says that we are to teach them to obey what? Everything that I have commanded. What happens is somebody comes to faith in Christ, we say, "Praise God, you're saved. You now have a new lord, a new master, he's going to be asking many things of you." People say to me, we're talking about water baptism, "Do I have to get up on front of all those people and give my testimony?" I say, "Yeah you do, but you know something, God is strong and powerful and he's going to give you the ability to do that. As a matter of fact, he's going to ask many hard things of you in your Christian life, isn't he?" That's just the first. By the way, if you had known just how hard the journey was, would you have ever come to Christ? He doesn't show you right up front but we know that through many hardships we enter the kingdom of heaven. It is a difficult journey we're called on, but it's a journey of obedience to a lord and master who gives us commands and we obey. This is a simple one, isn't it? Just stand up and give a credible profession of your faith in Christ and go into the water and come back up. That's pretty easy, anybody can do that. But if you're not willing to do that, what does it say about you? There's something amiss you don't understand. It's not to be disregarded. Jesus said, "If you love me, you'll obey what I command." And he commanded that we baptize the nations as we make disciples. Spurgeon said this, "If our congregations were what they ought to be, it would be a very simple matter to preach. For a sermon would then only need to be like the orders given by a commanding officer to his troops, short, sharp, plain, clear, distinct. Our hearers would not want illustrations and metaphors. They would simply ask to be told what they must do to be saved. And the more plainly they could be told, the better pleased they would be." So it's a simple command. Repent, be baptized, trust in Christ and walk with him. And so water baptism is really the first step of obedience. Can I apply it to you? Have you taken that step? Have you come to personal faith in Christ and received water baptism as a symbol of that? There are some people even in our midst that have paid a price to be baptized, even in front of all of you. Perhaps they were holding an office in the church, at some point they recognized that they weren't really saved. And they repented, and they stood up in front of you, and gave a testimony that they have now come to faith in Christ. Was that hard to do? Yeah it was. But they received the water baptism as a testimony of what God had done in their lives. Have you received baptism after you repented and believed? Have you received this? If he is calling you, if today you hear his voice, don't harden your heart, but come and follow and receive this ordinance, this symbol of water baptism. But for those of you who have been baptized as believers, but you're just not living up to it. It's kind of like a husband and wife. They stand up in front of God and each other, and they make promises to each other. If they're not living up to the promises the way they should, should they get married again? Should they stand up and do it all again? No, they need to live up to what they promised, that's all. The beauty of Romans 6, is that any moment a true Christian can repent and start walking with Jesus and stop sinning, because we're not under the authority of sin any longer. We're free from it forever. So if you are a Christian who is not living up to the promise you made to follow Christ and to obey him, live up to it, that's all. Walk by the power of the spirit. We're not going to sin all the more so that grace may increase, but rather we died to sin. We're going to never live in it any longer. God has raised you up to a newness of life, walk in it. Now we have had the opportunity today to hear from God's word. Our desire is that you hear and obey. If God has spoken to your heart, come and talk to me after the service. If you don't know for certain whether you've ever been saved, if you don't know for sure whether you're free from the guilt of your sin, come and talk to me. It's too important to put off. Won't you close with me in prayer? Lord Jesus, we thank you for the commands that you have given us, that they are clear and understandable. Father I pray in Jesus name, that you would enable us to hear and to obey. Thank you o Lord, for the doctrine of water baptism. We thank you for the symbol that it is of dying to an old life, dying to sin and rising again to newness of life. Help us to walk oh Lord, in that newness of life. We pray in Jesus name, Amen.
This episode is titled, Taking It Further.History, or I should say, the reporting of it, shows a penchant for identifying one person, a singular standout as the locus of change. This despite the recurring fact there were others who participated in or paralleled that change. Such is the case with Martin Luther and the Swiss Reformer Ulrich Zwingli. While Luther is the “historic bookmark” for the genesis of the Reformation, in some ways, Zwingli was ahead of him.Born in Switzerland in 1484, Ulrich Zwingli was educated in the best universities and ordained a priest. Possessing a keen mind, intense theological inquiry coupled to a keen spiritual struggle brought him to a genuine faith in 1516, a year before Luther tacked his 95 thesis to Wittenberg's door. Two yrs later, Zwingli arrived in Zurich where he spent the rest of his life. By 1523, he was leading the Reformation in Switzerland.Zwingli's preaching convinced Zurich's city council to permit the clergy to marry. They abolished the Mass and banned images and statues in public worship. They dissolved the monasteries and severed ties with Rome. Recognizing the central place the Bible was to have in the Christian life, the Zurich reformers published the NT in their own vernacular in 1524 and the entire Bible 6 yrs later; 4 yrs before Luther's German translation was available.Zwingli didn't just preach a Reformation message, he lived it. He married Anna Reinhart in 1522.In one important respect, Zwingli followed the Bible more specifically than Luther. Martin allowed whatever the Bible did not prohibit. Zwingli rejected whatever the Bible did not prescribe. So the Reformation in Zurich tended to strip away more traditional symbols of the Roman church: the efficacy of lighting candles, the use of statues and pictures as objects of devotion, even church music was ended. Later, in England, these reforms would come to be called “Puritanism.”But more than the application of Reformation principles, Zwingli's bookmark in history is pegged to the Eucharistic controversy his teaching stirred. He was at the center of a major theological debate concerning the Lord's Table. Between 1525 and 8, a bitter war of words was waged between Zwingli and Luther. During this debate, Luther would write a tract and Zwingli would reply. Then Zwingli would pen a treatise and Luther would reply. This went back and forth for 3 yrs. It was a war fought with pamphlets as the ammunition.Both sides rejected the Roman doctrine of transubstantiation—that the prayer of a duly authorized priest transformed the elements into the literal body and blood of Christ. Their disagreement centered on Jesus' words, “This is My body.” Luther and his followers adopted the position known consubstantiation, which says Jesus is present “in, with, and under” the elements and taking Communion spiritually strengthens the believer.Zwingli and his supporters regarded this as an unnecessary compromise with the doctrine of transubstantiation. They said Jesus' words had to be understood symbolically. The elements represented Jesus' blood and body, and Communion was merely a memorial. An important memorial to be sure, but the bread and wine were just symbols.The debate remains to this day.It should be noted that during his last years, Zwingli seems to have moved to a new position in regard to Communion. He came to recognize a spiritual presence of Christ in the elements, though reducing the idea to words is a proposition far beyond the capacity of this podcast to do. This later position of Zwingli was the position of Philip Melanchthon, Luther's assistant and spiritual heir.Following hundreds of years of tradition, Zwingli, along with many other Reformers, believed the State and Church should reinforce one another in the work of God; there should be no separation. That's why the Reformation became increasingly political and split Switzerland into Catholic and Protestant cantons, and eventually saw all of Europe carved up into differing religious regions. The terrible Wars of Religion were the result.Switzerland at that time was a network of 13 counties called cantons. These were loosely federated and basically democratic. Culturally, the north and east were German, while the west was French, and the south was Italian. The Reformation spread from Zurich, chief city of the capital canton, to the rest of German Switzerland, who were nevertheless reluctant to come under the politic al control of Zurich. Several cantons remained militantly Roman Catholic and resisted Zwingli's influence for largely economic reasons.As political tensions grew, several Protestant cantons formed the Christian Civic League. Feeling pressed and threatened, the Catholic cantons also organized and allied themselves with the king of Austria. A desire to avoid war led to the First Peace of Kappel in 1529. But as often happens, once a treaty was hammered out, the only option left was war. Sure enough, two yrs later, five Roman Catholic cantons attacked Zurich, which was unprepared. Zwingli fought as a common soldier in the Battle of Kappel in 1531 and died in the field.The Second Peace of Kappel hammered out at the end of the year prohibited further spread of the Reformation in Switzerland. Heinrich Bullinger, Zwingli's son-in-law, took over leadership of the Protestant cause in Zurich and enjoyed great influence across Europe.An important aspect of Zwingli's impact on the Reformation was that he cast it along civic lines, with a view to establishing a model Christian community. He persuaded the city council to legislate various details of the Reformation. He aimed at political reform as well as spiritual regeneration.The inter-canton struggles of this period led to the growing independence of the city of Geneva, which became the home of John Calvin, the other great Reformation luminary. The Swiss Reformation and Zwinglian movement ended up merging with Calvinism later in the 16th C.Often overlooked in a review of the Reformation are those we might call the REAL reformers – better known as the radical reformers.Not all those who broke with Rome agreed with Zwingli, Luther, or Calvin. As early as 1523 in Zurich, there were those whose vision of Reform outstripped Zwingli's. This movement coalesced around 2 leaders: Conrad Grebel and Felix Manz.On the 21st of Jan, 1525, a little group met in the home of Felix Manz. The Zurich City Council had just ordered Grebel and Manz to stop teaching the Bible. Four days earlier the Council ordered parents to baptize their babies within eight days of birth or face exile. But a group of Zurich's citizens questioned the practice of infant baptism. They met in Manz's home to decide what to do. After a time of prayer, they agreed they'd obey what their conscience told them God's Word said and trust Him to work things out. In an immediate application of that decision, a former priest named George Blaurock asked Conrad Grebel to baptism him in the fashion modeled in the Book of Acts. So, upon confession of His faith in Christ, Grebel baptized him, then Blaurock and Grebel together baptized the others.Anabaptism, another important expression of the Protestant Reformation, was born.As a term, anabaptist means “to baptize again.” The Anabaptists stressed believer's baptism, as opposed to infant baptism. But the term “Anabaptist” refers to diverse groups of Reformers, many of whom embraced radical social, political, economic, and religious views. Some Anabaptist groups are known as the Swiss Brethren, the Mennonites, Hutterites, and the Amish. While those names may conjure up images of buggies, overalls, bonnets and long beards, it's important to recognize that the Anabaptist tradition lies at the heart of a far larger slice of the Christian and Protestant world. Many modern groups and independent local churches could rightly be called Anabaptist in the bulk of their theology, though ignorant of their spiritual heritage.While the theology of the Anabaptist groups ended up being widely spread across the doctrinal spectrum, their main stream adhered to the sound, expository teaching of the Scriptures, the Trinity, justification by faith, and the atonement of Christ. What got them in trouble with some of their Reformation brethren was their rejection of infant baptism, which both Catholic and most other Protestant groups affirmed. They argued for a gathered, voluntary church concept as opposed to a State church. They advocated a separation of church and state and adopted pacifism and nonviolent resistance. They said Christians should live communally and share their material possessions. Counter-intuitively to all this, they preached and practiced a strict form of church discipline. Any one of these would mark them as distinct from other Reformation groups; but taken together, the Anabaptists were destined to run into trouble with Lutherans and Calvin's followers.That's what happened in Zurich. Zwingli's reforming zeal produced an intolerance of his disciples Grebel and Manz who simply wanted to take the reforms further. They tried to convince Zwingli to follow thru into a genuine NT pattern, but all they did was provoke him to urge the City Council to fine, imprisoned, and eventually martyr them and their followers.The rise of Anabaptism ought to have been no surprise. Revolutions nearly always spin off a radical fringe that feels its destiny is to reform the reformation. Really, that's what Anabaptism was; a voice calling moderate reformers to take it further; to go all the way into a genuine NT model.Like most such movements, the Anabaptists lacked cohesion. By lifting up the Bible as their sole authority, they resisted framing a cogent set of doctrinal distinctives. That meant the movement fragmented into several theological streams with no single body of doctrine and no unifying organization prevailing among them. Even the name “Anabaptist” was pinned on them by their enemies and was meant to class them as radicals at best and at worst, dangerous heretics. The campaign to slander them worked well.In reality, the Radical Reformers rejected the idea of “rebaptism” they were accused of because they never considered the ceremonial sprinkling of infants as valid. They preferred to be called simply “Baptists.” But the fundamental issue wasn't baptism. It was the nature of the Church and its relation to civil government.The Radical Reformers came to their convictions as other Protestants had; by reading the Bible. Luther taught that common people had a right to read, understand and apply the Scriptures for themselves, they didn't need some specially-trained church hierarchy to do all that for them. So, little groups of Anabaptists gathered around their Bibles.Picture a home Bible study. They discover in the pages of Scripture a very different world from the one the official church had concocted in their day. There was no state-church alliance in the Bible, no so-called “Christendom.” Rather, the Church was comprised of local, autonomous communities of believers drawn together by their faith in Jesus and nurtured by local pastors. And while that seems like a massive “Duh!” to many non-denominational Evangelicals today, it was a revolutionary idea in the 16th C.You see, though Luther stressed a personal faith for each believer, Lutheran churches were understood as linked together to form THE Church of Germany. Clergy were ordained by a spiritual hierarchy and the entire population of a region were de-facto members of that region's church. The Church looked to the State for salary and support. In those years, Protestantism differed little from Catholicism in terms of its relationship to the civil authority. If the State was society's arm with the strength to enforce, the Church was its heart and mind with the insight to inspire and inform.Or, think of it this way, for 16th C Catholicism, Lutheranism and Calvinism, in society, the State was the body, the Church was the soul. They saw the Radical Reformers insistence that the Church and State were separate as creating a headless monster destined to do great harm.The Radical Reformers, as we'd suspect, responded with Scripture. Hadn't Jesus said His kingdom was not of this world? Hadn't he told Peter to put away his sword? And besides, hadn't history amply proven that secular, civil power corrupts the Church? All true, but it seems reason and evidence didn't endear the Radical Reformers to their opponents.The Anabaptists wanted to reinstall “apostolic Christianity” by which they meant, the Faith as practiced in the NT, where the only members of the Church were those who were genuinely born again, not everyone who happened to be born in a province with a Christian prince.The True Church, they insisted, is always and only a community of dedicated disciples seeking to live faithfully in the midst of a wicked world.So that little group that gathered in Manz's home in January 1525 knew what they were doing was a violation of Zurich's city council. Persecution was sure to follow. Shortly after the baptism they withdrew from Zurich to the nearby village of Zollikon. There, late in January, the first Anabaptist congregation, the first free church in modern times, was born.The authorities in Zurich couldn't overlook what they deemed blatant rebellion. They sent police to Zollikon and arrested the newly baptized and imprisoned them for a time. But as soon as they were released the Anabaptists went to neighboring towns where they made more converts.Time and warnings passed and the Zurich council ran out of patience. A little over a year later they declared anyone found re-baptizing would be put to death by drowning. “If the heretics want water, they can have it.” Another year went by when the council followed thru on their threat and in Jan, 1527, Felix Manz was the 1st Anabaptist martyr. The authorities drowned him in the Limmat. Just 4 yrs later, the Anabaptists in and around Zurich were virtually wiped out.Many fled to Germany and Austria where their prospects weren't any better. In 1529, the Imperial Diet of Speyer declared Anabaptism a heresy and every region of Christendom was obliged to condemn them to death. Between 4 and 5 thousand were executed over the next several years.The Anabaptists had a simple demand: That a person have a right to his/her own beliefs. What we may not realize is that while that seems an imminently reasonable and assumed axiom for us—it was an idea bequeathed TO US by them! It's not at all what MOST people thought in the 16th C. No way! No how! The Radical Reformers seemed to Moderate Reformers like Luther and Zwingli to be destroying the very fabric of society. There was simply little conception of a society that wasn't shaped by the Church's influence on the State with the State's enforcement of Church policy.We hear the Anabaptist voice in a letter written by a young mother, to her daughter only a few days old. è It's 1573, and the father has already been executed. The mother, in jail, was reprieved long enough to give birth to her child. She writes to urge her daughter not to grow up ashamed of her parents: “My dearest child, the true love of God strengthen you in virtue, you who are yet so young, and whom I must leave in this wicked, evil, perverse world. à Oh, that it had pleased the Lord that I might have brought you up, but it seems that it is not the Lord's will.… Be not ashamed of us; it is the way which the prophets and the apostles went. Your dear father demonstrated with his blood that it is the genuine faith, and I also hope to attest the same with my blood, though flesh and blood must remain on the posts and on the stake, well knowing that we shall meet hereafter.”Persecution forced the Anabaptists north. Many of them found refuge on the lands of a tolerant prince in Moravia. There they founded a Christian commune called the Bruderhof which lasted for many years.A tragic event happened among the Anabaptists in the mid-1530's that's another frequent historical trait. The very thing the Lutherans feared, happened.In 1532, the Reformation spread rapidly throughout the city of Munster. A conservative Lutheran group was the first form of the Reformation to take root there. Then immigrants arrived who were Anabaptist apostles of a shadowy figure named Jan Matthis. What we know about him was written by his critics so he's cast as a fanatic who whipped the Munster officials into a fury of excitement that God was going to set up his kingdom on earth with Munster as the capital.The bishop of the region massed his troops to besiege the city and the Anabaptists uncharacteristically defended themselves. During the siege, the more extreme leaders gained control of the city. Then in the Summer of 1534 Jan of Leiden, seized control and declared himself sole ruler. He claimed to receive revelations from God for the city's victory. He instituted the OT practice of polygamy and took the title “King David.”With his harem “King David” lived in splendor, but was able to maintain morale in the city in spite of massive hunger due to the siege. He kept the bishop's army at bay until the end of June, 1535. The fall of the city brought an end to his and the Anabaptist's rule. But for centuries after, many Europeans equated the word “Anabaptist” with the debacle of the Munster Rebellion. It stood for wild-eyed, religious fanaticism.Munster was to the Anabaptists what the televangelist scandals of the 80's were to Evangelicalism; a serious black eye, that in no way reflected their real beliefs. In the aftermath of Munster, the dispirited Anabaptists of Western Germany were encouraged by the work of Menno Simons. A former priest, Menno visited the scattered Anabaptist groups of northern Europe, inspiring them with his preaching. He was unswerving in commanding pacifism. His name in time came to stand for the Mennonite repudiation of violence.As we end this episode, I want to recommend if anyone wants a much fuller treatment of the Munster Rebellion, let me suggest you visit the Hardcore History podcast titled Prophets of Doom. This podcast by Dan Carlin is an in-depth 4½ hr long investigation of this chapter of Munster's story.
© 2020-2025 Ivy Podcast Discovery LLC
