Discussion Questions
Matt frames political discussion by “setting the stage” with Psalm 110 and the repeated New Testament claim that Jesus is enthroned as King; how would your political instincts change if “the good news is Jesus is on the throne” was treated as the controlling fact rather than a background doctrine? JumpstartAnother way to ask: How would your political views change if you really treated “Jesus is King right now” as the main fact, not just a background belief?
The speaker says “no tiny amount of allegiance that’s due to Jesus should get siphoned off to anybody else”; what practical “siphoning” does that look like in real life (language, hopes, fears, online behavior, voting talk), and how can a group tell when it has crossed that line? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What are some real ways our loyalty to Jesus gets “leaked” to other people or causes (in our words, fears, posts, or voting talk)? How can a group tell when that’s happening?
In the Washington Times story, the Amish emphasized Trump as “not afraid to talk about Jesus Christ,” “work ethic,” and “moving the country in the right direction”; what does this reveal about what they considered “kingdom-like,” and what essential Anabaptist distinctives did Matt say were missing from that public witness? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What did the Amish comments about Trump show they thought looked “like God’s kingdom”? What key Anabaptist beliefs did Matt say were missing from what they said in public?
Matt suggests the White House visit could be “not necessarily” wrong, but that openly communicating political support is where “many serious conservative Anabaptists” would have reservations; what is the difference between respectful access to rulers and becoming a political prop, and how can Christians discern the difference before they accept an invitation? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What’s the difference between meeting a leader respectfully and being used to promote their politics? How can Christians tell the difference before saying yes to an invitation?
Matt calls freedom of conscience a “kingdom-like characteristic” of the U.S. because it allows people not to go to war even when that is “not in the best interest of the United States”; how should Christians respond when the state does something consistent with Jesus while also doing other things “at odds with Jesus,” and what does gratitude look like without sliding into loyalty? JumpstartAnother way to ask: How should Christians respond when a government does some things that match Jesus’ ways and other things that go against him? What does being thankful look like without becoming overly loyal?
The speaker says the Amish in the article “did not talk about what they believe to be an essential part” of Christian faith—especially loving enemies—and wonders what would happen if they raised that with Trump; what “hardcore” teachings (enemy-love, truth/no oaths, sexuality, modest living, nonviolence) are we most tempted to keep “around the edges” in public, and why? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Which difficult teachings of Jesus are you most tempted to avoid saying in public (like loving enemies, telling the truth, sexual faithfulness, simple living, or nonviolence)? Why do you keep those on the sidelines?
Matt quotes Jacob Ammon rejecting “good-hearted Christians” who were sympathetic but would not make the sacrifices of enemy-love, truthfulness, and marital faithfulness; what does that early Amish/Anabaptist insistence on visible obedience challenge in modern evangelical assumptions about assurance, “not judging,” and what counts as authentic faith? JumpstartAnother way to ask: How does the early Amish/Anabaptist push for clear, visible obedience challenge today’s ideas about being “sure you’re saved,” “not judging,” and what real faith looks like?
When asked what he would say to a president, Matt points to John the Baptist with Herod, Paul before Agrippa (“I wish you were exactly like me”), David Troyer asking Nixon “Are you a Christian?,” and Menno Simons bluntly confronting magistrates; what kind of witness to rulers is modeled here, and what fears or compromises would keep you from speaking that directly? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What kind of message to rulers is shown by John the Baptist, Paul, David Troyer, and Menno Simons—bold, direct, or something else? What fears or trade-offs might stop you from speaking that plainly?
Matt argues Christians should resist the “false partisan political alternatives” (either support Trump or support his opponents) and even calls it a legitimate prayer that a president would step down because the office is “responsible for killing others” (citing Hippolytus); how does “none of the above” expose the limits of partisan imagination, and what would it cost you socially or economically to live there? JumpstartAnother way to ask: How does choosing “neither side” show the limits of normal party politics for Christians? What might it cost you with friends, work, or money to live that way?
Near the end Matt warns that political passions reveal the heart—“if we’re on the internet vigorously arguing that we bomb Iran, that’s where our heart is”—and compares partisan debate to arguing whether to beat someone 10 times or 20 times; what does your own intensity (or “give me slack, now I’m going to talk politics” attitude) reveal about where you’ve separated a “political me” from a “kingdom me,” and what repentance would look like in habits this week? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What do your strongest political reactions (especially online) show about your heart and priorities? What would repentance look like in your habits this week?