Discussion Questions

The speaker says liberalism “doubt[s] what God says in His word until it’s proven,” and also says liberalism was “trying to save the faith”; what picture of God is assumed in each approach, and where do those assumptions quietly show up in how Christians talk about faith today? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If someone doubts what the Bible says until it’s proven, what does that assume God is like? If someone “saves the faith” by defending it, what does that assume God is like, and how do you hear those ideas in Christian talk today?

The speaker claims Mennonite leaders “borrowed fundamentalism” instead of “go[ing] back to their own story”; what would it have looked like, concretely, for Swiss Brethren churches to combat liberalism using their own historic convictions rather than Protestant tools? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What would it have looked like for Swiss Brethren churches to fight liberalism by using their own Anabaptist story and beliefs instead of copying Protestant fundamentalism? Give a few specific examples.

The speaker identifies “dualism” (salvation separated from ethics, beliefs, and church) as “practically expressed in Protestantism” and says the New Testament teaches salvation as “oneness”; where do you see that separation operating in your own thinking about assurance, obedience, and church life? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Where do you separate being “saved” from how you live, what you believe, or belonging to a church? How does that show up in how you think about assurance, obedience, and church life?

The speaker lists “fundamentalist lies,” including “Christianity is performance, perfectionism-based,” and says it produces “pride, fear, and shame, and despair” as “normal Christian experience”; what experiences in your church culture match that description, and what do those experiences suggest about what you believe God is like? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Where have you seen church life feel like performance or perfectionism, leading to pride, fear, shame, or despair? What does that reveal about what you think God is like?

The speaker says fundamentalism helped with real reforms (teetotalism, resisting some moral collapse, maintaining creationism), yet insists it also “turned the Anabaptists away from their own story”; how should Christians discern when a “borrowed” movement is a helpful corrective versus a spiritual takeover? JumpstartAnother way to ask: How can Christians tell when a movement they “borrow” is a helpful correction and when it starts taking over their faith and identity? What signs would you look for?

The speaker contrasts “God and I” (personal conversion as a “ticket to heaven”) with historic Anabaptist “God and we” community consciousness and Gelassenheit; what practices in your life and congregation train you toward “God and I,” and what would it cost to rebuild “God and we”? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What habits in your life and church push you toward “just me and God” faith? What would it cost—personally and as a church—to rebuild a strong “God and we” community way of life (Gelassenheit)?

The speaker argues that making rules to handle movies, dancing, women’s changing public life, and consumerism is “opposite” the Anabaptist story because Anabaptism is “a living personal relationship with Jesus Christ”; where do rules function as a substitute for discipleship in your setting, and why are rules often more emotionally satisfying than obedience to Christ? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Where do rules in your setting replace real discipleship to Jesus? Why do rules often feel more satisfying than obeying Christ day by day?

The speaker says “movement forward on issues happens with strong group consensus,” claims “no man is in Christ apart from his brother,” and calls “simple majority vote” invalid on major issues; how does that challenge modern church governance assumptions, and what would change if your church treated lack of agreement as a spiritual problem rather than a procedural problem? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If major church decisions need strong agreement, not just a majority vote, how does that challenge how churches run today? What would change if lack of unity was treated as a spiritual problem, not just a process problem?

The speaker criticizes the shift of authority from local congregation to conferences, describing the Mennonite General Conference as a “legislative enforcement agency” when local leaders couldn’t “win the loyalty…to Christ”; what does this imply about the nature of Christ’s authority in the church, and how might institutional enforcement actually signal discipleship failure? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What does it say about Christ’s authority if churches shift power from local congregations to conferences that enforce rules? How might heavy enforcement show that real discipleship and loyalty to Christ are weak?

The speaker notes a “subtle shift” where the Dordrecht Confession begins with God and defines faith as discipleship, but the 1921 Garden City Fundamentals “do not begin with God” and stress inerrancy; how does starting-point shape the kind of Christianity produced, and where do you see your own theology beginning—with God and Christ—or with the Bible as a defensive battleground? JumpstartAnother way to ask: How does where you start—starting with God and Christ, or starting by defending the Bible’s inerrancy—shape what kind of Christianity you end up with? Where does your own thinking usually start, and why?