Discussion Questions

Chester frames the “three Ds” from the early church—Demas (loved the present world), Diotrephes (loved preeminence), and Demetrius (loved faithfulness, likely with suffering); where do you recognize each of these temptations in yourself or your congregation, and what would repentance look like in concrete decisions? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Chester talks about three temptations: loving the world (Demas), wanting to be first (Diotrephes), and staying faithful even when it hurts (Demetrius). Where do you see these in yourself or your church, and what would real repentance look like in specific choices?

The speaker says the essence of the Anabaptist vision is “Jesus Christ, through the Holy Scriptures, is the ultimate authority,” and then argues the New Testament “supersedes the Old” (not a “flat Bible”); how does that claim reshape the way you read difficult Old Testament passages, and where do you feel resistance to letting “But I say unto you” set the higher standard? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If Jesus and the New Testament are the final guide for how we read the Bible, how does that change the way you read hard Old Testament passages? Where do you struggle to let Jesus’ “But I say to you” be the higher standard?

Chester contrasts starting with the Gospels (especially Matthew and the Sermon on the Mount as a “constitution”) versus starting with the Epistles as premises; what specific doctrines or instincts in your background would be threatened if you truly let the Sermon on the Mount govern how you interpret Paul? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If you let the Sermon on the Mount guide how you understand Paul, what beliefs or habits from your background would feel challenged or threatened? Be specific.

The speaker describes the church as a functioning, interdependent believer’s community with egalitarian membership (no clergy/laity divide) and consensus over voting on major issues; what would have to change in your church life for this to be real rather than rhetorical, and what would it cost leaders and members? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If the church really had shared life, equal membership (no clergy vs. regular people), and made big decisions by agreement instead of voting, what would need to change in your church? What would it cost leaders and members?

Chester says separation from the world and the “two kingdom concept” makes the church a visible “showcase” counterculture; in what ways have you quietly accepted the idea that being “normal” to the surrounding culture is harmless, and how does that undermine what God intends the church to display? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Where have you started thinking that being “normal” like the surrounding culture is no big deal? How might that keep the church from showing what God wants it to show?

When people become disillusioned because Anabaptist churches don’t match the ideals, Chester warns against defensiveness (“Shut up”) and says “we have some accountability” because the church claims to be a showcase; how should a congregation respond when newcomers or youth point out hypocrisy so that humility—not image-management—wins? JumpstartAnother way to ask: When youth or newcomers point out hypocrisy in the church, how should the church respond so humility wins instead of protecting its image? What would that look like in practice?

Chester claims groups severed from their Anabaptist “historical trunk” experience “amputation” and “must die” unless reattached; what do you think he means by “must die,” and how does that confront modern assumptions that a church can drop its story and still remain spiritually healthy? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Chester says groups that cut themselves off from their Anabaptist roots are like an amputated limb that “must die” unless reconnected. What do you think he means by “must die,” and how does that challenge the idea that a church can drop its history and still be spiritually healthy?

The speaker argues God uses story to “disarm” people (Nathan confronting David), and he lists biblical books heavy in narrative to show God’s method; where have you relied on “just preaching at people” or rule-enforcement instead of story, and what specific stories (biblical, church, or family) would you need to recover and retell to form identity? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Where have you depended on “preaching at people” or strict rule-keeping instead of using stories to shape hearts? What stories from the Bible, church history, or your family should be told again to build identity?

Chester lists what antagonizes the young: superiority, proof-texting/fundamentalism, “don’t question,” hypocrisy, parental disrespect, lack of historical background, personal prejudice for “new stuff,” and when tradition competes with Scripture; which of these do you see most clearly in your context, and how could older and younger believers change their posture without abandoning obedience? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Chester lists things that turn young people away (like hypocrisy, “don’t question,” proof-texting, and feeling superior). Which ones do you see most in your setting, and how can older and younger believers change their attitude while still obeying Christ?

Chester warns that the best way to attack Anabaptist values is to attack symbols (he cites head coverings as an example tied to authority, and critiques using holy-sounding symbols like tobacco “for children’s work”); how can a church discern whether a contested practice is a meaningful symbol carrying spiritual truth or merely sociological tradition—and what “hidden agenda” might be operating in how you argue for or against it? JumpstartAnother way to ask: How can a church tell whether a debated practice is an important symbol with spiritual meaning or just a social tradition? What hidden motives might be shaping how people argue for or against it?