Discussion Questions

Peter Riedemann uses the manna story (some gathered more, some less, but “when they measured it… those who had gathered much had nothing over… and those who had gathered little had no lack”) as “an example for us”; what does that analogy suggest about God’s intentions for economic life in the church, and where do you feel resistance rising up in you as you apply it to a modern congregation? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Riedemann uses the manna story as a lesson for the church. What does it say about how God wants money and resources shared in the church today, and what part of that idea do you resist?

Steve Russell says the “great controversy between us and the world” begins with faith being “something in the heart, not just a historical faith”; how does he connect “Jesus born in you” to money and possessions, and what would have to change in your life for your finances to become evidence of heart-faith rather than mere belief? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Russell says real faith is in the heart, not just in your head. How does he connect “Jesus born in you” to how you handle money and stuff, and what would need to change for your finances to show real heart-faith?

In the secret forest meeting, “after the gospel is explained” the next question is not only about surrender to Christ but also “Are there any needs… seed or tools… who has extra?”—what does that order reveal about early Anabaptist assumptions about what a worship service should include, and what would it expose about our churches if we tried to practice that today? JumpstartAnother way to ask: In the forest meeting, right after the gospel they asked who had needs and who had extra to share. What does that show they thought church gatherings should include, and what would it reveal about our churches if we did that now?

Russell highlights helping a brother “and it doesn’t matter if you are going to lose money or not”; what view of God’s provision and ownership is required to act that way, and what practical scenarios today would test whether you believe that (medical bills, rent, debt, job loss, immigration, legal trouble)? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Russell says help a brother even if it costs you money. What would you have to believe about God providing and owning everything to live that way, and what situations today would really test it?

The story of the expelled Swiss church leader whose farm was seized—and the congregation repeatedly helped him restart—includes the phrase “it had to pinch them at least a little bit”; what does “pinch” look like in real economic obedience, and how have you learned (or avoided learning) the difference between generosity that costs little and generosity that actually rearranges your security? JumpstartAnother way to ask: The church kept helping the leader restart after his farm was taken, and it “pinched” them. What does “pinch” look like in real-life giving, and how do you tell the difference between giving that barely costs you and giving that changes your sense of security?

The Hutterites said private ownership is “a sign of greed,” while Swiss Brethren said it’s permissible to “own things… with open hands”; what heart-level tests could distinguish “open hands” from baptized greed, and how might each group critique the weak points of the other position? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Hutterites said private ownership shows greed, but Swiss Brethren said you can own things if you hold them with “open hands.” How can you tell the difference between open-handed living and hidden greed, and what would each group say is the weakness in the other view?

When Russell says Hutterites targeted Swiss Brethren as a “mission field” because property ownership suggested they were “probably not totally yielded to Christ,” what does that imply about early Christian/Anabaptist expectations for visible obedience, and how does that confront modern evangelical ideas about assurance and discipleship? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Russell says Hutterites saw Swiss Brethren as a mission field because owning property showed they weren’t fully yielded to Christ. What does that say about expecting obedience you can see, and how does that challenge modern ideas about being sure you’re saved and what it means to follow Jesus?

Both groups appealed to the Bible, but they clashed over whether the Jerusalem church in Acts is a binding pattern; what hermeneutic assumptions are underneath “Jerusalem is the model for all churches” versus “we don’t see that pattern anywhere else,” and how do your own interpretive instincts get shaped by your economic interests? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Both sides used the Bible but disagreed on whether Acts’ Jerusalem church is a pattern all churches must copy. What beliefs about reading the Bible are behind each side, and how might your own views be shaped by what helps you financially?

Russell claims Anabaptists were known for hard work, improving ruined farms, crop rotation, livestock manure, and skilled trades—while also holding a suspicious view of usury/interest; how do you reconcile “work is good” and developing creation with a concern that major parts of modern economics (borrowing, interest, stock markets) may be “not so good”? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Russell says Anabaptists worked hard and improved farms, but they also distrusted charging interest. How can you hold “work and improving the world are good” together with concerns that parts of today’s economy (loans, interest, investing) may be wrong?

Near the end, Russell urges focus on developing God-given “talents or gifts” and says the focus should be “what we need rather than… making a lot of money”; what would change in your career choices, spending habits, savings goals, and giving patterns if “need” and “flourishing in Christ” replaced wealth-building as the organizing purpose? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Russell says focus on using your gifts and on what you need, not on getting rich. If “need” and “growing in Christ” became your main goal, what would change about your job choices, spending, saving, and giving?