Discussion Questions
Clyde asks, “Are you a missionary? And if not, why?”—what specific assumptions about the word *missionary* (airplane, overseas, formal programs) keep Anabaptists from applying Matthew 28’s “go” to the places we “live, work, play, worship, go to school,” and what would have to change to make “go” mean *our daily geography*? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What ideas (like flying overseas or joining a program) keep Anabaptists from thinking of themselves as “missionaries”? What would need to change for Jesus’ command to “go” to mean the places we go every day—home, work, school, and church?
Clyde wonders why God has blessed Anabaptists for “a couple generations”—how does that question expose competing beliefs about God’s intentions in blessing (comfort, stability, prosperity) versus God’s purposes (mission, mercy), and what evidence in our spending, schedules, and church life shows which story we actually believe? JumpstartAnother way to ask: When Clyde asks why God has “blessed” Anabaptists, what does that show about different beliefs—does God bless us for comfort and success, or for mission and mercy? What do our budgets, calendars, and church routines show we really believe?
He contrasts Acts 2 (Peter: Scripture, guilt, “what shall we do?”) with Acts 17 (Paul: poets, logic, starting with idols, mockers)—what does this imply about how early Christians understood evangelism as *adapting delivery without changing the seed*, and where do we resist Paul’s approach because it feels too slow, too intellectual, or too “messy”? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What do the different approaches in Acts 2 and Acts 17 teach us about changing how we share the message without changing the message itself? Where do we resist Paul’s slower, more thoughtful approach because it feels too messy or too intellectual?
Clyde critiques an “initial conclusion” from the soils parable: “I scattered seed; if they don’t receive it, it’s their fault”—how does that mindset function as a spiritual excuse, and what would it look like in real conversations to “pause and think which method of seed delivery should be used” instead of defaulting to the same approach every time? JumpstartAnother way to ask: How can “If they reject it, that’s their fault” become a spiritual excuse? In real conversations, what would it look like to stop and choose a better way to share instead of always using the same method?
He introduces “contaminated soil” in America and says, “There’s only one way… dig deeper”—which contaminants he listed (hypocrisy, abusive pastor/parent, “saved-from-hell gospel” indifferent to present pain, churches pursuing money/power, neglect of grace or truth) most resemble the stories you’ve actually heard from neighbors, and how should those stories reshape the way we speak about God’s character? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Which “contaminated soil” stories have you actually heard from neighbors—hypocrisy, abuse, a shallow gospel, churches chasing money or power, or missing grace or truth? How should those stories change how we talk about what God is like?
Clyde cites the survey where evangelicals are viewed as “judgmental… arrogant… little interest in the lives of those who see things differently,” and quotes John Lennox about violence “cutting off people’s ears” and our job being to “put people’s ears back on”—what practices in our speech, politics, or posture might be “cutting off ears” locally, and what would “putting ears back on” look like without diluting biblical truth? JumpstartAnother way to ask: In our words, politics, or attitudes, how might we be “cutting off people’s ears” by coming across as judgmental or uncaring? What would it look like to help people listen again without watering down biblical truth?
He says we need “thoughtful responses, not canned answers,” illustrated by the child who says, “I know the answer is Jesus, but it sure sounds like a squirrel”—where do you see Anabaptists using religious reflexes that avoid listening, and how would a commitment to two days of listening (his marriage-counseling story) confront our impatience to instruct, correct, or “get to the point”? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Where do you see Anabaptists giving quick “church answers” instead of really listening? How would practicing deep listening—like two days of listening before talking—challenge our need to correct and “get to the point”?
Clyde highlights Paul’s ministry “with tears” (Acts 20) and claims we need more outreach “with tears”—what does that reveal about God’s heart toward sinners and sufferers, and what would have to happen in us for “tears” to become normal rather than awkward, performative, or rare? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What does Paul serving “with tears” show about God’s heart for sinners and people who suffer? What would need to change in us for compassion to be normal and real, not awkward or fake?
His church-model grid labels many Anabaptist congregations as “Model 3” (strong community, little outreach) and says Jesus intended “Model 1” (strong accountability *and* strong outreach, costly, dying to self)—what concrete costs would your congregation have to pay to move toward Model 1, and which costs do we quietly refuse while still claiming to want “revival” or “impact”? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If many churches have strong community but little outreach, what real sacrifices would your church need to make to grow in both accountability and outreach? Which sacrifices do we avoid even while saying we want “revival” or “impact”?
Clyde uses Ezekiel’s indictment of Sodom—“pride, fullness of food, abundance of idleness… neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy”—how does that challenge the modern habit of treating sexual sin as the main danger while overlooking comfort and unused time, and what specific “potluck not soup kitchen” changes (letting neighbors contribute, open home, boundaries, using occupations, prayer for “opportunities wrapped as obstacles”) would most threaten your current lifestyle? JumpstartAnother way to ask: How does Ezekiel’s warning about pride, comfort, and not helping the poor challenge our focus on sexual sin as the main danger? Which practical changes—welcoming neighbors, opening your home, using your job to serve, setting boundaries, or praying for hard “opportunities”—would most disrupt your current lifestyle?