Discussion Questions

Menno Simons described preaching “by day and by night…in prison and in dungeons, in water and in fire…with possessions and blood, with life and death,” and then concluded, “For this is the true nature of the love which is of God”; what does that claim suggest about God’s love, and how does it confront modern instincts to separate “love” from costly proclamation? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What does Menno Simons’ description of preaching through danger and suffering say about what God’s love is like? How does it challenge the idea that “love” should be kept separate from hard, costly preaching?

Dean Taylor highlighted early Anabaptist conversion numbers (e.g., Hans Hut “12,000,” St. Gall “around 500,” Baumann’s “10,378”), arguing that “revival and missions…go hand in hand”; what assumptions about the Spirit’s work, the church’s responsibility, and the normal Christian life are embedded in the way these stories are told? JumpstartAnother way to ask: When people tell these big conversion stories, what do they assume about how the Spirit works, what the church must do, and what “normal” Christian life looks like? Why do they link revival and missions so closely?

The Mennonite Encyclopedia description of Hutterite practice says they sent brethren “every year,” chose preachers “semi-annually,” assigned each missionary a “certain field,” and maintained contact through letters carried by dispatched brethren; what would it require for a present-day congregation to treat mission as a yearly, church-wide rhythm rather than a “special calling” for a few? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What would your church need to change to treat mission as a regular, every-year practice for everyone? What keeps churches thinking mission is only for a few “called” people?

When the Calvinist superintendent accused Leonhard Dax of coming to the Palatinate to “confuse the people,” Dax replied that he came “to lead everybody from error to the right way of Christian discipleship”; what does that reveal about how these missionaries defined “the gospel,” and how does that challenge a modern evangelical tendency to treat discipleship as optional or secondary? JumpstartAnother way to ask: When Dax said he came to lead people into Christian discipleship, what does that show he thought “the gospel” included? How does that challenge the idea that discipleship is optional after someone believes?

Taylor emphasized the Hutterite claim that those sent by the brotherhood were “properly called apostles…commissioned by God himself,” and that otherwise “the apostolic church would not have done right”; how should Christians weigh “church commissioning” versus “individual sense of calling,” and what dangers arise when either one is detached from the other? JumpstartAnother way to ask: How should Christians balance being sent by the church with feeling personally called by God? What can go wrong if you separate one from the other?

Peter Jantz shifted toward “small, self-sufficient agricultural colonies” in Indonesia because converts were being killed in a hostile Muslim setting; what does this model imply about God’s concern for converts’ long-term survival, obedience, and community formation—not merely their moment of decision—and what parts of that implication make modern Christians uneasy? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What does Jantz’s colony plan suggest about God caring for new believers long-term, not just their first decision? Which parts of that approach make Christians today uncomfortable, and why?

In the Russian Mennonite material, Taylor quoted that “every member of the Gemeinde was a missionary…to build on earth a working model of the kingdom of heaven,” and that the Great Commission was understood “as a corporate, never as an individual or institutional calling”; where does your church functionally treat missions as an institution or as specialists, and what would have to change for the whole congregation to see itself as the mission? JumpstartAnother way to ask: In what ways does your church treat missions as a program or as work for specialists instead of everyone? What would need to change for the whole church to see itself as “the mission”?

Johann V. traced God’s visible Gemeinde back to “Adam and Eve in paradise,” through Noah and Abraham, and into Christ calling the Gemeinde “from all races and tongues”; how does that storyline reshape what “conversion” means, and how might it correct mission approaches Taylor criticized for leaving people mainly with “Huh, I’m forgiven” but not with a vision of God forming a visible people? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If God has been forming a visible people from the start, how does that change what “conversion” means? How could this correct mission efforts that leave people thinking mainly, “I’m forgiven,” but not joining a clear community?

Taylor questioned whether methods like the “Jesus film” and “Creation to Christ” can unintentionally omit what they “don’t say,” especially the theme of God establishing a people who anticipate the kingdom; if you evaluated your own evangelism or discipleship tools by what they consistently leave silent, what silences would you expect to find—and what do those silences produce in converts? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If you judged your evangelism tools by what they leave out, what missing topics would you expect to find? How might those gaps shape what new believers become like?

In the “Jesus fire” sermon, Heinrich Dirks said, “If we love him, none of us will fail to take part in the work of missions…For the one that refuses does not love the Savior”; how should a serious Christian respond to that claim without evasion—what might “taking part” look like in concrete terms today, and what does your resistance (if any) reveal about your loves, fears, and definition of freedom? JumpstartAnother way to ask: How should you honestly respond to the claim that refusing missions shows you don’t love Jesus? What could “taking part” in missions look like for you today, and what does any pushback in you reveal about your fears and what you value most?