Skip to content

Add your phone number?

Optional. Nothing is sent unless you choose it.
The Historic Faith
Sign in

Jumpstarter 7 of 10

Ideas to help restart your discussion
Romans Commentary Chapters 1-8  /  What Romans is All About – Part 2  /  Discussion Questions
All Questions
Question 7
The Anabaptists are described as holding free will, human responsibility, the necessity of godly living after initial salvation, and separation of church and state—closely aligned with early Christians; what parts of that package feel most threatening to modern church life, and why might state-aligned Christianity have found it necessary to “silence” those views?
Another way to ask: The Anabaptists taught free will, human responsibility, the need for godly living after salvation, and church-state separation. Which of those ideas feels most threatening to modern church life, and why would a church tied to the state want to silence them?

Direct Answer Based on the transcript, the most threatening parts are likely separation of church and state (it undermines state-church control) and the insistence on post-conversion godly living tied to human responsibility (it resists simple “works play no role” slogans). State-aligned Christianity would “silence” such views because they challenged both political-religious unity and the dominant theological systems that state power had protected.

Support from Transcript:

  • Anabaptists believed in “free will, human responsibility, and the necessity to live a godly life after our initial salvation.”
  • Their Romans understanding was “very similar to that of the early Christians.”
  • They also believed in “the separation of church and state.”
  • They “never got a fair hearing” because Reformers “unleashed savage persecution against them.”
  • Luther “drove them almost totally out of Germany,” and others “drove them underground in Switzerland.”
  • Their understanding of Romans was “largely silenced,” while state-backed systems became “well entrenched.”
Discussion Follow-ups How might modern churches still benefit from state-like support (cultural privilege, institutional clout) in ways that discourage hearing dissenting voices? What would change if discipleship required visible godly fruit as normal?

Jumpstarter 7 of 10
Back Questions Next