Discussion Questions

The chapter claims that when ordinary Europeans read the Bible “free of the Augustinian influence of the Reformers,” they “frequently came to embrace the Gospel of the Kingdom”; what does that suggest about God’s intention in giving Scripture to the church, and what does it imply about the spiritual danger of letting any respected theological system pre-filter what we are “allowed” to see? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If people reading the Bible without the Reformers’ Augustinian lens often chose the “Gospel of the Kingdom,” what does that say about why God gave Scripture to the church? What danger is there in letting any trusted theology decide ahead of time what we’re allowed to notice?

In Zurich, some of Zwingli’s associates wanted to “restore apostolic Christianity,” but Zwingli refused to move beyond what the city council permitted; what does this reveal about the chapter’s view of the proper relationship between Christ’s authority and civil authority, and where do you see similar “limits” placed on obedience today (even when leaders say they love reform)? JumpstartAnother way to ask: When Zwingli wouldn’t go past what the city council allowed, what does that show about who should have final authority—Christ or the government? Where do you see similar limits on obedience today, even among leaders who say they want reform?

The Anabaptists insisted on “a holy, disciplined church, not a state church that included everyone who lived within the state”; what assumptions about conversion, church membership, and holiness does this reflect, and how would adopting those assumptions disrupt the way many modern churches measure success and unity? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What does the Anabaptists’ push for a holy, disciplined church (not a state church for everyone) assume about conversion, membership, and holiness? How would that upset the way many churches today define success and unity?

The transcript describes both medieval Catholic practice and Protestant “easy believism” as different versions of “cheap grace” and “mechanical Christianity”; what concrete “mechanisms” does the chapter identify in each system, and where might similar mechanisms show up in our churches (even if our theology is technically correct)? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What “systems” does the chapter say made medieval Catholicism and Protestant easy-believism into “cheap grace”? Where might our churches use similar shortcuts today, even if our beliefs are correct?

Bercot argues that the Reformers treated Christianity as essentially “theology,” while the Anabaptists saw its essence as “relationship”; in the chapter’s framework, what does “relationship” actually look like in day-to-day life, and how does it expose ways we may be using theology to avoid transformation? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If the Reformers focused on Christianity as theology but the Anabaptists focused on relationship, what would “relationship” look like in everyday life? How might we use theology as an excuse to avoid real change?

The Anabaptist reply—“If your faith is as you say, why do you not do the things which he has commanded?”—targets people who claim regeneration and the Spirit; what do you think the chapter is demanding as evidence that the new birth is real, and which common modern markers of being “saved” would it consider unreliable? JumpstartAnother way to ask: When Anabaptists asked, “If your faith is real, why don’t you do what Jesus commanded?”, what proof do you think the chapter expects that the new birth is real? Which common “saved” signs today does it treat as shaky?

The chapter interprets “the Kingdom of God is not in word but in power” to mean Spirit-empowered obedience rather than theological talk or even “wonders”; how does the warning about miracle-working “lawlessness” challenge modern Christian fascination with signs, spiritual gifts, platformed ministries, or testimonies of dramatic experiences? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If “the Kingdom of God is not in word but in power” means Spirit-powered obedience (not just talk or even miracles), how does that challenge our obsession with signs, gifts, famous ministries, or dramatic testimonies? How does the warning about miracle-working “lawlessness” hit you?

Bercot says the wonder-workers’ problem was not “trusting in their own works” but “practicing lawlessness,” and he adds that a person is either “never…on Jesus’ vine or…lopped off”; how does that logic confront common evangelical ideas about assurance and perseverance, and what fears or resistance does it raise in you personally? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If the real issue is “lawlessness,” and a person was either never on Jesus’ vine or got cut off, how does that challenge common evangelical ideas about assurance and staying saved? What fears or pushback does that bring up in you?

The chapter highlights that Michael Sattler was brutally executed for teachings like refusing oaths and preaching non-resistance, then asks whether “those same Christian authorities would have torn Christ’s flesh” for teaching the same; what does that comparison reveal about how God evaluates “Christian” persecution, and what modern behaviors might be the functional equivalent of punishing believers for obeying Jesus too literally? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If “Christian” leaders killed Michael Sattler for obeying Jesus (like refusing oaths and non-resistance), what does that say about how God views persecution done in God’s name? What modern actions are like punishing believers for taking Jesus too literally?

Across the Quakers, Pietists, Dunkards, and Fröhlich’s movement, the chapter repeatedly links “new Kingdom movements” with simple theology, literal obedience (non-resistance, no oaths, simplicity), enthusiastic witness, and later decline through respectability or activism; if you tried to apply that pattern to your own congregation or life, what specific changes would be most costly—and what would you be tempted to label “works Christianity” in order to avoid them? JumpstartAnother way to ask: The chapter says new “Kingdom movements” often start with simple beliefs and literal obedience, but later drift into respectability or activism—how might that pattern show up in your church or life? What changes would cost you the most, and what would you be tempted to call “works Christianity” to avoid them?