ANABAPTIST HISTORY (PAGE 2)

(Menno took over part of the Dutch AnaBaptist, who believed the same. Did he conform to get a Church?) The German religious leader, Melchior Hoffman, who made all types of crazy predictions, started this part of the Dutch AnaBaptist Movement. See- (The Swiss AnaBaptist, page 30. This group strongly rejected Menno’s theology.)

Menno believed that Christ body was totally celestial. See – Secret of Their Strength, by Peter Hoover, Benchmark Press, Shippensburg, Penn., page 245. However, some how or another, Menno did believe that Christ had a human nature, somehow, just not a human body. (See – Menno Simmons, Life and Writings, page 58).

Thus, Menno Simons denied that Jesus Christ was ever flesh and blood!

Menno Simons taught a strict, rash, authoritarian way of Excommunication and Shunning, on all that disagreed on anything with the Preacher, (See- Secret of Their Strength, page 258-259).

Menno Simons taught a form of Baptismal Regeneration. That is, Baptism was the final step for the forgiveness and remission of sins. After which, Simons believed, comes the promise of Salvation, See –(Secret of Their Strength,

Page 101-102.) “Christian Baptism is a seal of faith by which they receive remissions of sins”, See—(Secret of Their Strength, page 106). “We preach that remission of sins takes place in baptism, not on account of the water of the rite performed, but because men receive the promise of the Lord by faith and obediently follow His Word and will….. The forgiveness of sins takes place during baptism according to the holy writings. Baptism is the putting on of Christ….. (See – Secret of Their Strength, page 114).

Menno Simons at one time stated, “After we have searched ever so diligently, we shall find no other baptism but dipping in water, which is acceptable to God and approved in his Word,”

See--J.N. Brown’s Religious Encyclopedia, page 797; (Also find this quote in Baptist History, by Clover, page 333). NOTE – Modern Mennonites do not like this translation, and instead translate this passage as, Baptism In The Water, Instead Of Dipping In The Water! However, they still leave –IN – the water!

Issac Backus in his Church history book, page 227, writes, “The Mennonites also came from Germany, and are of like behaviour, but they are not truly Baptist now. Their fathers were so in Luther’s day, until confinement in prison brought them to pour water on the heads of the subjects, instead of immersion; and what was done out of necessity is now done of choice, as other corruptions are”.

Menno Simons also later it appears, approved of Baptism by pouring. See – (Secret of Their Strength, page 126).

This also comes out in Menno’s book, Foundation, and his book, The true Christian Faith, when Menno states, the act of Baptism is an easy matter to submit to as, “having a handful of water applied”.

(See – The Complete Works of Menno Simons, pages 38, and 124).

This is why Menno’s followers, the modern Mennonites, never Baptize anyone, according to the Bible, that is by Immersion. If there is no Immersion, there is never any Biblical Baptism!

There had been a few exceptions, for at least the first couple of centuries (1500 & 1600’s),

There were some Mennonites who only Immersed. See—(Mennonites In Europe, pages 228, 249, and page 277).

Menno Simons also believed in the Sacraments. He wrote, “We believe and confess that the night time meal is a holy sacramental sign, instituted by the Lord himself in bread and wine and left to his disciples in remembrance of Him”, See – (Secret of Their Strength, page 137). Menno Simons further wrote, “The visible commune must be sound in teaching and sacraments”. See – (Secret of Their Strength, page 172).

Menno Simons also taught a works Salvation. He stated, “If we do not perform the nighttime meal and baptism, or if we perform them differently from what God has commanded, we have by our disobedience neither covenant nor promise. Whosoever teaches you differently deceives your soul”. See- (Secret of Their Strength, page 178). Menno also wrote, “I tell you the truth, I would rather be cut into pieces than to allow myself to be separated for a valid reason from the Lord’s commune ….. Let everyone be careful to conduct himself wisely before God and his commune so that he may never be smitten with such a curse by Christ – so that he may never be placed outside of the holy congregation by Christ and his commune. All who are outside of Christ’s congregation must be in that of Antichrist”. See – (Secret of Their Strength, page 180).

Based on Menno’s views, it is hard to see how Menno could have ever been considered a Baptist, (HE still is insome books) and his followers the Mennonites (a part of the Dutch AnaBaptist), by the mid-sixteen hundreds, as ever being considered true AnaBaptist, and thus no longer a true local Church!

According to Mennonites in Europe, page 392 – A Mennonite Publication, it is stated that the Swiss Brethren (AnaBaptist) were known as Taufer. The German word Taufer means Baptizers or Baptist.

The Dutch word for Taufer is Doopers. Yet, the Mennonites still deny that historic anabaptist existed before them, and Immersed. What then, were the early Christians, but Immersing AnaBaptist!

The modern Mennonites (since the mid-1600’s) came from a part of the Dutch Anabaptist, and to be more exact, from Menno Simons. They cease to be AnaBaptist, when they ceased to Immerse. The Baptist, coming out of the AnaBaptist, continue to Immerse saved ones. Like true AnaBaptist Churches. However, even today, many Baptist Churches, like the Mennonite Churches in the 1600’s, are ceasing to continue to be the Lord’s local Churches, because they are no longer worship as God directed. They have become Protestant Assemblies, with a Baptist name. Is it wrong for Churches to once again use the AnaBaptist name?  If they do not like that name, what is wrong with the name brethren, or Plymouth Brenthren?

Were the AnaBaptist Arminian, as defined, since 1610 AD? ------- NO------!!!!!!!!!!!

A brief explanation is needed, as to why since 1610?

Jacobus (James) Arminius was born in 1560 AD. He became a reformed (Calvinist) Preacher in 1589 in Amsterdam.

In 1599 AD he was asked to write a rebuttal to the Mennonites (not the AnaBaptist). At this time he was a Dutch Seminary Professor. In 1605 he became a Mennonite, and wrote not many subjects before his death in 1609 AD. In 1610, his followers, who are the present Mennonites, one year after his death, presented a Remonstrance (a protest) to the State of Holland. Arminius followers, who became known as Arminians, demanded that the doctrinal position of the Churches of Holland, be changed with five major points of change.

1. Man is so depraved that divine grace is necessary unto faith or any good deed. This point is called Total Depravity, as compared to Calvin’s Total Inability. This was James Arminius position, and he never changed on it. However, Arminians, and latter Wesleyans, changed this point to partial depravity. Man is born innocent, but will sin, because of the influences of the world around him. Man under partial depravity can respond to God on his own, if man chooses. In reading the writings of James Arminius himself, it is very clear that Arminius believed man could only come to God, by God enabling man’s will, to respond to God. Without the intervention of God, all men would go to Hell, and none could even make a chose for God!

James Arminius held to the AnaBaptist position, and true local Churches today!

2.God elects or reproves on the bases of foreseen faith or unbelief.

3. Christ died for all men and for every man, although only believers are saved.

4. This grace may be resisted.

5. James Arminius taught that all who are regenerated by the Spirit of God are eternally secure and can never perish. However, in the Remonstrance, it is stated like this, “Whether all who are truly regenerated will certainly persevere in the faith is a point which needs further investigation. See— (Arminianism, by Roger Nicole, Baker’s Dictionary of Theology, page 64). This led to Arminians teaching that one, who is saved, could lose their salvation. This led to works salvation. This is seen in the modern Wesleyan Church, Nazarene Church, Holiness Church, Freewill Churches, and Mennonite Churches, just to name a few. This view follows Minno Simon’s position, and not James Arminius.

In 1619, the Protestant Synod of Dort rejected Arminianism, and affirmed Calvinism. They placed Calvinism into 5 points, using four Chapters, See – (Calvinism by Ben A Warburton, page 61) also See – (The Five Points of Calvinism, by David Steele and Curtis Thomas, pages 13 – 23). This book is a strong Calvinistic book.

For those who deny that the views of James Arminius have been altered, to fit Menno Simons views, the five points of James Arminius are restated again, taken from his own writing (original source).

1) Depravity is a state, which leaves the reasoning of man responsible for his own destiny through choosing faith or unbelief. Arminius believed God enabled man to be able to choose. Whereas Augustine placed all babies who die in Hell, Calvin placing all non-elect babies in Hell, Arminius placed all dead babies in Heaven. Arminius believed that inherit sin, (From Adam) caused only physical death. However, acquired sin, when one is old enough to reason, sends all to Hell, without the New Birth. That why Christians, with the New birth, cannot escape the penalty of physical death, because of inherit sin.

2) Election or predestination is conditional, based upon God’s foreknowledge and not arbitrary degree.

3) The atonement of Christ is for all, not just for the elect, even though some reject it and therefore fail to receive the benefit

4) God’s grace is not irresistible, but can be rejected by man in his free choose.

5) “But at no period have I asserted, that believers do finally decline or fall away from Faith or Salvation”.

See – (Arminius, volume 1, page 741)

“Faith (Saving Faith) is peculiar to the elect (Saved Ones) and believers (Saved ones) do not finally fall away from the faith. In like matter, faith (Non-saving faith) is not particular to the elect, and some believers (lost ones) finally decline from the faith”. See – (Arminius Volume I, page 742)

In point five, Arminius is giving room for the Religious lost. Can anyone deny that there are some who say they are saved, who will end up in Hell?

Menno Simmons contested Luther’s Faith Only Doctrine when he said, “Thus; they maintain this doctrine as firmly as though works were not at all necessary”.

Clement, an early church father writes, “God does not crown those who abstain from wickedness by compulsion, but those who abstain by choice”.

Justin Martyr writes, “Though we have no choice in our creation, yet in our regeneration we have; for God persuades only, and draws us gently in our regeneration by co-operating with those rational powers He has bestowed upon us”.

See -- Heartbeat of the Remnant, March 2000, pages 16-19)

Joshua Thomas who died in 1797, wrote the History of the Welch Baptist from 1633 –1770AD, on page 45 he wrote,

“Divided unbelievers into the following classes: Atheists, Deists, Jews, Socinians, down-right Arminians, the Openly Profane and Backsliders. The unbeliever’s duty was to come to Faith and Repentance”.

Because of Menno Simon’s views, look what happened to the Mennonites?

Mennonite publishing committee in 1919, wrote—

2) That God will not bestow his saving grace upon the sinner without repentance, submission, and obedience on his part (works).

3) Evil works will undermine a saving faith and rob the individual of salvation. God will remove his saving grace from such as do not continue to bear fruits of submission and obedience.

4) Restitution is an indispensable condition without which the grace of God will not operate.

NOTE – The danger or perhaps even the tendency of modern Arminians to fall into legalism or Pharisaism is very real!

Not to leave the dangers of Calvinism out here, Augustine wrote, “Why is it wrong to kill a man, who was going to die anyway, if it is for the greater good of mankind? – This leads to -- Mercy killing? Abortion? Killing the terminally ill? Killing the lame, the retarded, even the elderly?

There being no evidence of Modern Arminism, among the AnaBaptist, before Menno Simons, was there evidence of Arminism among Catholicism?

In 400AD, a British monk and Catholic theologian came to Rome, by the name of Pelagius. Pelagius lived from 360AD until 420AD. He was banished by the Catholic Church in 418AD, because of his views. He taught the following:

1. That the human will has a place in the process of Salvation.

2. That each man is created free as Adam was. That each man has the power to choose good or evil. That each soul is a separate creation of God. Therefore, each soul is uncontaminated by the sin of Adam.

3. That the universality of sin is the weakness of human flesh, rather than by the corruption of the human will by original sin.

Further, that man does not inherit original sin.

4. That sins are committed unless the individual wills to cooperate with God in the process of Salvation.

5. That the Human will is free to cooperate with God in the attainment of holiness and can make use of such aids to grace, as the Bible, reason, and the example of Christ.

At this same time in Church history, a man was living who name was Augustine. He is considered by many as the father of Catholic Theology. He lived from 354AD until 430AD. Today, we talk about a person being a Calvinist or not. In actuality, one is either an Augustinist, or not. This is because all five points of Calvin are found in Augustine, eleven hundred years before Calvin. Augustine taught some of the following things:

1. That regeneration is exclusively the work of the Holy Spirit.

2. That man’s will is entirely corrupted by the fall, so that he is unable to exercise his will in regard to the matter of Salvation.

3. That Salvation can come only to the elect.

4. That God must energize the human will to accept His preoffered grace, which is only for those whom He has elected to Salvation.

Shortly after Augustine died, the Catholic Counsel at Ephesus condemned Pelagius views, in 431 AD. However, neither the Eastern nor the Western Catholic Churches, ever fully accepted Augustine’s views on everything.

This led to a Century later, for a Catholic monk, John Cassianus, to try to find a compromise position by which the human and Divine will, could cooperate in Salvation. John Cassianus taught the following:

That all men are sinful because of the fall, but their wills were only sickened, and not totally corrupted. Cassianus feared that the doctrines of election and irresistible grace taught by Augustine, might lead to ethical irresponsibility.

In the final conclusion, the views of Cassianus were condemned at the Synod of Orange in 1529AD, in favor of a moderate Augustinian view. See—(Christianity Through the Centuries, by Earle Cairns, pages 148-149 & 157).

It is important to note that the views of the Medieval Church on this point were similar to those of the Semi-Pelagians, who followed John Cassianus.

With this background, one wonders how Menno Simons, a former Catholic Priest, ever took free will so far, that one could lose their Salvation, having been transformed by the power of God, into a new Creation?

Were the AnaBaptist Theological Calvinist (Augustinist)?

To begin with, we need to go back to the start of Calvinism, Augustinism. Itmight surprise many Calvinist, that Augustine was not original, in the doctrines, which would make him famous.

In Athens, Greece, over seven hundred years before Augustine, lived a man by the name of Zeno. He was the founder of the celebrated school of the Stoicks. He lived from 362BC until 264BC. He taught the predestination or fatality of all things. The Stoicks embraced the doctrine of the predestination of all things. This doctrine stayed with them for hundreds of years.

When Paul was teaching at Athens, Greece, the Stoicks and the Epicureans encountered Paul and disputed with him.

They stated that he had set forth strange gods, and a new doctrine. (Acts 17:16-21). Was Paul the first Preacher to preach against Calvinism?

According to the Stoicks, every event is determined by fate. The sentence already fixed, predestinated by the gods.

The Jewish Pharisees also believed in the absolute predestination of allthings. See – Josephus History book 2, chapter 8, section 14, as well as Mosheim’s History, page 164. This might account for the Pharisees attitude towards Jesus in Mark 8:24-41. Catholic continued the doctrine of predestination, through Augustine in the 300’s AD.

Protestants adopted and slightly modified the doctrine of predestination of all things by John Calvin in the 1500’s AD.

The main difference being that Augustine placed all dead babies in Hell, and Calvin only placed non-elect babies in Hell.

Mosheim states that all the fathers before Augustine taught a conditional election, and that Augustine himself, in his early ministry, taught a conditional election. But, in the year 397AD, Augustine discovered the doctrine of absolute predestination.

Augustine was a bitter enemy of the Donatist Churches, which held to the doctrines of the Novations. The Novations taught a conditional election, and were strongly opposed to unconditional election!

Historically, the AnaBaptist were opposed to:

1. Total Inability. Not total depravity, which has God enabling man.

2. Unconditional Election

3. Limit Atonement

4. And Irresistible Grace

They did believe strongly in Eternal Security, this is different from Perseverance of the Saints.

See – (Election Made Plain, by L.S. Ballard and Ernest Rippetoe, now published by Halls Baptist Church, Halls Tenn., this was an old out of print work) Call – (865) 922-2912, to obtain a copy.

Calvinism as crept into the Baptist Church from English Baptist, who were exposed to Protestantism. It has also come into the Baptist Churches from the great Revivals of George Whitfield, who filled the Baptist Churches with Calvinist in the 1700’s. Another great problem is that most Scholarship on Bible Studies has been written by Calvinist. The printed page has ruined many a Baptist Preacher. Baptist as a whole, have been poor on writing Theological Works. This is sadly very true!

This last section will make many Baptist mad. However, are you a Cultural Baptist, or a Bible Christian?

Teachings of the AnaBaptist neglected or rejected today, by most Baptist Churches!

The practice of Nonresistance (See—Matthew 5:38-48; Romans 12:14; 2 Corinthians 10:3-5; John 18:36; Ephesians 6:12; and Hebrews 7:12 etc.) – Also discussed favorably in Clover’s Baptist History Book

“The AnaBaptist did not use the negative term nonresistance. They spoke only of Wehrlosigkeith (being without defense), AnaBaptist …… believed that the sword was for the world and the Word of God for the Church. See—(Secret of Their Strength, page 210).

AnaBaptist believe the sword mentioned in Luke 22:36, was for the protection against wild animals, not to be used against men!

The Baptist were peace lovers and did not believe in the use of the sword. This trait would probably describe most of them. They were reviled and they reviled not again, they were persecuted and they pleaded for liberty of all. The entire Christian world was engaged in persecution. The Baptist, in all lands, both Protestant and Roman Catholic, were cruelly persecuted by imprisonment, exile, torture, fire, and sword. The Baptist by thousands were martyred. They alone pleaded for liberty”. See – (A history of the Baptist, by Christian, page 99-101).

Felix Manz said, “No Christian smites with the sword nor resists evil”. See – (MIE, page 359)

Adrian Cornelis who was executed in 1551 AD wrote, “Woe is you who shed the innocent blood of those who have no desire to defend themselves with material or carnal weapons, but only with God’s Word. This is our sword, and it is two-edged and sharp”.

Conrad Grebel in 1524 wrote, “The Gospel and those who accept it are not protected with the sword, neither should they thus protect themselves ….True believing Christians are as sheep in the midst of wolves … They must be baptized in anxiety and trouble, tribulation, persecution, suffering, and death. They must be tried in the fire and must reach the Fatherland of eternal rest, not by overcoming bodily enemies with the sword, but by overcoming spiritual foes. They use neither the worldly sword, nor engage in war, since among them, taking human life has ceased entirely, for we are no longer under the Old Covenant”.

Hans Schlaffer who suffered martyrdom on February 4th, 1528 wrote, “Our faith, life, and Baptism is founded on nothing else than the commandment of Christ, and all the days of my life has no uproar or sedition come into my heart ….. There is no plot or other intention among us except to amend our lives, and to abstain from the vicious, unrighteous life of the world”.

The Swiss Brethren (AnaBaptist) wrote in 1532, “In Matthew, chapter 5, Christ forbids the believers all use of force. He says that rather than go to law they should permit others to defraud them, they should not strive with any one and should give the cloak to him who takes away their coat. The civil government was ordained of God to punish the evildoers and protect the good …. We believe the civil government should be separate from the church ….. And not be established in it”.

In Moravia, in the year 1579, for the first time, a sum of money was demanded from the Hutterian Brethren as a war tax.

In accord with their principle of nonresistance and their confession of Faith, which forbids paying war taxes, they refuse to give it. The authorities in consequence seized part of their property, and continued to, for many years, at one point becoming annually. See – (MIE, page 362)

Wilhelm Hadorn and other impartial writers have pointed out that the Swiss AnaBaptist always consistently adhered to the principle of nonresistance. See—(MIE, page 365)

The fact deserves notice that not only the followers of Hubmaier but all AnaBaptist who did not teach the principle of nonresistance, had a very brief history. Few of them indicated a willingness to endure persecution. See – (MIE, page 365)

NOTE – The last person executed for heresy in England, was by being burned alive. This took place at Litchfield, England April 11th, 1612 AD. At this time, Edward Whitman, a Baptist, was burnt alive. See – (The World’s Debt to the Baptist, by John Porter, page 16).

Head Coverings on Ladies

Very few Baptist Churches still believe in Head Coverings on Ladies (I Corinthians 11), and these Baptist Churches are mainly Calvinistic. Any honest Bible student will admit there are two coverings in I Corinthians eleven. The long hair cannot be the covering; women are to put on their heads. Besides, there are two different words for coverings in the Greek for this passage. (Unless you believe Paul wrote and spoke in 1611 English). There are 4 articles listed at Anabap.com, under tracts, for further study on this topic. The reason that Preachers won’t speak out for the woman’s head covering has to do with popularity, not with the Bible. How about the Holy Kiss, (commanded 5 times in the New Testament)? Just how much, has our culture taken us away from the Word of God?

Marriage

AnaBaptist also refused to have their marriage ceremonies performed by the officials of the State Church, and this caused many people to believe that they were not married and were guilty of immorality. They felt that their lifetime pledge to each other, witnessed by a preacher of the Gospel and local witnesses, constituted a Biblical Marriage. See – (Faithful Baptist Witness, by Stringer, page 203). Note—All that a State Marriage, as compared to a Coveture Marriage does, is give you the opportunity to get a DIVORCE!

Easy Beliefism

Pilgram Marpeck in his writings, who labored in Strasburg, Augsburg, and other places of South Germany, spoke disapprovingly of preaching justification by faith without giving repentance and conversion their proper emphasis. He also declared that taking Oaths and defense by force were forbidden the Christian. See- (MIE, page 360)

Non-conformity To The World

Bullinger in his first book against the Swiss AnaBaptist writes in 1531, “they disapprove of dancing, and all other forms of worldly amusement. They insist on modest apparel, and condemn outward adorement.” Bullinger in his second book written in 1561 writes, “they reject wearing costly clothing and ornaments”.

Franck in 1531 AD wrote, “The AnaBaptist believe in simplicity of clothing”.

Capito wrote concerning the Swiss AnaBaptist, “They are determined to shun the evil life of the world”.

A Good Quote – “Worldliness manifested itself in the endeavor to avoid unpopularity”. See—(MIE, page 255)

   <<<PREVIOUS PAGE                             TOP OF PAGE