2010 Fall Anabaptist Identity Conference

I was recently listening to a number of messages from the 2010 Fall Anabaptist Identity Conference, which offers a large number of downloadable MP3s.  The message that I just listened to was Believer's Baptism - A Fundamental in the Separation of Church and State, which prevented a solid Scriptural defense of believer's baptism (although how any paedobapist can profess to defend this practice from Scripture is totally beyond me...)


Anyhow, from the message you see how the Anabaptists draw a strong distinction of church and state (which considering my growing disillusionment with all things political, this is something I'm finding more and more easier to agree with.)  And on the topic of a state church, you can't have a true state church without infant baptism, compromising the requirements of membership in order to just bring more people into the church.  On church and state, the question is asked: if all society is in the church, then where is the world, of which we are to be separate?


The church is to teach of the intention of making disciples.  Who should be baptized?  Disciples.  We are commanded to teach all nations, a command observed everywhere, and our message is not to change until the end of the age.  We should not teach based on assumptions or traditions, but on the Word of God.


Where in Scripture has Christ commanded infant baptism?  He hasn't.  Scripture says to repent and be baptized.  Unless there is genuine repentance, no baptism.  Paedobaptists will sometimes misquote Matt. 19:14, of “Let the little children come to me and do not hinder them, for to such belongs the kingdom of heaven", saying that Jesus here is allowing children into the kingdom of heaven via infant baptism.  But if this passage is about infant baptism, and the disciples were familiar with this, then why did they object to the children going to Jesus?  There is a distinction between "blessing" and "baptism".  Additionally, how could they be baptized into the kingdom, if according to v.14 the kingdom already belongs to them?


Paedobaptists also misapply Col. 2:11, "In him you were also circumcised, in the putting off of the sinful nature, not with a circumcision done by the hands of men but with the circumcision done by Christ," in drawing an incorrect association with circumcision and baptism.  Water baptism was never intended to replace circumcision, and while circumcision was done by the hands of men, baptism is about internal change, and operation of God alone.  And if this parallel is to be drawn, it is notable that Abraham was circumcised AFTER his faith, not before.  Additionally, appeals to traditions, in addition to being a fallacy of special pleading, run into a difficulty when you find traditions such as described in the Didache.  Are infants really supposed to fast two days prior to baptism?


Believer's baptism is making a covenant before men, and being willing to give up everything (as the early radicals were when they defied the infant baptism traditions of the state church.)  Infant baptism, on the other hand, includes sinners by design.

Essential Anabaptist Mennonite Doctrines and Practices

A link to some of the Essential Anabaptist Mennonite Doctrines and Practices.  While some of it is still hit or miss for me, I think they are one of the few groups that gets it right with head coverings, family and church/state relations, etc.

Schleitheim Confession (Anabaptist, 1527)

Link to the Schleitheim Confession, an earlier Anabaptist confessional document.  I don't profess to agree with all of it, but I've got a strange interest in the anabaptists lately (maybe because I'm technically a twice-baptized person myself: once the wrong way (baby) and once the right way (believer)).

Michael Phillips - History of the Anabaptists

Pastor Michael Phillips offers a nice overview in this MP3 of the Anabaptist movement, both the origin and early history of this group as well as an exploration of some of their key teachings. Speaking as an "anabaptist" (one twice baptized - once the wrong way as a little devil of a baby, once the right way as a professing believer) I really admire the convictions of the early believers who took a stand for their convictions, often with their lives sacrificed as a result.

Pastor Phillips talks about Conrad Grebel, a student of Zwingli in the 16th century. Zwingli was assailing the catholic mass at that time, as something not found in Scripture. Grebel took that a step further and applied that same reasoning logically to infant baptism as well. What is fascinating is that Zwingli privately agreed, yet hypocritically he publically supported paedobaptism. And sadly at that time it was the city council that stood in judgment over the matter, with Zwingli's backing, when truthfully Christ is the only head of the church. Grebel was arrested, imprisoned, but ultimately able to flee and continue to spread the word. The message also continues into details about Felix Manz and also Michael Sattler, the later who faced a brutal torture and execution simply because he taught and believed in the Scripturally-correct mode of baptism.

While the anabaptists were not without faults theologically, one of the interesting points made by Pastor Phillips is that, while there will be Judases in baptist churches, these are NOT ones that are deliberately brought in, whereas in the paedobaptising congregations, as he puts it in the message, the practice was that of "sprinkled water on the heads of little devils and brought into the church". Strong, true, but accurate.

The Radicals

The Radicals is a fascinating film about the "radical" reformation, or Anabaptist movement of the 14th century, and the tragic story of Michael and Margatetha Sattler. The film, though low-budget, is an excellent account of this movement that defied both the catholic church and other protestant reformers of the time.

The Sattlers joined up with the Anabaptist group and presented teachings that challenged those of the State, and of many protestant reformers. As this movement continued to grow, they faced horrendous persecution, and this video does NOT go light on the details of torture and execution (strong enough that I would not recommend this film for families with young children.)

What was interesting too, to me as an old Star Trek fan was seeing Mark Lenard (Spock's Dad) appear as Michael Sattler's nemesis. He's an excellent actor, and did a tremendous job in this role. Having seen him as a vulcan appealing to Klingons in the United Federation of Planets, it can be a little difficult seeing him outside of that role, but all the same, he does a great job.

The Radicals is a very moving film, and gives an excellent narrative of the early movement of the Anabaptists, their beliefs, and the horrendous persecution that they suffered from the catholic church. The DVD also includes some excellent extras, such as a documentary on the Anabaptists and chapter introductions setting the historical context. Worth checking out, but again, viewer discretion advised for the graphic torture sequences.

"Better a prison of stone than a prison of false conviction."