I think you left out a huge factor that needs to be noted. The Lutherans, Reformed, and Catholics were all combinations of religion and state. Infant Baptism was used to confirm a child with that particular religion and state. When you were confirmed with that religion/state it was near impossible to switch allegiances, especially when that particular kingdom/region needed faithful soldiers for conflicts. Many Anabaptists were opposed to the state/religion combination as well, so their persecution often came from the state. (Many also refused to kill as well.) Also, any opposition to state religion was considered 'Anabaptist'. They were essentially labeled by all three major groups as a scapegoat. They were the predecessors to the ideas in which America was founded, in that state/religion were separated.

Great short biography of Menno Simons. Thanks.

Thank you so very much for making these Available! most helpful as I pursue my auto didactic study of church history. Your objective,factual approach is most commendable. Excellent in every way!

Please note two typos. First, Friesland (not Freisland). Second, Simons (not Simmons). In general, I greatly enjoy your online lectures. Church history is fascinating, yet little understood by many. A better understanding of it should help clear up a lot of the "them vs. us" polarization in our nation today.

Since Amish, Mennonites, and Hutterites are Anabaptist. What are the difference and similarities of their belief and practice.

Just listened to the story of Münster. Very interesting stuff.

Never heard of the Anabaptists of Munster, thank you.

Are there specific resources that would help in diving into the Menno study? This vantage point of the anabaptist history seems to, maybe, be left out of the anabaptist discussion today (as I am some overlook the less glamorous parts of the other reformers as well).

@acolytes777

6 жыл бұрын

From what I've heard from theologians is that the early history of Anabaptists is very difficult to know with precision. As Dr. Reeves said, the term was thrown around to label people as radical, that is it wasn't meant to describe a theological position. While the rejection of pedo-bapstism was a belief attributed to anabaptists, one should avoid the tendency to assume that all anabaptists believed such a thing. There were people that were labelled as anabaptists that rejected concepts such as the trinity and embraced concepts that were ( and are) deemed as heretical (Arianism, Sabellianism/Modalism, etc) Furthermore, given how these individuals were persecuted mercilessly by secular and religious authorities there was very little opportunity by intellectuals to develop a robust theology of distinction. Apart from the radical way of viewing things of the things of their time and the general stance of pedo-baptism, seems to me that we will never actually know what believing Christians within the Anabaptistist 'movement' actually believed.