A few Quakers and Mennonites framed this first public antislavery statement in North America, in 1688. It was a statement that clashed with the kingdoms of this world.

Would you, as a disciple of Jesus, help her? Even if it was illegal to help her?

A confrontation of values

It is a clash of kingdoms. No, our war does not involve guns and ballistic missiles. This war is a collision of values and virtues. God said, “Go forth and multiply and fill the earth,” and no murderer shall be a part of heaven. The opposing kingdom says, “We are fearful of overpopulation. You will kill your baby or we will kill it for you.”
And the battle is on. Christ’s kingdom against the kingdoms of this world. Christ’s righteousness against the self-righteousness of those who choose their own standard of right and wrong instead of submitting to the righteousness He has spelled out in His teachings.
As citizens of Christ’s kingdom, Christians are caught up in the clash with the values of earthly kingdoms in many fronts. One continuing thorny issue with the kingdoms of this world has been of self-defense and war. Jesus’ ethic is to overcome evil with good. The kingdoms of this world try to quell evil with punishment and revenge. A very recent example of this is the revenge killing of Osama bin Laden. Jesus’ method of conquering Osama would have been to win his heart by love, changing it from strife and warfare to one of peace and love. The kingdoms of this world “triumphed” over the hatred of Osama with a revenge killing.
But sad to say, it is very likely that the revenge will be revenged, and the hatred will be perpetuated. Hatred does not conquer hatred. Only love conquers hatred.

The clash in history

An example of a historical clash of kingdoms occurred when Europeans kidnapped (or bought kidnapped) Africans and shipped them to various parts of the world as slaves. Such morally twisted values can never be accepted by disciples of Jesus, and some of these disciples began to speak up. In 1688, the first antislavery statement in what would later become the United States of America was issued. A group of Mennonite/Quakers near Philadelphia wrote a letter addressed to other Quakers, reproving them for accepting slavery. The following is a portion of the letter, set in modern English:

These are the reasons why we are against the traffic of humans: Is there anyone that would like to be sold or made a slave for all of his life? How fearful and fainthearted are many on sea when they see a strange ship—being afraid it should be a Turk, and they should be taken, and sold for slaves into Turkey. Now how is enslaving Africans doing better than Turks do? Yea, rather it is worse for them, which say they are Christians; for we hear that the most part of such Negroes are brought here against their will and consent, and that many of them are stolen. … There is a saying that we shall do to all men like as we will be done ourselves; making no difference of what generation, descent, or color they are. And those who steal or rob men, and those who buy or purchase them, are they not all alike? … But to bring men here, or to rob and sell them against their will, we stand against. … Pray, what thing in the world can be done worse towards us, than if men should rob or steal us away, and sell us for slaves to strange countries; separating husbands from their wives and children? Since this is not done as we would have done to us, therefore we contradict and are against this buying and selling of humans. And we who profess that it is not lawful to steal, must, likewise, avoid purchasing such things as are stolen, but rather help to stop this robbing and stealing if possible. And such men ought to be delivered out of the hands of the robbers, and set free …

The brave men who signed the document started at the right place. This letter was sent to fellowbelievers who had gotten sucked into the values and ethics of this world. Imagine, Quakers buying and selling slaves! The letter was a rebuke directed toward other believers, not a political statement directed toward the government.
Even so, the letter did militate against the political kingdoms of this world. It suggested that Christians ought to “help stop this robbing and stealing” and that “such men ought to be delivered out of the hands of the robbers.” After all, if you were the one who had been kidnapped from your family and sold as a slave, would you not appreciate a helping hand if you escaped? The letter was not a call to armed rebellion, not even political involvement. It was a call for Christians to repent of their involvement in this sin of legalized kidnapping and to be ready to help those who knocked on their door in the middle of the night needing refuge.
During the next 150 years, some of the American colonies and the later United States of America would make it illegal for anyone to help a slave escape. George Washington himself (who owned or leased over 300 slaves at his death) had signed the 1793 Fugitive Slave Act that slapped a $500 fine (appr. $50,000 in today’s value) on those who “shall harbor or conceal such person after notice that he or she was a fugitive from labor.” The State of South Carolina even had a death penalty for helping slaves escape. Yet many Quakers and other believers felt a moral obligation to help those who were being unjustly kidnapped—even though the kingdom of this world called The United States of America made it illegal to extend the hand of love and compassion. John Greenleaf Whittier, a Quaker, put the national shame of slavery to verse in a poem titled For Righteousness Sake. The first of the five stanzas—dedicated to “friends under arrest for treason against the slave power”—runs like this:
The age is dull and mean. Men creep,
Not walk; with blood too pale and tame
To pay the debt they owe to shame;
Buy cheap, sell dear; eat, drink, and sleep
Down-pillowed, deaf to moaning want;
Pay tithes for soul-insurance; keep
Six days to Mammon, one to Cant.
In 1850, another Fugitive Slave Act was passed into federal law. Called “The Bloodhound Law” by abolitionists, this new law increased the fine to $1000 and 6 months in jail for aiding an escaping slave, and gave authorities the right to deputize any citizen and force that person to aid in capturing escaping slaves. This meant that if the local sheriff came along and told you that you were now deputized to look for slaves, you were obligated by law to help capture runaway slaves, like it or not.
Those US citizens who realized that Christ’s kingdom rejects legalized kidnapping and cruel mistreatment of slaves were forced to choose whose laws they would allow to govern their choices: the kingdom of Christ or the kingdom of The United States of America. It was, once again, a clash of kingdoms.

A recent clash

Another very recent example of the clash of kingdoms involves an Anabaptist minister named Timothy (Timo)Miller, missionary to Nicaragua. When Timothy saw the opportunity to help a former lesbian remove her child from what appeared to be a forced acceptation of homosexual “marriage,” Timothy extended his helping hand. He now faces the possibility of a 3-year prison term for helping the mother of the child escape from being forced to do things contrary to God’s decrees. The values and ethics of Christ’s kingdom—which has not and never will accept homosexual “marriages” as legitimate—has clashed with a kingdom that says everyone must accept the validity of those “marriages.”
And with a clash and a bang, the war is on. Whose law trumps the other? Does the law of Vermont, which says that homosexual “marriages” are as legitimate and binding as God-ordained heterosexual marriages? Or does the law of Christ trump the self-righteous proclamations of a perverted nation? In the mind of Christ’s followers, there is no question.

A modern Mars’ Hill

Like Paul preaching on Mars’ Hill, I recently went to a place I don’t normally spend a lot of time with, to “preach.” I went online and joined in on some discussion on a national news media comment section concerning the Timothy Miller case. The following are some edited excerpts from that forum:
(Mike) People like Timothy Miller can be looked upon as kidnappers and terrible criminals, or they can be seen in the light of his Mennonite forefathers who along with Quakers helped form the Underground Railroad, in spite of President George Washington himself (who owned, leased, and used over 300 slaves at his death) signing the 1793 Fugitive Slave Act that fined those who helped slaves to escape up to $500.
Lisa Miller has felt that she cannot morally accept the court rulings and must do as those who could not morally accept the 1793 Fugitive Slave Act and must do what they felt morally right to do—help slaves escape.
(Commentator 1) Tim Miller belongs in prison, as does Lisa Miller (who also needs mental health counseling). Hopefully the child survives the ordeal.
(Commentator 2) Kidnapping in the Name of Jesus!! Thank God I’m a Christian!!
(Commentator 3) In Mike we see yet another example of a “good Christian” —one who justifies kidnapping a child from her legal parent by comparing that crime to freeing the slaves.
Kidnappers for Jesus! … Given the severity of the problem, I’m wondering if all Christian clergy should be required to wear GPS tracking ankle bracelets, and we should establish a 2,000 ft no-clergy zone around areas frequented by children like schools, playgrounds, and residential housing? The no-clergy zone also needs to include hospital maternity wards and daycare centers.
(Mike) Hmm. What about those who use the legal system to abduct a child from her biological parent? Suppose that ever has happened? Legalized abduction!
(Commentator 1) Mike, that happens every day in family law court. As this case proves, some biological parents are unfit and can’t be trusted with the welfare of their children.
(Mike) Timo Miller will be in court tomorrow. Timo is an honest man, a so-called “Anabaptist.” He will not lie about his involvement in this. (He may plead the 5th … I dont know.) But he is not expected to deny the fact that he and quite a large number of us who were not involved feel a conscientious and ethical imperative to aid biological parents keep their children from being turned over to those who are not the biological parent [on the basis of homosexual unions].
Civil law always subjects itself to the higher law of conscience. While we as “Anabaptists” do strive to obey civil law, we have a history book 1000 pages thick (called Martyrs Mirror) of those who have suffered imprisonment, beheadings, and other harassments from civil governments for doing what we feel was a moral and ethical imperative. We are thankful that the US government has treated us with the greatest respect in these areas, better than any other government has.
We do not generally take part in civil government, we do not take up arms (some of us have sat in jails in practically all the wars of the USA for being conscientious objectors, and two of our young men died from mistreatment by US officials during WW I for refusing to take arms) and we do not sue at courts.
Call it “Christian Sharia” or call it what you want. We firmly believe that conscience trumps human institutions called civil law. And we have committed ourselves to die for that, if those who do not agree decide to kill us or punish us for our ethical standards.
But we do not fight back in the flesh. We will not take up arms. We will not mount a political campaign to force our convictions on others. We choose to live them and invite others to join us, but we do not force. Like our Master, we do what we understand to be right, and expect to suffer for it from those who do not understand.
(Commentator 1) Our secular civil law trumps your Christian Sharia law every time. You have no more right to violate our civil laws than does Scott Roeder.
Hopefully the other members of the child abduction ring will be captured and imprisoned too. They deserve justice.
(Mike) Scott Roeder violated civil law, and the ethics and teachings of Jesus’ law. I am sorry to have to say it for the name “Christian,” but 90% of those who claim that name do not follow Jesus’ teaching. And neither do I want to say that we “Anabaptists” do it perfectly. But Scott Roeder would be excommunicated from our congregations if he had been a member. (As would have been George Tiller also, obviously.)
We call it “the doctrine of the two kingdoms.” We live in Jesus’ kingdom by His laws, and strive to obey the civil kingdom we also live in. Sometimes the laws of the two kingdoms conflict—as in Timo Miller’s case—and we recognize that we will have to suffer from the earthly kingdom. But we have absolutely no intention of extending Jesus’ law by force; neither military nor political force.
Want to join us? It’s a voluntary society that overcomes evil with good and does not take revenge when misunderstood. We have sat the equivalent of thousands of years in jails for our beliefs and actions. We may add a few more to that number in the case of Timo Miller.
Even so, we have no plans of changing our standard of ethics and morals.
(Commentator 1) I wasn’t aware that the US constitution had an exemption for Anabaptists, or that civil crimes were graded on theological effort. I think it’s more of a pass/fail kind of thing.

Michael and Joseph Hofer were two Hutterites that suffered mistreatment from US military officials for being conscientious objectors. Both died from the mistreatment they received.

Hopefully the other cult members will be captured quickly and given lengthy sentences so that they can’t harm any more innocent children.
(Commentator 2) Jerry Falwell’s ministries/Liberty University with a big batch of “lawyers” (if you can call them that) are trying to keep a child from her other parent by illegal means.
(Mike) We are not a part of what Falwell/Liberty University does. Our methods and ethics are distinct from theirs. While we may both be on the same side of moral issues in some cases, our view of following Christ is quite distinct. It is a case of Baptist vs. Anabaptist in this situation.
We recognize that civil governments do not make exemptions, although in some cases they have, like in giving us conscientious objector status when we tell them we cannot in good conscience kill another human. But we fully expect that civil governments not understand us in some cases. And we will have to suffer without resistance for doing what we understand as right. Even so, we have no intentions of trying to force the civil government to our ethics. Ethical and moral decisions made by force are not a part of Christ’s kingdom.
You are still invited to join us! Be forewarned. One has to take up a thing called a cross to join us. That means you have to give up all rights to self-defense and accept the lordship of Someone higher. It hurts, believe me. I mean, like Timo Miller. It sure would be a lot easier to lie to the judge, to sue back, to fight with a gun …
(Commentator 1) Hmmmm … sounds like we need to put GPS ankle bracelets on all Anabaptists and monitor them closely. I was hoping we could limit it to the clergy, but it looks like the entire cult might be involved.
Now Timo’s the victim? ROFLOL.
I hope as a homophobe he enjoys prison life for many years. [End of discussion.]

Christian sharia

What do Muslims, Jews, Catholics, Mormons, Evangelicals, and the homosexual movement have in common? They are all perpetuators of their values by the use of force. Each band uses political, judicial, and/or military power to enforce its moral and ethical standard on others. Judges with gavels, prisons, lawsuits, political campaigns … these are all signs of a worldly kingdom. Be that a strict Muslim kingdom, or a liberal gay-rights agenda. For as much enmity that there is between homosexuals and organized religions that ban their perverted deeds, they all operate outside the kingdom of God when they use force to push their morality—or the lack thereof—on those who differ. In the case of Timo Miller, the State of Vermont and the homosexual movement seem bent on forcing everyone to accept the validity of their immorality. A big batch of lawyers and law enforcement officers will see to it that we all accept their moral standard … like it or not.
It is at this point that the kingdom of God differs from the kingdoms of this world. While the kingdom of God has what is probably the highest moral and ethical standard in the world, force is never used to propagate the kingdom. It is voluntary. Either one freely decides (by faith) to become part of the kingdom of God, or he simply does not enter in. No one will force him with a sword or a lawsuit to walk in the teachings of Jesus.
And it is at this point that “kingdom Christianity” parts ways with Evangelicals, Catholics, Orthodox, and other “Christians.” The only tools used to propagate the kingdom of God are teaching and example. The only “discipline” is the purposeful withdrawal of fellowship from those who say, but do not do. Where the political campaigns begin and the war drums start to roll, or the sheriff slaps the handcuffs, or the fines are imposed, there the kingdom of God ends.

The two kingdoms

The saints of God realize that they live in a world of two kingdoms. Their first allegiance is to the King Jesus and His values, teachings, and ethics. If the civil kingdom that they reside in happens to allow the citizens of Christ’s kingdom to live their principles in peace, so be it! Historically, though, the majority of the time there has been a continuous battle for allegiance between the kingdom of God and the civil kingdom that Christians reside in.
We here in the USA have been blessed to live under a civil government that has been probably the most favorable towards Christ’s ethics than any government in history. However, things are changing fast. One or two generations ago would probably have never seen Timo Miller getting arrested for helping a mother keep her child from being forced to leave her child with an unrelated lesbian. From the looks of things, barring a national repentance and revival, it will not get any better in the following decades. The day may well come—sooner than we think—when children will be required by law to be indoctrinated with the perverted values of the pagan society that the USA is becoming. Either make “Heather Has Two Mommies” a part of your homeschool curriculum, or the Social Services will take your children … and place them with Frank and Joe, the new “couple” just down the street who have recently been given foster care rights.
When your children are taken and placed in such an environment, the clash of the kingdoms will suddenly ring loud and clear! You will then have to make a decision as to which kingdom you will adhere to. And adhering to Christ’s kingdom may find you facing a stern judge with a big gavel.
Thump!!! “Guilty! Two years of suspended jail and the loss of parental rights for …”
Are we ready?

David Nitschmann (the Bishop … there were at least three famous early Moravian Brethren named David Nitschmann, so that is why this one is called “The Bishop.”) was the first bishop of the renewed church at Herrnhut, Germany. Interesting people, they were. Some of the stories got exaggerated, as can be seen in the video, but Riedhead does catch the spirit of the missions, even though his “facts” are not factual.

I do not in any way put an endorsement on Zinzendorfian theology (he killed the Moravian Brethren, in my opinion), but the zeal and dedication and love of the Moravian Brethren is worthy to look at. (And Zinzendorf was a very dedicated man, just had some kooky theology, which even the Moravian Church acknowledges.)

One of the other reasons I chose Anna to write about is that there are many missionary biographies focus on men, but there are very few written about women. And since men are biblically ordained to take the lead in missions and church leadership, it is right that men are encouraged in that direction. That said, there is room on about any mission front for consecrated maidens of the Lamb. Anna turned down two marriage proposals in her youth so that she could dedicate herself better to Jesus Christ. Not all are called to singlehood, but some are. This story is dedicated to the sisters who are sold out for Jesus.

At this time, Handmaiden of the Lamb, The story of Anna Nitschmann, Moravian shepherdess of souls is only available in pdf. Contact me if you would like a hard copy.

Anna Nitschmann was a dedicated sister in the Renewed Moravian Church

Anna Nitschmann was a consecrated sister in the Renewed Moravian Brethren church. This booklet was written to encourage young sisters to total consecration. Included in her story is an overview of the Moravian practices and teachings, the good points, and the bad. An appendix looks especially at Zinzendorf’s [bad] theology and the overuse of the lot.

In mid-October we received an invitation to engage in a discussion with a senior’s group at the St. Thomas Catholic Church.  They wanted us to explain the differences between our faith, (Anabaptism), and theirs.  We responded positively, perhaps a bit eagerly.

I gave it very little thought as the day approached. After all, this was likely going to be a meeting with  a few old ladies, and how deep can you get in a setting like that?  When we pulled into their parking lot, however, I was surprised by the number of cars already there.  Was this, perhaps, a bigger thing than I had expected?  I regretted not taking the time to be more prepared, but I was in good company since Aaron, Andrew, Jonathan, David and our wives were all along.  We bravely marched into the St. Thomas Church basement,– suspenders, coverings and all.

We were received warmly enough.   After a potluck dinner, the  priest, Brian Johnson, gave Jonathan the responsibility of organizing the topics and speakers.

Jonathan gave a brief history of Anabaptism in Europe, and their “coming out” of the Catholic church.  I could not see any reaction on the faces of our Catholic hosts–only friendly curiosity.  I suspect there is not much history about the Catholic church that would surprise any of them, nor do they feel any real attachment to the Catholic church of 500 years ago. But then, what did I expect?  Would I?

Aaron followed with a brief explanation of how Caneyville came to be, and why we are not exactly Amish, Mennonite, or German Baptist.  When asked if there were any people in the room who had ever considered joining the Amish, the response was sort of feeble.  Undazed, Aaron went on to explain that many of their fellow Americans do, in fact, want to join the Amish.  He explained the hurdles those people face, and why there have sprung up across the country small communities like ours who seek to remove unscriptural hurdles and yet maintain the strong community structure of a believer’s church.

Jonathan had me give a summary of doctrinal differences.  I tried to explain that Anabaptists take the words of Jesus very seriously and, if at all possible, literally.  Besides the obvious difference of believer’s baptism, we Anabaptists also try to live the sermon on the mount; not swearing, not resisting evil, and so on.  I also tried to note the places we actually agree with Catholics, without getting too ecumenical about it.  Looking around th room at the 50 or more people who were there did not make me want to talk much about our common ground.

Finally, Andrew fielded and answered questions from the group.  They had plenty of them, but once again it seemed to be only friendly curiosity–nothing critical or accusatory.  We might easily have imagined that we were at a luncheon with the Grayson County Historical society.

A few days later, we did a 180 degree u-turn and went to Carrolton, Kentucky, to a gathering of plain or ex-plain people sponsored by Michael Pearl.

Michael began the 3-day session by telling us that he had spent many hours in the plain church meetings, “stinking, hot, and seemingly endless”, being bored to death by our preachers.  Now it was his turn, and he intended to get revenge.  He gave us a  schedule of 7 meetings totaling around 15 hours of preaching.

Could Michael do it?  Indeed he could.  He could hardly stop talking when the time was up.  And what did he talk about?

Well, Michael is as close to a modern-day Martin Luther as you can get.  We spent hours going through Romans and the  Protestant “faith alone” doctrine, but we were never bored.  Mike is an entertaining speaker with clear and firm gasp of his subject.  We liked him.

I was glad for the chance to spend most of three days trying to understand Protestant theology.  I was surprised at how little I disagreed with the actual words he preached, and yet how vehemently I disagreed with his summaries and conclusions.  Perhaps our greatest disagreement was the way we approached the New Testament.  Michael wanted us to skip past the 4 gospels,–(“that’s Old Testament stuff”), and start at God’s premier book to the non-Jewish people, the book of Romans.  Romans was, for Michael, the window through which he saw the rest of the Bible.  Romans was, in fact, the Gospel.

In sharp contrast, for us Anabaptists the teachings of Jesus and his announcements of the Kingdom is the actual Gospel.  We see the gospel as the “turning upside-down” of our lives and inviting us to participate in the kingdom struggle.  We read Jesus’ accounts of end-time judgment and believe it to be a  judgment of fruits and works, not theology.

Michael doesn’t agree. Our salvation is based on grace, through faith alone and not of works.  Period.  All that stuff about not swearing, not resisting evil people, doing violence to no man, and so forth, belong to a works-based salvation.

By the end of 3 days, it was clear to me that Martin Luther had distorted the gospel message and robbed it of its fruitfulness.  Not so much by the exact things being said, but by an overall imbalance of Scripture and a gross misunderstanding of what the Gospel message was.

I watched for my chance to question Michael in a non-threatening setting between meetings.  Finally, on the last day, I found him outside all alone.

“How is is,” I asked, “that there can be absolutely no works in salvation when the Bible includes such things as “calling upon the name of the Lord: to be saved? Even simple belief itself is called a ‘work’ by Jesus in John 6:28b,29 “What shall we do, that we might work the works of God?  Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.”  My brain, my mouth, my ‘giving up’–are they not the works of my organic body?”

Michael is never stumped.  “Those are what we call non-meritorious works”, he said.  “That’s not what we mean, not what Romans means when it speaks of works.”

Oh.  Maybe we aren’t so far apart as our etymology suggests.  If we could find different words, would our worlds draw closer?  But then I think of the crisp advice given by John: “Little children, let no one deceive you.  He who practices righteousness is righteous, just as He is righteous.”

Catholics and Protestants.  Are they opposites?  In many ways, they seem more similar to each other than to the Anabaptists, though they would probably cringe to hear me say it.  And yet, in widely different ways, each of them has adopted a way of believing the Bible which ultimately becomes friendship with the world and its values.  The Way of the Cross, so central to Anabaptist theology, does not dominate their doctrine and thus does not cramp their lifestyle either.

And yet, in my more humble moments, I have to confess that we were treated kindly and graciously in both settings.  I want to learn from this, and return grace and kindness to those with whom I disagree, even strongly.

Peter Riedemann's Confession of Faith is the best-articulated book I have found to describe the beliefs of early Anabaptism

A positive statement

Right from the first chapter of any of his books one quickly senses a different tone than that of many of the other early Anabaptist writers. With many of the others, I often feel that one thing lacking is a more positive expression of their faith. Written on the run, defending themselves against a false accusation, or having to scratch out a few lines through the terrible conditions of dungeon life made many of the Anabaptist writings come off as defensive or polemic. Having the luxury for careful editing or even the chance to make meaningful analogies to express their heart in a devotional style was uncommon in the early days of the Anabaptist movement. It is here that Peter Riedemann shines most. Riedemann was a very spiritual, expressive, and passionate writer. A longing for Christ and total dependence on the Holy Spirit flows through every page. Riedemann captured the devotional style. He comes off more like an Andrew Murray than a Menno Simons.

Riedemann started to write his first book in 1529 while imprisoned in Gmunden, Germany. He finished it approximately in the year 1532 shortly before he escaped from that prison. During his early years, Riedemann had fellowshipped and studied with some of the most gifted Anabaptist leaders of his day. After his escape from prison, he threw his lot in with the newly-forming Hutterian Brethren in Moravia. The brethren quickly recognized his gifts, and the next year they sent Riedemann out as a missionary, in 1533. In that same year he was again captured and put into prison until 1537, this time in the town of Nuremberg. After his release he traveled as a missionary and did pastoral work until he once again landed in prison around the year 1540, where he wrote his second book.

While in prison, Riedemann took advantage of a few privileges that other Anabaptist prisoners never had. While it is true that his books were written from a castle dungeon, as far as dungeon-life in the 1500s went Riedemann had it better that most. The Protestant ruler of this area, Philip of Hess, did not allow the Anabaptists of his region to be executed. So while Riedemann was imprisoned he was allowed some privileges—like writing. Many scholars think that these “Confessions of Faith” were actually written in answers to questions that Phillip of Hess had personally asked him.

Orthodoxy

One of the most obvious things you quickly notice about “Confessions of Faith” is that he presents the faith following the lines of the ancient Apostles’ Creed. Some have suggested that he did this to prove the orthodoxy of the Anabaptists to Philip of Hess … who knows? Whatever his motive, the beauty of this approach was that it presents the early Anabaptist faith based on one thing—their understanding of God. Just as A. W. Tozer said over 400 years later in the opening line of The Knowledge of the Holy, “what comes into our minds when we think about God is the most important thing about us,” Riedemann’s theology flows from his view of God Himself. However, flowing from this creedal approach, Riedemann rescues the Apostles’ Creed from a mere head knowledge by insisting that this ancient faith must effect our life—or it is vain. As he wrote, “no one may truthfully ascribe such glory and honor to Christ unless he has experienced this victory in himself.”[1]

Clear salvation

Pouring through almost every topic is Riedemann’s passionate appeal that the Law has been replaced by the Spirit and grace, and that salvation is entirely the work of the Holy Spirit. Furthermore, this salvation cannot stop with a head knowledge, but is always made manifest by a changed life. Riedemann argues very convincingly that by faith this salvation brings a great confidence and even an assurance of our salvation. Riedemann’s careful balance through these often controversial topics surrounding salvation theology is refreshing. Under the chapter entitled “How People Again May Find God and His Grace,” he writes concerning remorse about our sin:

Those who want to repent with all their heart must first feel genuine remorse for their sins. Remorse, however, means first recognizing how wrong, evil, harmful, and destructive sins are. Otherwise, repentance cannot endure, and still less can the sinner receive grace. True remorse follows the recognition of sin and is the basis on which people feel repugnance and horror of their sin. Yes, they even loathe themselves for being guided and controlled by sin for so long …[2]

Speaking of how the Spirit prepares our hearts for salvation, Riedemann says:

What does the Lord say? ‘No human shall see me and live!’ Therefore, when God starts to speak in us, something must begin to die. We must hear, see, taste, and feel the Lord God in the countenance of Jesus Christ. All of this must happen before such construction can begin.[3]

Following the spirit of remorse, Riedemann says the Spirit leads us to repentance:

Remorse, then, leads to true repentance, and repentance means to humble and submit oneself before God, to bow down, and to be ashamed because of one’s wickedness. This shame brings about a genuine return, so that one hastens to God, cries aloud, and prays to him for forgiveness and grace.”[4]

After surrendering to Christ, Riedemann writes that God’s salvation is real and life-changing. He, along with other early Anabaptist writers, insisted that salvation goes beyond mere mental assent. He offered beautiful analogies of how the nature of Christ is infused or poured into our hearts, giving us life and spiritual power. He even argues that this salvation gives us a real assurance of our hope in heaven:

He has given us a new birth to an imperishable hope, grafted us into his divine nature, and after we believed the gospel, sealed us with his promised Spirit. This Spirit now accomplishes everything in us, eradicating and destroying the sin that we have by nature so that what is good, true, and holy, which he brings with him and plants in us, may take root and bear fruit.[5]

Speaking of the incarnation and the receiving of the divine nature of Christ, he writes:

Through his actual strength and activity, Christ leads us to be partakers of his nature, character, and being. … Christ is our righteousness and goodness. He is our life; we ourselves do not live, but Christ lives in us. Christ is our resurrection, our salvation, and our all in all. We also believe that Christ’s incarnation means that we can be transformed. His suffering and death are salvation and life for us. In Christ we truly have everything.[6]

He [the Holy Spirit] also teaches and guides us, assures us that we are children of God, and makes us one with him, so that through his work, we are made part of the divine nature and character. We experience his work within us in truth and power in the renewing of our hearts. God be praised! In God we have absolute certainty that he has drawn our heart to him and made it his dwelling place.[7]

Christ is the root and the vine, and we are grafted into him through faith. Just as the sap rises from the root and makes the branch fruitful, so the Spirit of Christ rises from the root, Christ, into the branches and twigs, to make them all fruitful. The twigs are of the same nature as the root and bears its kind of fruit.[8]

Christ has given us his Spirit, which joyfully and without compulsion accomplishes God’s will within us.[9]

Speaking of the assurance of our salvation, but yet our continual need of God’s grace, Riedemann said:

Leaving everything else, we cleave to him and depend on him with absolute certainty that we can acknowledge that everything we have comes from God. Since God’s nature and character is eternal life, he has made us partakers and sharers of himself by sealing our faith with his Holy Spirit, which is the security of our inheritance. Through his grace, for which we praise him, we experience his works in us, and this makes us certain of all his promises.[10]

Spirit and church

As with his view on personal salvation, Riedemann speaks of the church as completely dependent of God’s Spirit and grace. Pointedly, Riedemann also argues that the true church is only made up of the company of those who are born again and walking in the Spirit and truth:

The children of God, however, become his children through the unifying Spirit. Thus it is evident that the church is gathered through the Holy Spirit; the Church has its being, and continues to exist, through the Spirit. There are no churches apart from those which the Holy Spirit gathers and builds.[11]

The church of Christ is a pillar and foundation of truth and continues to be that. Truth itself is expressed, confirmed, and put into action in the church by the Holy Spirit. Thus, whoever endures and submits to the working of the Spirit of Christ, is a member of this church. Whoever does not want this and allows sin to rule over them, does not belong to the Church.[12]

Real Spirit-led ministries

Speaking of the pastors and missionaries of these Spirit-led churches, Riedemann writes of the absolute necessity for the anointing of God in order to have a real ministry:

Those who have been on the mountain with Christ and have seen the tabernacle with all its adornments and furnishing, they and only they are able to know how to do the work to please him whose dwelling it shall be.[13]

If anyone is to go out [as a missionary] for the Lord, he must be chosen by the Lord and endowed with his power; he must feel that power working in him. Above all, he must let the Lord’s power rule over him and lead him. … Christ will not permit a messenger to go out who is not first clothed with the power of his Spirit. Those who feel this power will heed the command of their Lord, who has sent them.[14]

Kingdom-based missiology

The goal, calling, and desire of Peter Riedemann and these radical brethren was Christ and His kingdom. His heart beat with the heart of Christ with his appeal to manifest God’s kingdom on earth. This Kingdom-based missiology caused these early Anabaptist communities to pour out their lives in missions, even in the most difficult times of war and persecution. What’s more, when they built these missions they understood that disciplining them in all of the teaching of Christ was what was expected of them. They believed Jesus actually meant it when He said, “Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you.”

The Son does what he sees the Father doing. When the Son wished to create a new humanity, or to renew humanity in the likeness of its Creator, he also wanted to do everything in the proper order.[15]

Since they cannot preach without first being sent, it is certain that God, in giving them his command to go out, puts his word in his messengers’ mouths. The Lord himself testifies to this when he says, “I have put my words in your mouth. I have set you over nations and kingdoms, to uproot, pull down, and destroy, and then to build and plant anew.” Therefore, all who have not been sent have no word from God. They only have what they have stolen from the Scriptures or from one another. That is the main reason God’s commission is necessary. It is not enough that they were sent; they also had to know the purpose of being sent, and what they had to do. Christ commanded them to do his work, saying, “teach all nations,” and “Preach the gospel to every creature.”[16]

Love

One last thing about the book that I feel I just have to mention. Through both of his books, Riedemann constantly speaks about the power of love. It is love, he teaches, that makes all this spiritual life work.

There is a particular point that Riedemann makes about love in the brotherhood that I don’t want us to miss. He argues that the oneness and unity that the brotherhood is to have flows from our understanding of the Trinity. This “community of the Trinity,” spoken of by Christ in John 16 and 17, forms the model of unity and love for the brotherhood here on earth. Riedemann used this concept of love so much that his first book has actually been named after it—Love is Like Fire. That title came from his inspiring analogy of a man building a fire from sticks. He says that when you first start building the fire, almost any size of stick can snuff it out. But as the fire grows, it can get to the point that even whole trees or houses can’t stop it. That’s the way love is.

Let it burn! ~Dean Taylor

Love is Like Fire

Love is like fire, which goes out before it really ignites if one puts too much wood on it, as those who work with it know. But once it really flares, the more wood one puts on it, the better it burns, so that even houses and whole forests are burned. But when there is no more wood, however, it dies and grows cold. It is the same with love. When it is first kindled in a man, small troubles and temptations smother and hinder it; but when it really burns, having kindled the man’s eagerness for God, the more temptations and tribulation meet it, the more it flares, until it overcomes and consumes all injustice and wickedness. But when love is not practiced, when the man grows lazy and careless, it flickers out again; the man’s heart grows cold, faith declines, and all good works cease. Then the man stands like a withered tree fit for the fire, as Jesus himself says. Love flows from faith; for where there is no faith there cannot be love, and where there is no love there cannot be faith. The two are so entwined that one cannot be pleasing to God without the other.[17]

[2] Ibid., 95.

[3] Ibid., 174.

[4] Ibid., 96.

[5] Ibid., 61.

[6] Ibid., 75.

[7] Ibid., 76.

[8] Ibid., 97.

[9] Ibid., 100.

[10] Ibid., 64.

[11] Ibid., 77.

[12] Ibid., 78.

[13] Ibid., 175.

[14] Ibid., 184.

[15] Ibid., 186.

[16] Ibid., 186-187.

[17] Peter Riedemann, Love is Like Fire: The Confession of an Anabaptist Prisoner (Plough Publishing House, 1993), 25-26.

“I know I’m a vile sinner, and when I get to the gate of glory, God is going to read down over the long list of my sins, and look up and say, “Is this you?” And I with shame will respond, “Yes.” But in that very moment Jesus is going to come on the scene and say, “But Father, remember that I died for her?” And right there my list will be erased and I will be let in to glory.

Sorry, Ma’am, but if that is how you plan to be saved, you will be sorely disappointed. Every  judgment scene presented to us in the New Testament tells us that our works that we have done will determine whether we enter heaven. You will be asked no questions. When you breathe your last breath, your destiny is sealed.

And your works will determine your final destination. So we had all better turn from evil works to good works through faith in Jesus.

If any0ne can show me where the Bible teaches otherwise, please send me the references.

Consider it well – your destiny is at stake.

Faithfully following the details, our friend made the correct turns and finally dead-ended … right in the local cemetery! He never found out how hard the man giving the directions had laughed after he had pulled away.

Have you ever followed directions, only to end up where you didn’t want to be? Or found out later that your map or GPS deceived you, taking you the “the long way around,” or perhaps to the wrong destination? It wasn’t that you didn’t follow the directions well, the map or GPS was simply wrong!

I appreciate bypasses. Most of them anyways, like when I am in a hurry to get to the other side of town. But a recent discovery has led me to realize that a well-known map used by many travelers is in error, and is leading men and women down streets and into a final end where they were never intended to end up at. This map is so well known and highly valued, that it seems no one even questions its authority. It is the so-called “Romans Road to Salvation.” This map is advertised with the following words: “If you walk down this road you will end up understanding how to be saved.”

The problem with the maps I have seen is that they have several bypasses in them, detours that take men onto a route that ends up on a dead-end street. Well, let me rephrase those words “dead-end street.” It would be more proper to call it “a street that ends up among the dead.” Just like my friend ended up in a graveyard, men who follow the typical Romans Road maps will end up among the dead.

Yes, that’s right! Those popular Romans Road maps totally bypass some very important truths in Paul’s letter to the Romans. Let’s take a look at Romans again, carefully, and look at a few points the popular road maps have detoured around. Unfortunately, a short article does not provide enough space to make a full commentary on Paul’s letter to the Romans, so this short article is not intended to be a complete package in and of itself. It is written with the simple goal of alerting the reader of some missing aspects of the typical “Romans Road” map.

Before we begin …

I want the reader of this article to note two things before he/she continues reading:

1.       I will be referencing the Greek text in this article. No one needs to feel pressured, feel stupid, or feel like knowing Greek is essential to understanding the Bible. There is nothing wrong with the English wording; I refer to the Greek to give us synonyms (which often get our minds out of theological ruts) and to help guide us in the meaning of the English prepositions, which can vary greatly in meaning. The definition we apply to the preposition can entirely change our perspective. Which brings us to point two …

2.       As will be seen, those little prepositions (words like “for,” “by,” “of,” “through,” etc.) can change the whole meaning of a sentence, depending upon the definition applied to them. We tend to never look up their meanings in the dictionary, because we all know what “by” (for example) means, right? If this article does nothing else, it will challenge us to carefully consider the major influence of the definition that we place on prepositions. I encourage us all to not pass over the prepositions lightly.

The purpose of grace—eis obedience

Paul begins his letter with a lengthy salutation, and quickly brings in the topic of Jesus the Anointed. He declares Jesus to be both human (v. 3) and divine (v.4). His divinity was proved by the authority that He manifested over death. Paul then immediately makes clear that it was by means of Jesus that “we have received grace and apostleship.”

Stop for a moment at the next word in verse 5: “for.” Don’t bypass that little word. Its significance is important.

Readers of the article “Given Her for a Covering” may remember that same word expounded upon in 1 Corinthians 11:15 and remember that “for” has many meanings—27 are listed in my unabridged dictionary.

But don’t jump your guns! This time around the Greek word is not “anti,” but a different preposition: “eis.” While “anti” means “right in front of,” “eis” indicates an “entering into.” Picture a circle with an arrow going from the exterior “into” the interior. That is “eis.” “Eis” is used to focus on destination, where something is to end up at, the goal.

So here we are, looking at “grace and apostleship,” and wondering just where that is to take us next. Very simple … into (eis) obedience to the faith among all nations!

Let’s take a brief look at Ephesians 2:10. I know this is outside of Romans, but the teaching is so similar that we can reinforce it with this verse: “For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.” Why were we created in Christ Jesus? “Unto good works!” Although the preposition used here is epi and not eis, the meaning is so similar in this case that eis could have easily been used. Look! The purpose of our creation in Christ Jesus was so that we could move into good works!

Back to Romans 1:5. The sentence doesn’t stop at “unto obedience to the faith among all nations.” We find another “for” following the word “nations.” And we find yet another Greek preposition translated as English “for.” (“For” is truly a flexible word!) This time the Greek word “uper” is used. This preposition is transliterated as “hyper,” which we see a lot in modern English, such as hyperactive, or if someone is hyped up. Reduced to a one-word translation, “over” is the best we can do in English. But the idea is that of being “over and beyond, more than.”

Back to our text, we saw that grace was given to take us into obedience, then, “and over and beyond (uper) that, to glorify His name.”

The summary of Romans 5:1 is this: The reason grace was given to us is so that we  could enter into obedience, so that His name would be glorified.

A very fundamental aspect that your typical Romans Road map detours around is the fact that God ultimately saves men for His glory, not for man’s good. God is saving you so that He gets glorified, not so you can feel happy in eternity! This is such a shocking new way to look at salvation, and the “why” of it all, that you will—if you are like me—need many days and weeks and months to ponder the whole thing before it will sink in enough to radically affect how you view Christianity. I urge you to ponder it well. I urge you to meditate on the fact that the ultimate reason why God sent grace into this world is NOT to make men happy and get them to heaven, BUT TO BRING GLORY TO HIS NAME!

Before parting this theme, let’s turn to Ezekiel 36. For the sake of space, the text is omitted here. But you need to read the whole chapter. And please do read it, right now, if you are not familiar with it.

In this chapter, God is promising to do marvelous things for His people. Promise after promise after glorious promise! Now, let’s focus on verse 22 and see why God is doing this. Was He doing it for their sake? NO! “I do this not for your sakes, O house of Israel, but for my holy name’s sake …”

Then come more promises, including the giving of a new heart (v. 26), the sending of the Holy Spirit (v. 27), deliverance from uncleanness (v. 29), and glorious fruitfulness.

Then God drops the bombshell on us again as to why He will do these things.

For our sake? NO! If you don’t believe me, then read verse 32: “Not for your sakes do I this, saith the Lord God …” Does it shock you that God did not plan our salvation for our sake, but for His sake? It did me!

When we think of the Roman Road to salvation, we need to make sure that we do not bypass this fundamental truth.

What will determine our entrance into heaven?

The next detour on the typical Romans Road map that we want to examine is the detour around Romans 2:5-16. The topic of these verses is the final judgment. Paul is explaining to the Romans what it is that will determine their eternal destiny, the criteria that God will judge them by. Verse 6 is really pretty plain: “Who will render to every man according to his deeds.” That is pretty clear, but we could make it plainer yet, perhaps, by using the two synonyms. The first is replacing “render” with “give,” and the second is to replace “deeds” with the word “works.” And before we do that, it should be made clear that the word “deeds” is from the same Greek word that “works” is translated from: ergon. They are completely interchangeable words, with practically no difference in their meaning. So, we end up with, “Who will give to every man according to his works.”

We really do not need to explain what this verse does NOT say, but just for clarification, let’s list a few things that this verse does NOT say:

• Who will give to every man according to his hopes.
• Who will give to every man according to his doctrines.
• Who will give to every man according to his beliefs.
• Who will give to every man according to his faith.

Paul goes on to give us the two options at the final judgment. Verse 7 is option one, in which those who patiently persist in doing good works, seeking glory and honor and immortality, will be given eternal life. Verses 8-9 show us option two, in which the reward of those who disobey God is revealed. These will receive tribulation and anguish. Then Paul switches back (v. 10) to those who do good, and adds glory, honor, and peace to their reward.

Perhaps some may quibble about my phrase in the preceding paragraph about “patiently persist in doing good works.” My choice of words was deliberate. The word “doing” in verse 7 comes from the same word as “deeds” in verse 6, ergon; and in Acts 9:36, Romans 13:3, Ephesians 2:10, and other verses, the very same Greek words used in Romans 2:7 (doing good) are translated as “good works.” It is not a mistranslation to translate that verse like this: “To those who—seeking for glory, honor, and deathlessness—persist in good works, eternal life [will be given].

Does that mess up your Romans Road map? If it does, you would do well to revise your map. That fact that we will all be judged by our works is reaffirmed by every—and I mean every—judgment scene presented to us from Matthew to Revelation. I know that is another shocking revelation to those of us who have been told—time after time after time—by the marketers of the typical Romans Road maps that good works have nothing to do with our salvation. But it is an indisputable fact that our works will determine our final destiny. Our beliefs will not be figured in the decision on that last great day.

The source of being made righteous—Ex faith

Our next look at the Romans Road is not really about a detour, but rather what could possibly be called a misreading of the road signs, a misinterpretation. I am referring to another little pronoun, “by.”

In particular, I am looking at this word “by” in connection with the word “faith.” Eight times the phrase “by faith” is used by Paul in his letter to the Roman brothers and sisters. The first occurrence is in chapter 1, verse 17, where Paul quotes from one of the prophets, saying, “The just shall live by faith.”

What does that little word “by” mean? Like “for,” “by” is quite a bendable little word, but with only 14 different entries for it in my unabridged dictionary instead of 27. Looking at the original language for some guidance as to what the intention is, we see the Greek preposition “ex,” sometimes spelled “ek.”

Ah! “Ex,” we all know what that is, right? Ex-Catholic, ex-miner, ex-president, ex-druggie … “Ex” tells us the exact opposite of “eis.” Remember “eis”? We found that “eis” starts on the outside and goes into, indicating the destination, or the final goal. Well, turn that arrow around and start it on the inside and make it go out of the circle, and you have “ex.” You know what an exit is, don’t you? You go out of something when you exit; out the door, out of the interstate highway system, out of the airplane.

Before proceeding any further, let’s meditate a moment on someone who exits a building. If I say, “John went out the exit,” you know where he originated from, but you have no idea whatsoever where John ended up. You only know where he started from. In the same way, if I say “John is an ex-Buddhist,” you know where John came from, but can you tell me what religion he now is? Can you tell me what all he went through on his way to get to his present religion? No!

Ex only indicates origin or source. So if we say that “The just shall live ex (by) faith,” the only thing we can learn from that is that faith is the origin of life. That tells us nothing whatsoever where that life will take the just man. There is no indication where or what the final destination shall be of “the just.” All we know is that righteousness starts ex (from) faith.

Now let’s apply the same to Romans 5:23, where Paul states a conclusion: “a man is justified ex (by) faith, without the deeds of the law.”

The only thing we really learn from Paul’s statement is the source—the foundation—of the process that turns an unrighteous man into a righteous man. Paul’s conclusion really does not state what all else might be involved in the process, nor the final steps. In fact, we do not know if this is the only step, or if there are three other steps in the process, or 13 steps in the process. All we are told is the origin, the source, the beginning. All Paul has concluded here is that becoming righteous does not begin with doing the works of the Mosaic law. Becoming righteous does not start with Sabbath days and circumcision. It starts in faith, “outside the territory of”[1] new moons, animal sacrifices, and other Mosaic ceremonies.

Remember how we talked about knowing nothing about where John went if all we know is that he exited the building? Or what religion he now professed if all we know is that he is an ex-Buddhist? In the same way, we do not know everything about justification from the simple phrase “ex faith.”

Do you get the point? The phrase “a man is justified ex (by) faith” is not saying that faith is the only thing involved in becoming righteous. It only tells us the beginning, or the source.

Perhaps a little analogy would help. I assume everyone reading this is familiar with the basic rules of baseball. The batter hits the ball, and then tries to run around all the bases without getting tagged. If he hits the ball hard enough, he may well be able to run around all the bases and get back home without having to stop at one of the bases. If he does make it all the way safely back home without stopping, it is called “hitting a homerun.”

Now, let’s make a conclusion about hitting a home run, using our Greek preposition “ex” translated into English “by.” We can say that a home run is “ex” (by) hitting the ball. What does that tell us? It tells us that the homerun came, started, or originated from that solid smack of the ball to the uttermost corner of the field. Does that mean there is no running of the bases involved? No, of course not. All it means is that the homerun’s origin was the good hit. The batter must then run to first base, then to second, then to third, and finally back to home base to complete his home run. If he hits the ball clear over the fence and then refuses to run the bases, would his team get a “run” scored on their side. No!

And yet we can truthfully say that a home run is by (ex) hitting the ball. And Paul could truthfully say that justification is by (ex) faith. Was he saying that justification involves only faith? NO!!! All we can safely conclude is that becoming righteous has its source in faith. Paul then goes on to clarify that justification also begins “outside the territory of” doing the works prescribed by the Mosaic Law. There may or may not be more than faith involved in justification. Romans 5:23 does not tell us if there are bases to run or not. It only concludes that a home run (justification) has its beginnings in a good smack of the ball (faith).

My whole point in this section concerning the phrase “by faith” is this: theologians have misinterpreted this phrase to mean that justification is totally accomplished by faith all by itself, when in fact it only indicates that justification originates or has its source in faith.

Check your Romans Road maps well, my friends! Make sure the road signs have not been misinterpreted!

Grace kingdomizing

What!!?? Kindomizing? Let me explain …

Turn your Bibles to Romans 5:21, to another very powerful verse that the typical Romans Road maps bypass. Here we read, “so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.”

Let’s dissect this verse into smaller pieces for easier digestion. First, the words “grace reign.”

“Grace” is the noun, the subject. And it is doing something. Grace is kingdomizing!

Taking a look at the Greek text again, we see “basileuse.” The interesting thing about this word is that it is a verb, from the same root as the Greek word for “kingdom.” In our English language, “reign” is a good translation, perhaps the best official English translation available. “Kingdomize” is not an official English word, but it gives us a good word picture. Or, perhaps an even better word picture is to phrase it, “grace makes kingdom happen through righteousness.”

The purpose of Christ’s coming was to set up a kingdom, that is, to organize an “alternative society” that reigns over sin, self, Satan, death, and hell. And, Paul gives us a beautiful picture of grace “kingdomizing.” In previous times, our verse tells us, sin used to be king, bringing us to death. But now, grace abounds (v. 20) so that grace may kingdomize us eis (into—remember that preposition eis, with its reference to goal or destination?) eternal life.

Let’s look now at the phrase “through righteousness.” “Through” is another preposition, but with only eight definitions in my dictionary. Looking at the Greek for some guidance, we see dia. Dia is pretty simple to get the idea of, since we have so many English words that are prefixed with dia-: Diagram, diameter, diarrhea, etc.

The Greek preposition dia is used to indicate the channel by which something is accomplished. Dia is the pipe, so to speak, that is used to carry out the action of the verb. That is why it is translated “through.” At the gas station, you put gas in your car dia (through) the nozzle and hose that comes from the gas pump. In the same way, grace kingdomizes a person into eternal life dia (through, or by means of) righteous living.

Paul ends the verse by telling us that the whole operation is dia Jesus Christ our Lord. Here, the KJV uses “by,” in the sense of “by means of.” This last phrase sort of sums up the channel through which the whole operation flows—Jesus!

We end up with Paul telling us that in the same way that sin used to extend its kingdom in us, taking us into death, now grace would kingdomize in us, and by means of upright living would take us into eternal life—all through the “channel” of Jesus!

The dead-end street

Remember the family friend I mentioned at the beginning, the one who ended up on a dead-end street in a cemetery? Well, your typical Romans Road map has a dead-end street in it, and unfortunately, most of them end up leading you there. Can you imagine!?

You see, most of the Romans Road maps that I have seen end up saying essentially that the road to heaven is called “Faith-Alone Avenue.” This well-known route is traveled by many pilgrims in search of eternal life. But it always dead-ends—just like my friend—among the dead.

The only place in the KJV where the words “faith” and “alone” are in the same verse is in a verse that also contains the word “dead”: “Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.” Ja. 2:17

Dear reader, “Faith-Alone Avenue” is a dead-end street!

Conclusion

Putting some of the above points together, suddenly a different picture begins to emerge than what the typical Romans Road map gives. We see faith in God as a source from which springs the opportunity to experience a grace that will reign in us, leading us into obedience, righteous living, and eternal life. We then have no fear of the judgment day, in which our works will determine our destiny. This is because faith and grace have kingdomized us into a fruitful life of good works. God has performed the whole operation for one cause—for His name’s sake, for His glory! And all through this was channeled through Jesus!

My friends, I sincerely suggest that you wad your old Romans Road map up and toss it eis (into) the trash can. Then, get out a fresh sheet of paper ex (out of) your drawer and carefully begin a new map, going through the Bible verse by verse, slowly and carefully. And, please, please do not use the few points in this short article as a complete “Romans Road” map. What I have written here is incomplete, a few points chosen out of many, just to highlight a couple of missing points. I reiterate: This article is NOT a complete Romans Road Map.

And to you, dear young brother or sister who is just starting on your journey to heaven, I have some sincere advice. The book of Romans is filled with some of the deeper intricacies of Christian theology. Even the apostle Peter wrote that Paul’s letters contain “some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.” 2 Pe. 3:16 You would do well, young reader, to begin your Christian life with a focus on Jesus’ teachings. Focus first on the example and commands of Christ, and then let Paul’s letter to the Romans reinforce what Jesus taught. Too many people have “wrested” Paul’s writings—separating them from Jesus’ life and teachings—and then come up with what is supposed to be a simple “Romans Road Map to Heaven.” But as we have seen, there are too many bypasses, detours, and dead-end streets in their maps.

Do you know that I have never, ever—not one single time—seen a Romans Road map that included Jesus’ simple and clear statement that one cannot be His disciple if he does not take up the cross and follow Him? Taking up your cross is an absolute must, yet not one single Romans Road Map has ever included that important step. I know that this teaching is not in Paul’s letter to the Romans, but that just shows the folly of trying to make a roadmap to heaven out of one part of the New Testament. When you begin redrawing your roadmap to heaven, start with Jesus’ teachings and life, and include the whole of the New Testament.

Fare ye well, fellow pilgrims! May grace abound in you and kingdomize you eis obedience. You will then have no fear of the coming judgment day!

-Mike Atnip

The following tract was usually bound in the same Anabaptist books with the tract on “have to” vs. “want to” obedience, and since the writing style is so similar, it is assumed both are by the same author. Michael Sattler, who probably penned the Schleitheim Confession, is suspected to have written them, but they are unsigned, probably due to persecution to anyone whose name appeared as author of an Anabaptist tract.

The topic of this tract, as the previous one, is obedience. But this time the author does not deal with what kind of obedience we render, but rather if obedience is even necessary. The context is the Protestant Reformation, and the common—but mistaken—view held by some Protestants that “Jesus did it all on the cross; we only have to accept His perfect obedience to be saved.” This tract argues that Christ’s work is not finished until Christ has brought the believer to the cross with Him, and Christ is reigning in the heart of the believer. After all, a crucified Christ living in the heart of an uncrucified believer is an impossibility!

This version is a slightly more “free” translation than the more “scholarly” translations that others have made of the tract (Often titled, “On the Satisfaction of Christ”), but the original German text was consulted to keep it faithful to the author’s designs. Since the Scripture quotations are from an early German Bible (most likely the “Froschauer Bibel,” the tract was probably written before Luther had finished his translation)—or even just paraphrased by the author—the wording will be a bit different than what we are used to in our KJV. And, since the Froschauer Bibel did not have verse numbering, only the chapters are given in the references. The paragraph divisions, subtitles, footnotes, italics, and bold letters have been added to aid in readability and comprehension.

Keep in mind what the author is trying to bring forth: It takes more than “accepting what Christ did on the cross” to be saved. We must also take up our cross and put self to death. Only when self is on the cross and Christ is reigning as Lord over our entire being is His work finished.

Christ, the mercy seat

Paul says to the Romans in the third chapter, that they are all sinners and come short of the glory which God should have from them. However, without deserving it, they shall be made righteous by His grace, by means of the releasing which Christ accomplished. This is He whom God has foreshown to be a mercy seat, through faith in His blood. He did all this to demonstrate the righteousness which in God’s eyes has value, in that He forgave the sins which happened formerly under the divine patience.

He says; “From which also you are in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, righteousness, sanctification, and redemption.” John the Baptist says in John 1, “Look, that is God’s Lamb, who takes upon himself the sin of the world.” John says in 1 John 2, “And He is the reconciliation for our sins.” Peter says in I Peter 2, “Who offered Himself for our sin on the tree, that we might be without sin.” As the prophet also speaks, in Isaiah 53, “We are made well through His stripes.”

Such statements, I say, and others like them, the scribes[1] interpret as if a person could be saved through Christ, whether he does the works of faith or whether he doesn’t do the works of faith. If it didn’t matter whether a person did any works, why then should Paul say in Romans 2 that God will give to everyone according to his works? He clearly says that eternal life shall be given to those who strive after glory, praise, and immortality, with perseverance in good works. But to those who are quarrelsome and are not obedient to the truth, but are obedient to the evil, there will come disfavor, wrath, tribulation, and anxiety, yes, upon all the souls of men who do evil.

Some verses about doing good works

Listen to what Paul, Peter, and John are saying in the following verses:

• Romans 2: Not those who hear the Law are righteous, but those who do the Law.
• Romans 3: He does not make void the law through faith; rather he establishes it.
• Romans 8: There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. For what the Law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, that God did and sent His Son in the form of sinful flesh and through sin condemned sin in the flesh, that the righteousness which the Law demands might be fulfilled in us who now walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. … If you live after the flesh, you shall die.
• Galatians 5: In Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision avails anything, but a faith which works by love.
• 1 Corinthians 13: If I had all faith so that I could remove mountains but have not charity,[2] I am nothing.
• Ephesians 5: For ye know that no whoremonger nor impure person nor covetous man, who is an idolater, hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God. Let no man deceive you with vain words.
• Ephesians 6: For you know that everyone will receive from the Lord that good which he hath done.
• 2 Corinthians 5: For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ that everyone may receive according to that which he hath done with his body, whether it be good or evil.
• Peter says in 1 Peter 1: And since ye call upon the Father, who without regarding the person, judges according to each man’s work, so pass the time of your pilgrimage with fear.
• 2 Peter 1: And therefore offer, with highest diligence, through your faith, virtue; through virtue, knowledge; through knowledge, moderation; through moderation, patience; through patience, godliness; through godliness, brotherly love; through brotherly love, common love. For if such virtues abound in you, you shall neither be lazy nor idle in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. But he who lacks these things is blind and doth grope.
• John says in 1 John 1: If we should say that we have fellowship with Him and walk in darkness, we would lie and do not the truth.
• 1 John 2: Hereby know we that we do know Him if we keep His commandment. Whoever says that he knows Him, but does not keep His commandment, is a liar. Whoever says he is in the light, but hates his brother, is in darkness.
• 1 John 3: Children, let no one deceive you. Whoever practices righteousness is righteous, just like He is righteous. But whoever practices sin is of the devil. He who is born of God sins no more, because His seed remains in him, and he is not able to sin, because he is born of God.

Now let’s look at what Christ says:

• Matthew 4: Improve yourselves[3], for the kingdom of heaven is come near. He said to Peter and to others: Follow me.
• Matthew 5: Let your light shine for men that they may see your good works and praise your Father in heaven. You ought not to think that I am come to do away with the Law and the Prophets. I did not come to do away with them, but to fulfill them.
• Matthew 7: Therefore whoever hears my discourse and practices it, I will compare him to a prudent man who built his house upon a rock. And then a pelting rain fell and floods came and the winds blew and beat upon the house, but yet it did not fall, because it was founded upon a rock. And whoever hears my word and does not practice it is like a foolish man who built his house upon the sand.
• Matthew 10: Whoever confesses me before men, I will confess him before my Father in heaven. Whoever loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me, and whoever loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.

What Jesus said about discipleship

Consider now what He says of the good seed which falls into the good earth:

• Matthew 16, Mark 8, Luke 9: If anyone wishes to come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross upon himself and follow me. For whoever wishes to preserve his life shall lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake will find it.
• Matthew 16: For it shall come to pass that the Son of Man will come in the glory of His Father, with His angels and then will He repay each one according to his works.
• In Luke 10, Christ tells the scribe that he should love God with his whole heart and his neighbor as himself; thus would he live.
• Luke 13: Strive that ye may enter through the narrow door.
• Luke 14: If anyone come to me and hate not his father, mother, wife, children, brothers, sisters, and also his own life, he cannot be my disciple. And whoever does not bear his cross and follow me cannot be my disciple. Whoever does not renounce all that he has cannot be my disciple.
• John 13: I have given you an example that you should do as I have done to you. If you know these things, you are blessed if you do them. A new commandment give I unto you, that you love one another as I have loved you. So shall all men know that you are my disciples if you have love among yourselves.

Do we have to actually follow Jesus?

Further, as Christ therefore has suffered for us (He did not have anywhere he could lay His head, (Matthew 8 –) must we never—because of our faith in Him—renounce our supposed possessions and our own selves and suffer for His sake? If not, why did Jesus say the following to His disciples:

• Matthew 19 (to the young man who asked him how he might be saved): If you want to be perfect, go, sell what you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me.
• It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.
• Luke 5 to Peter and Andrew (as was said above), “Follow me”? And to Matthew, “Follow Me”?

Did not Zacchaeus say in Luke 19, after he came to know the poor Jesus and had received Him, “Behold, the half of my goods I give to the poor, and if I have defrauded anyone I will restore fourfold”?

If we did not need to renounce our possessions and self, it would then be the case that Christ had lied when He says in Matthew 6, “You cannot serve God and mammon.” And that which Luke writes in Acts 2 about the upright Christian church which was once at Jerusalem would not be true: “But those who believed were together and had all things common.” Yes, the article of the Christian faith which says “A communion of the saints” would also be untrue.[4]

Tell me, why then does Jesus say in Mark 8, “Whoever wishes to come after me, let him deny himself, take his cross upon himself and follow me?” And, “whoever wishes to save his life shall lose it.” Why does He say in Matthew 5, “Blessed are they who are persecuted for righteousness’ sake,” and “blessed are ye when men revile you and persecute you and say all manner of evil against you for my sake”?

Consider also Matthew 10 and John 15: “The disciple is not above his master, nor the servant above his Lord.” “It is enough for the disciple that he be as his master, and the servant as his lord.” John 16: “They will put you in the ban.” “The time cometh that whoever kills you will think that he is doing God a service therein. Verily, verily, I say to you, You shall weep and lament, but the world shall rejoice.” Does not Peter also say in 1 Peter 2, “For you were called to this: because Christ also suffered for us, and left us an example, that you should follow His footsteps.

Suffering with Jesus

Yea indeed, if Christ therefore did enough by his sufferings which He suffered at Jerusalem, and nothing was left uncompleted of His suffering, why then does Paul say the following:

• Colossians 1: Now I rejoice in my suffering which I bear for you and fill up in my body that which is lacking in the afflictions of Christ?”
• 2 Corinthians 1: But as we have tribulation or comfort, it works out for your good.
• Philippians 2: And if I be offered as an offering and service to God for your faith, I joy and rejoice with you all.

In the same way, did not Christ chiefly establish the Lord’s Supper for this reason, namely, that they had to suffer just like Christ their Head did, and by means of death enter into glory; yes, that their death should not be theirs, but the Lord’s; and that they like their Head should be awakened from the dead? And what about the dear apostles and prophets, yes, even Christ Himself, and likewise the dear friends of God who suffer much at this time and who have testified for so many years—if the members of Christ must not suffer like their Head did?

Does Peter not say in 1 Peter 5, “Humble yourselves under the mighty hand of God that He might exalt you at the right time? Cast upon Him all your care, because He cares for you. Be sober, watch, for your adversary, the slanderer, goes about as a roaring lion, seeking whether he can devour someone; whom resist, fortified by faith, since ye know that throughout your brotherhood which is in the world the same suffering is accomplished.”

Works of the law, or good works?

And for this reason, when Paul says in Romans 3 that those who are made righteous through Christ are made righteous without deserving it or without the works of the Law, he does not mean that a man can be saved without the works of faith (since Christ and the apostles demand such), but without those works which are done outside of faith and the love of God—such as circumcision and similar deeds, which the Jews did that they might become righteous.

Therefore, whenever Paul and Christ apply the term righteous-making [justifying] to works, they do not mean those works which originate in men; but those which originate in God and Christ, through whose strength the man performs them. These works are not performed by the man as if he received something originating from himself, but because God wishes so to give the man works that are truly His works, and not just the man’s own works.

And why is there a mercy seat, except as a means for God to reveal His will? Why should God make known His will, if He did not wish that a person do it? Yes, how could God be satisfied with anyone who neither wishes to hear the will of God coming from His mercy seat, or who having heard and knowing about it, wishes to hold it only with words and not deeds? Would not such a person take away the honor from the mercy seat, the very mercy seat that was given to him for his own good?

Yes, man gives his own word and says that he heard it from the mercy seat. Yes, he curses and persecutes everyone who refuses to believe him. Will such boasting not lead to his damnation? Did Paul in 1 Corinthians 1, where he calls Christ the righteousness and wisdom of the believers, mean the outward Christ without the inward, and not much more the inward with the outward?[5] Namely, since Jesus is the Word of the Father, He makes known to us the true obedience, which is the only thing that satisfies the Father.

I will mention that Paul at this place is not speaking of Pharisees or scribes (as if they were the righteousness of Christ), but of those who like Paul and others receive Him in truth and remain His disciples, living in accordance with what faith eliminates and demands from their life.

But what about those who boast so proudly of Christ? They allege that Paul wrote of them, when in fact they are the biggest persecutors of Christ and of Paul.

Who can claim the promises?

When John the Baptist says in John 1, “Christ is the Lamb which takes upon Himself the sin of the world,” he wishes to be understood that this applies only as far as the world surrenders to Him in faith. That is why he says also in John 3, “Whoever believes in the Son has everlasting life; whoever does not believe in the Son shall not see life.” In the same way also when John says in 1 John 2, “He is our reconciliation,” he wishes to be understood that this applies only to those who so recognize Him. For although He is truly a reconciliation for the whole world, that does no one any good, except those who recognize and receive Him through faith. It goes without saying that those who receive Him keep His commandments. But he who does not keep the commandments, and yet boasts of Christ as being his reconciliation, is a liar. Such a person has never known Christ—just like John testifies.

And do we think that when Peter says in 1 Peter 2, “Who offered Himself for our sins in His body on the tree, that we might be without sin,” that he meant that Christ so offered Himself that through Him men are exempted from the curse, whether they believe on Him or not, whether they put off the sinful or not, whether they have a change of mind through Him or not, as the Holy-Deed-Doers[6] and scribes[7] think?

That is so far out!

Why then would he say in 1 Peter 1, “Whom having not seen you love, in whom you also believe although you do not see Him … and whereas you call on the Father who, without regarding the person, judges according to every man’s work, conduct your life in the time of your pilgrimage in fear”?

Now those who are without faith, who have not ceased from sin, those sinning even worse than before,[8] yes those with just as unwilling and ugly a disposition toward God and their neighbor as they had before—how can such people appropriate the words of Peter for themselves, since Peter did not write to them, but to Christians?

How Christ will finish His work

How is it now that Christ did not do enough for our sins? Answer: Christ will do enough—not only for ours alone, but for the sins of the whole world—insofar as they believe on Him and follow Him according to the demands of faith, as was already said above. Yes, just like He was “doing enough” as the Head of his community, He still does no less for His members day by day, so that He continues to “do enough” for those who are His. In the same way that He has done from the beginning, He will continue to do until His return.

Therefore, when one speaks about being made righteous through Christ, he must also speak of faith: repentance is not separated from works, yea, not separated from love, which is the anointing. For only such an anointed faith as one receives from the resurrection from the dead is true Christian faith. This anointed faith is the only kind that is counted for righteousness. (Romans 4)

Dead works

Again, one must not promote the class of works of the Holy-Deed-Doers[9]—Law-like works—but must preach works that spring from faith; that is, a turning back from ceremonial works, possessions, and yourself through faith in Christ the Crucified. It is not like a man could do this of himself, but he is enabled to do it through the strength of faith, so that a person’s good works do not have their origin in man, but in God. This is because the will and the ability to turn back to God do not originate from man, but they are gifts of God through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Truly happy then is the man who keeps on the middle path and does not yield to the Holy-Deed-Doers, who promise salvation or the forgiveness of sins through works that are done without faith—that is, through merely having done something. They thus veer to the left, preaching dead works; paying no attention to faith and not wishing to see or hear of a faith which is sufficient unto salvation. All their works are like tiny wild plums, that is, ceremonies devoid of faith.

Dead faith

Nor should a man on the other hand yield to the scribes,[10] who although they have renounced works, yet veer to the right and under the name of “gospel” teach a faith without works, taking the poor and obedient Christ (who had nowhere to lay His head (Luke 9), and without either the murmuring complaints or the defense of men, said, (Luke 22) “Nevertheless, Father, not my will but Thine be done.” for their “finished work.” But … they do not wish to hear what He says:

• Luke 9: Come, follow me.
• Luke 14: Whoever does not renounce all that he possesses cannot be my disciple.
• Mark 8: Whoever wishes to come after me, let him deny himself, take his cross upon himself, and follow me.[11]

Yes, the Father must also be a “fanatic” to them when He says, “This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased, hear Him.” They make of Christ, when He was in a human body, what the pope has made of the saints, namely a golden calf like the Jews of old. In other words, they confess Christ as David’s Son, and yet they deny Him—yes, call Him a “fanatic”—because God’s Word and Son were sent into the world to tell to man the obedience or righteousness of His Father; not only in words, but also with works. He did so that all who believe in Him might not perish in their death, but be delivered from death.

All their preaching and fruit are like prickly thistles; they have much to say regarding faith, and yet know neither what Christ nor faith are. They reject works without faith in order that they may embellish faith without works. They wish to obey God only with the soul—and not also with the body—in order that they may escape persecution. They think that faith is a useless and empty mirage.[12] For this reason they are able to say that infants have faith, even though works of faith are not seen in them, even after these same infants are grown up. (If infants had faith, the work of faith and of the Holy Spirit would then be cursing, because of the bad language when they are just learning to talk.[13])

Come out of her, my people![14]

The Holy-Deed-Doers say, “Lo, here is Christ!” The scribes cry, “Lo, here is Christ!” Therefore, happy is he who departs from Babylon, that is, who neither believes the Holy-Deed-Doers nor the scribes, but submits with fear to the discipline of Christ, because the heavenly voice (Revelation 18, Isaiah 52, 2 Corinthians 6) cries out and says, “Come out of her, my people, so that you do not become partakers of her sins, that you do not receive of her plagues, for her sins have resounded unto heaven.”

[2] Note that the difference between love and charity is that charity is love in action! If my love is not active (doing good), I am nothing!

[3] A literal translation of the Froschauer Bibel, for “repent ye” (besserend euch).

[4] A reference to the “Apostles’ Creed.” But the German word “gemeinschaft” is used, which the author probably intended in the sense of “community” or “sharing.”

[5] In other words, some were looking at what Christ worked when He was in His flesh (the “outward Christ”), but refusing to acknowledge that Christ still wanted to work inwardly … in their heart!

[6] A reference to the Catholic system: those who trust in their non-biblical ceremonial works, rather than by faith doing the good works that Christ has called us to.

[7] A reference to the Protestants: those who threw out both ceremonial works and good works.

[8] The author is probably making a comparison between the moral level of the masses when still under Roman Catholicism, and the even lower morality that occurred after the Protestant Reformation in some places.

[9] A reference to the Catholics who tried to become upright people by means of nonbiblical works, such as kneeling on sharp stones, making pilgrimages, saying repetitious prayers, etc., in the same spirit as the OT Jews often performed circumcision, Sabbath-keeping, dietary regulations, and similar ceremonial deeds. While kissing the feet of a statue of Mary has nothing to do with becoming holy, these deluded folks esteemed such works as a way to holiness. Hence the name “Holy-Deed-Doers.”

[10] The Protestants.

[11] In hymn #7 of the Ausbund, Sattler wrote, “When Christ had gathered together a small host, He said that each one should take up his cross daily and follow Him with patience.”

[12] In other words, faith has no substance or reality to it; they count faith as some dreamy state that is concocted up in the mind.

[13] Hymn #42 of the Ausbund records that “The children in the lanes swear by the blood of Christ.” Such irreverent talk by baptized children is probably what the author is referring to.

[14] A few preceding paragraphs from the original have been dropped here, dealing with figurative speculations concerning Catholicism being the first beast of Revelation 13, and Protestantism being the second. Those paragraphs do not directly affect the teaching of the tract on the topic of Christ finishing His work in us.