The Confessions of a Nonprofit Director, Part 1

It has now been almost 36 years that I’ve been serving in vocational ministry. Along the journey, I’ve learned not just a few lessons. How I wish I could have known 36 years ago what I know now! I would have done so many things differently.

Thankfully, one thing I’ve learned is that God is in the redemption business. He can use even our mistakes to produce something good. Perhaps this series of e-teachings will serve that purpose to some degree, if I can help others—who have begun their journey more recently than me—to avoid the mistakes I’ve made.

Straining Out Gnats

Whoever then annuls one of the least of these commandments, and so teaches others, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever keeps and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven (Matt. 5:19, emphasis added).

Jesus obviously believed that there were lesser commandments, as revealed in the quote above. He therefore must have also believed that there were greater commandments.

Why Be Plain? A Biblical Response – Chapter 16

Chapter 16 - German Sermons and Missing Missions, Part 1

One indication of the new birth that I’ve consistently observed in those who are born again is their desire to share the gospel with others. They want everyone to experience the same spiritual resurrection they’ve experienced. They want everyone to be indwelt by the Holy Spirit and set free from their slavery to sin. They don’t want any of their family and friends to go to hell. They know Jesus warned that, apart from the new birth, no one will see or enter God’s kingdom (see John 3:1–16).

If you don’t possess a desire for others to be born again, that is an indication that you have not been born again yourself. How could anyone who genuinely believes in Jesus remain unconcerned about people all around them who are weighed down by their sin and guilt and are on the road to hell? If those people would only repent and believe in the Lord Jesus, they would be on the road to eternal life! But as Paul wrote, “How will they believe in Him whom they have not heard? And how will they hear without a preacher?” (Rom. 10:14). That is what motivated Paul to preach the gospel.

The early Christians certainly possessed a concern for the lost. After the first persecution that arose in connection with the martyrdom of Stephen, Luke tells us that “they were all scattered throughout the regions of Judea and Samaria.” He then says, “Those who had been scattered went about preaching the word”[20] (Acts 8:1, 4). God designed His kingdom to expand by the proclamation of the gospel. He equips apostles and evangelists with special gifts for effective evangelism to the masses, and He also equips ordinary believers with His love and the truth of His Word for effective evangelism to their family members, friends, and neighbors.

Like the first Christians, the early Anabaptists spread the gospel throughout their European towns and villages. One reason why they were persecuted to the point of being driven from their homes is that they were spreading the gospel. Their persecutors felt threatened by all the people who were leaving state churches to join the Anabaptist movement.

In contrast, Weaver and Zimmerman readily admit that Plain churches aren’t making an effort to proclaim the gospel to the lost, either locally, nationally, or internationally. They offer several reasons for this phenomenon, but they fail to mention what is likely the primary reason: only genuine believers share the gospel. Only God knows how many Plain people, as well as Plain leaders, are not genuine believers in the Lord Jesus Christ, as indicated by their lack of concern for unbelievers. They may be religious ordnung keepers, but they have never been genuinely born again.

What is the Plain Gospel?

In the New Testament, the word “gospel” appears over one hundred times. It literally means “good news.” What is the gospel? What must people do to be saved?

I suspect that many Plain people would give a different answer to that question than Paul did when he was asked it by Philippian jailer. Paul’s good news was, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved” (Acts 16:31). How simple! How biblical! It harmonizes perfectly with John 3:16.

If there is any Plain gospel, it is something like this: “Say that you believe in Jesus when you are baptized as a teenager, and then vow to keep the ordnung. Renew that vow twice a year for the rest of your life. If you do well enough at keeping the ordnung, you have a hopeful chance of getting into heaven. But no one can be certain of heaven before they die, and anyone who says that he is certain [like Paul, or like all the Anabaptist martyrs whose stories are preserved in The Martyrs’ Mirror] is full of pride.”

Plain people hear that “gospel” all their lives. So it is no surprise that they don’t communicate it to people outside their own communities, or that Weaver and Zimmerman begin chapter 7 of Why Be Plain? with a criticism of non-Plain churches that, in their view, “over-emphasize” spreading the gospel:

The over-emphasis on missions and soul winning that came with the Great Awakening is splashed across almost all doctrinal and devotional books written by members of English churches (p. 132).

That sad statement certainly displays Weaver and Zimmerman’s disdain for missions, soul winning, and even the Great Awakening that swept tens of thousands of people into God’s kingdom and morally transformed the American colonies in the 1730s and 1740s. We certainly would never want to see that kind of “over-emphasis” ever again, would we?

Weaver and Zimmerman seem defensive on this point because, as they reveal, Plain church members sometimes ask Plain leaders, “Why aren’t the Plain People fulfilling the commandment of Christ to take the Gospel to all nations?” (p. 132). And that question can lead to Plain people leaving Plain churches to join churches that are involved in fulfilling Jesus’ Great Commission.[21] Of course, the entire reason Weaver and Zimmerman wrote Why Be Plain? is to try to stop the exodus from Plain churches. So they provide a tragic answer to that question.

The Tragic Answer

Weaver and Zimmerman contend that Plain people—whom they earlier claimed “obey the Bible more literally than many other people” (p. 59) aren’t called to obey Christ’s commandment to “Go ye therefore and teach all nations.” Perhaps other churches, they say, are called to obey the Great Commission (Matthew 28:18–20), but the Plain churches are not.

Then, even though it contradicts their statement that some churches may be called to obey the Great Commission, the authors next declare that Jesus’ Great Commission was given only to “the apostles and their generation,” and not to “the church down through the ages” (p. 133).

Yet Jesus’ very words in His Great Commission prove otherwise. He told His apostles to “Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations … teaching them to observe all that I commanded you.” The Great Commission thus became one of the commandments the apostles taught their disciples to obey. It was a perpetual commandment for every generation, which makes perfect sense, since every new generation needs to hear the gospel and be discipled.

Attempting to further buttress their claim, Weaver and Zimmerman then state that the supernatural works done by the apostles—such as casting out of demons, speaking in other tongues, and healing the sick—all ceased “once the Christian faith was established” (p. 133). With that claim, the authors not only reveal their ignorance of the many times in recorded church history when those same miracles were evident among genuine believers, but they also show their ignorance of what is happening today outside the Plain bubble in which they live.

Demons are still being cast out, the sick are still being healed, and Christians are still speaking supernaturally in other tongues all over the world in Bible-believing circles. Literally hundreds of millions of Christians around the world have experienced the miracle of speaking in a language they have never learned, a phenomenon that is mentioned many times in the New Testament (see Mark 16:27; Acts 2:2–4; 10:44–46; 19:1–7; 1 Cor. 12:10, 28–30; 13:1; 14:1–28).

I am one of those hundreds of millions of Christians who, like the apostle Paul, am thankful that I speak in other tongues as part of my daily prayer life (see 1 Cor. 14:18). Three times in my life, Japanese-speaking people who have been present when I was praying told me that I was speaking in Japanese, and they even told me what I said! Every time I was praising God, yet I don’t know a single word in Japanese. The early church’s miracles have not ceased.

Nothing in the New Testament would lead any honest reader to think that it was God’s intention that His supernatural gifts to the church would cease with the first apostles.

Grasping at Straws

Weaver and Zimmerman even claim that the healings and miracles God did through the original apostles began to cease near the end of Paul’s ministry, and to prove it, they cite two associates of Paul who Scripture says were sick: Epaphroditus and Trophimus. The authors fail to mention that Epaphroditus, who became ill because he “risked his life for the work of Christ” by traveling to bring an offering to Paul, was indeed healed (see Phil 2:25–30).

They also fail to mention that near the recorded end of Paul’s ministry, God was still working many miracles and healings through him. You can read about those miracles and healings in the final two chapters of the book of Acts.

Moreover, there is no biblical evidence that Paul or any of the early apostles could heal anyone anytime they wanted. “Gifts of healings,” which Paul listed in 1 Corinthians 12:8–11 along with eight other gifts of the Spirit, operate “as the Spirit wills” (1 Cor. 12:11; Heb. 2:4), not as people will. So the fact that Paul left Trophimus sick (2 Tim. 4:20) is no proof that God still wasn’t using Paul to heal others.

Additionally, the same Paul who saw Epaphroditus healed and who left Trophimus sick in Miletus wrote to the Corinthian believers, “For this reason many among you are weak and sick, and a number sleep. But if we judged ourselves rightly, we would not be judged. But when we are judged, we are disciplined by the Lord so that we will not be condemned along with the world” (1 Cor. 11:30–32).

Therefore, sickness can be (though it is not always) an indication of God’s discipline. Paul likely wrote those words to the Corinthians when he was in Ephesus around 53–55 AD, during a time when Scripture tells us that “God was performing extraordinary miracles by the hands of Paul, so that handkerchiefs or aprons were even carried from his body to the sick, and the diseases left them and the evil spirits went out” (Acts 19:11–12). While some Corinthians were suffering sickness under God’s loving discipline, God was doing extraordinary miracles of healing through Paul in Ephesus.

Not Everyone Is an Evangelist or Apostle

Of course, most believers are not called to be apostles or evangelists, so they are not supernaturally equipped to preach the gospel to the masses or establish churches. They are called, however, to keep and to teach others to obey Jesus’ commandments, as Jesus said in His Sermon on the Mount:

Whoever then annuls one of the least of these commandments, and teaches others to do the same, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever keeps and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven (Matt. 5:19, emphasis added).

Jesus also told His followers in that same sermon to “let your light shine before men in such a way that they may see your good works” (Matt. 5:16). Amazingly, Weaver and Zimmerman use that commandment as a justification for not verbally proclaiming the gospel, as if sharing the gospel was not one of the “good works” Jesus had in mind. Paraphrasing a famous quotation that is often attributed to Roman Catholic friar St. Francis of Assisi, Weaver and Zimmerman write, “We should preach at all times, but only speak when necessary” (p. 135). That is like saying, “We should feed the hungry at all times, but only give them food when necessary.”

Weaver and Zimmerman point out that so much of what the apostles wrote in their letters to the New Testament churches centered around holy living, and that very little of what they wrote was about spreading the gospel:

Many churches today stress missions and telling others about Christ as one of the most important parts of being a Christian. Why is this emphasis not found in the letters written to the churches?

Could it be because the church’s form of evangelism is supposed to be their righteousness and godliness? (p. 134).

This is yet another exaggeration by Weaver and Zimmerman. Non-Plain, Bible-believing churches stress righteousness and godliness as well as evangelism. In fact, evangelism is a component of righteousness and godliness. Godly people love their neighbors as themselves, so they share the good news with them. And their holy lives give them a platform by which to share the gospel. Their transformed lives bear witness to the power of the gospel they proclaim.

But Weaver and Zimmerman believe that their only real obligation is to quietly live holy lives before the watching world:

When Christ told us to let our lights shine before men, He did not even mention words or telling others about Him. He specifically said our works will turn people to glorifying God (Matt. 5:16). A light, after all, does not make a lot of noise about its presence. It just shines and shows the way quietly. Not by their words, but by the love, peace, and unity they have among themselves (John 17:23) (pp. 135–136).

So our good works, which Jesus described as shining lights, have nothing to do with our words? Isn’t telling the truth part of letting our light shine? What about letting “no unwholesome word proceed from our mouths, but only such a word as is good for edification according to the need of the moment, so that it will give grace to those who hear” (Eph. 4:29)? What about avoiding cursing, swearing, filthy speech and course jesting (Eph. 5:4)? It seems that the “silent light” analogy of Weaver and Zimmerman might be a bit of Scripture twisting. And is not sharing the transforming, saving gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ a “good work”?

In fact, both Peter and Paul did highlight the importance of sharing the gospel verbally. First, here are Paul’s words:

Conduct yourselves with wisdom toward outsiders, making the most of the opportunity. Let your speech always be with grace, as though seasoned with salt, so that you will know how you should respond to each person (Col. 4:5–6).

And here are Peter’s:

But sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts, always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you, yet with gentleness and reverence; and keep a good conscience so that in the thing in which you are slandered, those who revile your good behavior in Christ will be put to shame (1 Pet. 3:15–16).

Those two passages describe responsibilities of ordinary believers, and they were written by two men who were both specially called and equipped by God to journey to distant places in order to proclaim the gospel and make disciples. Jesus builds His church through obedient ordinary believers as well as obedient apostles and evangelists.

Why is God not calling and equipping any Plain apostles or evangelists to take the gospel to where it has not yet been heard? Could it be because Plain churches are promoting a “different gospel,” one that requires adherence to an archaic, enforced dress code, an abandonment of certain technologies, and the purchase of a horse and buggy?

Appealing to Justin Martyr

In yet another desperate attempt to justify their idea that Christians should only “let their lights shine” via their “good works” rather than take any initiative to proclaim the gospel, Weaver and Zimmerman quote Justin Martyr, one of the early Christian writers. Justin penned his famous First Apology around AD 156, about 123 years after the death and resurrection of Jesus and about 56 years after the death of the apostle John. Weaver and Zimmerman write:

The following is what he [Justin Martyr] wrote about the church’s successful form of evangelism: “Some of them were won to Christianity by the righteousness they observed in the life of their Christian neighbors. Others were won by the extraordinary restraint Christian travelers displayed when they were cheated. Still others were attracted by the honesty of the Christians with whom they transacted business.[22]

And that is how the Plain People believe people should be turned to Christ (p. 135).

All this is quite misleading. Justin Martyr’s First Apology was specifically addressed to “the Emperor Antoninus Pius, and to his adopted sons, Marcus Aurelius and Lucius Verus, the philosophers. Also to the venerable Senate, and to all the people of Rome.” In other words, writing the Apology was part of Justin’s effort to proclaim the gospel to every Roman of his day!

Weaver and Zimmerman also skip over these words from Justin in his First Apology:

[God] is free from all impurity, and we [all believers] worship and adore him, and the Son who came forth from him and taught us these things … and the prophetic Spirit. We [all believers] know them in reason and truth. And we [all believers] freely share the things we [all believers] have been taught with all who wish to learn.

We [all believers] consider it important to teach these things to all people. In fact, the teachings of the Logos, because he is Divine, would have already touched most of mankind, if it were not for the wicked demons. …

David predicted the mighty word of Jesus that his apostles, going forth from Jerusalem, preached everywhere. Even though death is decreed against those who teach about Jesus, or even confess the name of Christ, we [all believers] still embrace his name and teach about him everywhere (emphasis added).[23]

Clearly, Justin Martyr’s view regarding assertive evangelism was quite different from what Weaver and Zimmerman want us to think. The early Christians verbally proclaimed the gospel upon a platform of holy, righteous lives, resulting in genuine conversions to Christianity. Compare that with the Plain practice of “just letting our lights shine by our good works” and then answering an occasional question from those who are curious about Plain attire. If that is how Plain People believe people should be “turned to Christ,” how is their belief working? How many outsiders are turning to Christ from observing the lives of Plain people?
 


[20] According to a note in the margin of the NASB, an alternate translation of this passage is, “those who had been scattered went about bringing the good news of the word.” So they were not necessarily engaged in public preaching to crowds, but were sharing the gospel individually.

[21] The “horrible” phenomenon of Plain people leaving Plain churches to join soul-winning churches is the topic of Dan and Steve’s imaginary conversation at the beginning of chapter 7.

[22] This quotation is from page 83 of We Don’t Speak Great Things—We Live Them!, a modern English rendition of Justin Martyr’s First Apology, by Scroll Publishing (1989).

[23] This quotation is from pages 96, 98 and 122 of the same title.

To subscribe to David Servant's periodic e-teachings, click here.


Why Be Plain? » Why Be Plain? A Biblical Response – Chapter 16

Why Be Plain? A Biblical Response – Chapter 5

Chapter 5 - The Lure of the World, Part 4

In their quest to convince discontented Plain folks not to defect from Plain ranks, Weaver and Zimmerman appeal at the close of their first chapter to the New Testament’s admonitions for Christians to submit to spiritual leaders. They write:

We live in an individualistic society. It’s all about me, my beliefs, my opinions, my rights. This attitude wants to in-filter into the church and we are in danger of losing the Anabaptist way of submission to God, the brotherhood, and ordained ministerial authority. … In the Anabaptist way, group authority guides personal conviction. The Holy Spirit would not give a person one conviction and his brother the opposite one.

The very commandments in the Bible to submit to the brotherhood and the ministry implies that opinions will differ but may not override church authority. Paul admonished the church in Rome not to quarrel over opinions and differences.

It is another matter when a church is willfully disobeying the Bible. But too often people leave because they have a different way of interpreting a confusing verse, not because Bible doctrines have actually been dropped (p. 12).

All this is generally true. The Bible has plenty to say about believers’ obligation to submit to God, secular government, employers, church leadership, and one another (Jas. 4:7; Rom. 13:1–7; Tit. 2:9; Heb. 13:17; Eph. 5:21). Of those five, however, there is only one to which Christians are always supposed to submit—God. The other four are composed of human leaders who themselves may not be submitted to God.

Scripture makes it clear that there are times when Christians should not submit to secular government, employers, church leadership, or other Christians. When any other authority stands at odds with what God expects of us, we are obligated—due to our higher obligation to always submit to God—not to submit to them. That means we are obligated to disobey them. It is just that simple.

That is certainly what the original Anabaptists believed. Many of them forfeited their lives because their dedication to God motivated them not to submit to civil and religious authorities. You can read their inspiring stories in The Martyr’s Mirror.

The original apostles once similarly suffered flogging by civil and religious authorities for preaching the gospel. But after being flogged and warned, they kept right on proclaiming the good news (see Acts 5:40–42). They did not submit. Peter and the apostles declared, “We must obey God rather than men” (Acts 5:29).

Peter and John’s similar Spirit-inspired response to the Jewish Sanhedrin, who commanded them to no longer teach about Jesus, instructs all of us about our own call to God-honoring civil disobedience:

Whether it is right in the sight of God to give heed to you rather than to God, you be the judge; for we cannot stop speaking about what we have seen and heard (Acts 4:19–20, emphasis added).

Church Authorities

Although we generally expect church authorities to be worthy of our trust, Jesus warned His followers about “false prophets” who are “wolves in sheep’s clothing” (Matt. 7:15). His analogy reminds us that such spiritual wolves could be right among the flock. They appear to be harmless sheep but “inwardly are ravenous wolves.” They aren’t servants of the sheep, but predators.

I think very few Plain leaders can be considered spiritual predators. Nevertheless, sincere leaders can be “the blind leading the blind,” to borrow another of Jesus’ descriptions of some spiritual leaders (see Matt. 15:14). Those who are misguided themselves are apt to mislead others.

Current Plain leaders, like all other sincere Plain folks, have been taught Plain doctrines from childhood, and Plain thinking is not easily challenged within Plain circles. Tradition runs very deep, questioning is discouraged, protective walls are tall, disagreement is dealt with by expulsion, and the Bible is often interpreted through Plain lenses. In fact, anyone who challenges Plain tradition or doctrine from the outside or inside is often referred to as a “wolf in sheep’s clothing.”

I am not seeking to criticize Plain leaders. If I had been raised Plain, I would likely think just like an average Plain person. I would interpret the Bible through a Plain lens. If I didn’t understand German and was discouraged from reading an English Bible, I would have a hard time comparing what I was taught with what the Bible teaches. But if my beliefs were indeed misguided, I would appreciate anyone who would love me enough to try to help me see what I was missing. I am trying, with love and humility, to be one such person, even though some view me as a wolf in sheep’s clothing.

In previous chapters, I have sought to show from the Bible that (1) the Plain interpretation of the phrase “the world” is generally unbiblical, (2) the Plain belief that God has a lower standard for English people to get into heaven and a higher standard for Plain people is also unbiblical, and (3) nothing in the New Testament resembles any Plain ordnung. If I succeeded in persuading you on these points, you now realize that your Plain bishops and ministers have been misleading you. They are probably entirely sincere, but they are still misleading you on some very important issues. The biggest of these issues is the idea that you must keep hundreds of rules that can’t be found in the Bible if you want to enter heaven. They are making man-made rules equal with God’s commandments.

Therefore, when spiritual leaders who mislead you by means of unbiblical ideas about what is required to get into heaven then say you must submit to them because the Bible requires submission to church leaders, you are under no obligation to submit to them. In fact, if you know the biblical truth, you are responsible to gently, lovingly confront those spiritual leaders—for their own sakes and for the sake of those whom they are misleading. To submit to such spiritual leaders would be to disobey God. When such spiritual leaders expect you to submit to them, it is like a blind person expecting a seeing person to follow him. No seeing person would allow a blind person to lead him. The only people who would allow a blind person to lead them are other blind people. And no seeing person would remain silent if he saw a blind person leading anyone!

What Does the 1632 Dordrecht Confession Say?

Again, I want to emphasize my sympathy and respect for all Plain leaders and all Plain people. They have all been born into a unique culture and religious system. There are many praiseworthy aspects of Plain culture, passed down from the original Anabaptists who loved Jesus. And there are many sincere, wonderful Plain people.

But their current religious system is not like that of the original Anabaptists. The centerpiece of the faith of the original Anabaptists was the new birth and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. They had no ordnung but the commandments of Christ, which is why you won’t find anything about any ordnung in the 1632 Dordrecht Confession. Since they had no ordnung, there is no record of them requiring ordnung vows of baptismal candidates or semi-annual ordnung vow renewals of everyone. Nor is there any record of them shunning anyone who transgressed the ordnung. Beyond that, there is no record that they avoided using any man-made technology available to them or dressed any differently from anyone else in their European communities.

But here is the real shocker for modern Plain folks: Not only is there no mention of any ordnung in the Dordrecht Confession, but it actually contains a prohibition against any ordnung. Allow me to show this.

The title of Article 5 of the Dordrecht Confession is: “Of the Law of Christ, that is, the Holy Gospel or the New Testament.” There are three phrases in this title: “the Law of Christ,” “the Holy Gospel,” and “the New Testament.” The last two are alternate descriptions of the first one. In other words, Article 5 is all about the Law of Christ, which can also be referred to as “the Holy Gospel” or “the New Testament.”

What is the Law of Christ? It is a biblical phrase found in 1 Corinthians 9:19–21 that clearly refers to all of Christ’s commandments, just as the phrase “the Law of Moses” in the same passage refers to all the commandments God gave through Moses. The original Anabaptists focused heavily on the commandments enumerated in Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount, believing that they introduced higher standards.

So Article 5 is all about the believer’s obligation to obey Christ’s commandments. In quoting Article 5 below, I have noted, in brackets, every time the Law of Christ is referenced, either directly or indirectly, and I have used all capital letters to highlight Article 5’s clear prohibition against creating any additional rules beyond Christ’s commandments:

Of the Law of Christ, that is, the Holy Gospel or the New Testament: We also believe and confess that before His ascension He instituted His New Testament [the Law of Christ], and, since it [the Law of Christ] was to be and remain an eternal Testament, that He confirmed and sealed the same [the Law of Christ] with His precious blood, and gave and left it [the Law of Christ] to His disciples, yea, charged them so highly with it [the Law of Christ], that neither angel nor man may alter it [the Law of Christ], NOR ADD TO IT [the Law of Christ] nor take away from it [the Law of Christ]; and that He caused the same [the Law of Christ], as containing the whole counsel and will of His heavenly Father, as far as is necessary for salvation to be proclaimed in His name by His beloved apostles, messengers, and ministers—whom He called, chose, and sent into all the world for that purpose—among all peoples, nations, and tongues; and repentance and remission of sins to be preached and testified of; and that He accordingly has therein declared all men without distinction, who through faith, as obedient children, heed, follow, and practice what the same [the Law of Christ] contains, to be His children and lawful heirs; thus excluding no one from the precious inheritance of eternal salvation, except the unbelieving and disobedient [to the Law of Christ], the stiff-necked and obdurate, who despise it [the Law of Christ], and incur this through their own sins, thus making themselves unworthy of eternal life. (Jer. 31:31; Heb. 9:15–17; Matt. 26:28; Gal. 1:8; I Tim. 6:3; John 15:15; Matt. 28:19; Mark 16:15; Luke 24:47; Rom. 8:17; Acts 13:46).

Unquestionably, the original Anabaptists believed that eternal salvation was granted to those who repent, believe, and then obey the Law of Christ. To them, that was all that was required. Nothing more. And they also firmly believed that no one should add anything to the Law of Christ, as we just read.

But that is exactly what has happened in Plain circles. Although the authors of Why Be Plain? often misleadingly refer to the ordnung as “guidelines,” the ordnung has actually been elevated in Plain circles to be equal with Christ’s commandments, because every Plain person is required to pledge, at his baptism, to keep all the rules of the ordnung, and unrepented transgressions against the ordnung are treated as sins that result in eternal damnation. The original Anabaptists would be horrified by such an idea or practice. It would remind them of all the additional man-made rules of the Roman Catholic Church that were tied to salvation, rules from which they had been delivered.

In any case, when ordnung-promoting Plain leaders claim that the 1632 Dordrecht Confession—contained in practically every copy of The Martyrs’ Mirror, a book found in many Plain homes—is the standard for their doctrine and practice, they are ignoring Article 5, because it condemns the addition of any rules to the Law of Christ.

The New Testament on Ordnungs

As we have already seen, there is nothing that remotely resembles Old Order ordnungs in the New Testament. The apostles saw no need to add hundreds of rules to the Law of Christ.

Of course, Jesus and His apostles, who lived under the old covenant, followed the Law of Moses. They didn’t, however, follow any of the thousands of “fence laws” that were added to the Law of Moses by the scribes and Pharisees.

Moreover, Jesus condemned Jewish leaders whose traditions invalidated God’s commandments or who “taught as doctrines the precepts of men” (Matt. 15:1–9, emphasis added). He also condemned religious leaders who “tied up heavy burdens and laid them on men’s shoulders” (Matt. 23:4)—an obvious reference to extra religious obligations not included in the Law of Moses. All that should be instructive to modern Plain leaders.

The early church at first consisted solely of Jewish believers, who continued to keep both the moral and ceremonial requirements of the Law of Moses, as those requirements were the fabric of their culture. Of course, those Jewish believers also began keeping any commandments contained within the Law of Christ that were not included in the Law of Moses, such as Jesus’ commandment to make disciples of all the nations, teaching them to obey all His commandments (see Matt. 28:19–20).

Years later, when Gentiles, whose culture was pagan, began believing in the Lord Jesus Christ, some of the apostles gathered in Jerusalem to decide whether Gentile believers were obligated to keep rules that were included in the Law of Moses but not in the Law of Christ, such as circumcision (see Acts 15). They decided that the answer was no, and that essentially God was not requiring anything of the Gentiles beyond obeying the Law of Christ. Some of the Jewish-background apostles soon began to understand the same was true for them. One of them was Paul (see 1 Cor. 9:19–23).

That landmark event in early church history should also be instructive to modern spiritual leaders. The early church, when given an opportunity to add extra rules beyond Christ’s commandments for Gentile believers to obey, decided not to do so, even though those extra rules were of divine origin. They understood that the Law of Christ was sufficient.

The Simplification of God’s Laws

In contrast to Plain leaders who add hundreds of rules to Christ’s commandments, Jesus Himself once declared that everything in the Law of Moses and the Prophets can be summarized by two commandments:

One of them, a lawyer, asked Him [Jesus] a question, testing Him, “Teacher, which is the great commandment in the Law?” And He said to him, “‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.’ This is the great and foremost commandment. The second is like it, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ On these two commandments depend the whole Law and the Prophets” (Matt. 22:36–40, emphasis added).

That is why I am always so amused when professing Christians ask me if I am keeping some morally-insignificant rule for which they think they’ve found a little support in Scripture. I usually tell them, “I’m still working on loving God with all my heart, soul and mind, and loving my neighbor as myself. Once I reach perfection regarding those two commandments, perhaps I can then strive for perfection in lesser things, like you.” (I usually find that people who are focused on morally insignificant rules are not doing well at loving their neighbors as themselves.)

Imitating Jesus (see 1 Cor. 11:1), the apostle Paul had no qualms also simplifying God’s expectations by summarizing all of them into one sentence:

Owe nothing to anyone except to love one another; for he who loves his neighbor has fulfilled the law. For this, “You shall not commit adultery, You shall not murder, You shall not steal, You shall not covet,” and if there is any other commandment, it is summed up in this saying, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself” (Rom. 13:8–9, emphasis added).

For the whole Law is fulfilled in one word, in the statement, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself” (Gal. 5:14).

Clearly, Paul believed that by focusing on one commandment—the commandment Jesus referred to as the second-greatest—one would keep all the commandments. So we could evaluate every ordnung rule by that one commandment. Any ordnung rule that is not related to loving my neighbor as myself is exposed as irrelevant to God. For example, how is the prohibition regarding driving cars relevant to the commandment to love our neighbor? There is no obvious relevance (unless, of course, I drove poorly and struck a pedestrian). Under normal conditions, a car could help me love my neighbor better, such as by providing a ride to the hospital in an emergency, or to a grocery store to purchase needed food.

What do you suppose the apostle Paul would say to Christian leaders who create and enforce hundreds of extra-biblical rules that have no relevance to the great commandments to love God and neighbor, as well as no moral, ethical or biblical basis, and who warn their congregations that if they don’t keep all these extra rules, they will go to hell? We really don’t have to guess, do we?

As noted earlier in this chapter, Weaver and Zimmerman declare that believers have the right to leave any church that is “willfully disobeying the Bible” (p. 12). By that declaration, they have unwittingly described every ordnung-promoting church and given every Plain person in them a right to leave.

If the truth be told, Plain people have no more obligation to submit to their bishop when he says, “You must keep the rules of the ordnung,” than they would if he were to tell them to murder the Millers. Again, I know that they are only parroting what they’ve been taught all their lives. If any of them have read this far, however, they no longer have any excuse.

Shall We Abandon the Ordnung?

Just as the Mosaic Law was the fabric of Jewish culture, so the ordnung is the fabric of Plain culture. And just as God didn’t require Jewish believers in the early church to abandon their cultural connections to the Mosaic Law, neither does God require Plain believers in Jesus to abandon their cultural connections to their Old Order ordnung.

That being said, God did expect Jewish believers to realize that their salvation was by His grace through a living faith in the Lord Jesus Christ (whose commandments they thus obeyed) and not due to keeping any aspect of the Law of Moses that is not found in the Law of Christ. He also expected them to view believing Gentiles as their spiritual brothers and sisters in Christ, even though those Gentiles did not keep any aspect of the Law of Moses that was not included in the Law of Christ.

Similarly, God expects Plain believers to realize that their salvation is by His grace through a living faith in the Lord Jesus Christ (whose commandments they thus obey), not because they keep any aspect of the Plain ordnung that is not included in the Law of Christ. He also expects them to view fellow Plain believers who follow only some or none of the ordnung rules as their spiritual brothers and sisters in Christ, and also to view non-Plain followers of Christ in the same way.

Plain leaders who want to follow the New Testament example of the apostles would announce the end of the ordnung as having any relevance to salvation, while affirming repentance, faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, and obedience to the Law of Christ.

If they did that, we could have Plain communities full of people who would be faithfully following Christ but who would happily tolerate others in their community who keep all, some, or none of their former ordnung (that is not part of the Law of Christ), either as a matter of personal conviction or cultural preference. Some would be driving buggies and others would be driving cars. And those with cars could be taxi drivers for those who were still driving buggies! Some would be wearing traditional, cultural Amish clothing, and some would not. Everyone would love each other and get along.

This would also result in the reconciliation of thousands of Plain families who are currently at odds with each other. If the idea that the ordnung is relevant to salvation was eliminated, the result would be one big, happy family. Sounds like heaven!

To subscribe to David Servant's periodic e-teachings, click here.


Why Be Plain? » Why Be Plain? A Biblical Response – Chapter 5

Should You Always Submit to Spiritual Leaders?

Chapter 3 of Why be Plain? A Biblical Response

In their continued quest to convince discontented Amish folks not to defect from Amish ranks, authors Weaver and Zimmerman appeal at the close of the first chapter of Why be Plain? to the New Testament’s admonitions for Christians to submit to spiritual leaders. From the Amish perspective, that means Amish bishops and ministers. The authors write:

Hebrew Roots? Yes. Hebrew Fruits? No.

By David Servant

Most every true Christian understands that Christianity has its roots in Judaism. Jesus is the Jewish Messiah, and He kept the Mosaic Law all of His life. All of His apostles witnessed Him perfectly keep the Mosaic Law. He obviously, for example, kept the annual Feast of Passover (which, incidentally, foreshadowed His saving work in numerous ways.)

The early church was 100% Jewish. All of those early Jewish Christians, who lived among non-believing Jews, followed the Mosaic Law that they had been keeping all of their lives. It is clear that Peter, for example, kept the Mosaic dietary laws at least until Acts 10, which would have been seven to ten years after the Day of Pentecost.

“Come out, in Jesus’ Name!”

by David Servant

In my Christian life over the past 49 years, at least three times I’ve watched a wave of “deliverance ministry” sweep through a segment of the church. The first time was when I was just a relatively new Christian, in the late 1970s. A man named Don Basham, who was part of a group of five popular teachers based in Ft. Lauderdale who jointly published a magazine called “New Wine,” wrote a book titled Deliver Us from Evil. It became quite popular within the growing “Charismatic Renewal” that was sweeping through the denominational world.

I read that book and learned that I could actually cast demons out of myself. As an adolescent male, I also realized from reading that book that I had a demon of lust. So, I followed its instructions for self-deliverance.

The book explained that, as any demons came out of me, I might choke, gag or even vomit. Sure enough, when I commanded the demon of lust to come out of me, I gagged. Wow! I felt it! It was the real thing! I was delivered from the demon of lust!

But there was just one small problem. It wasn’t very long before I realized the demon wasn’t gone. I found myself still struggling with immodest women. Had the demon returned? How did it gain entrance back into me so quickly? Should I do another self-deliverance?

A Tale of Two Ordnungs

The Amish Papers - Chapter 8

A Tale of Two Ordnungs

As Amish folks know, Amish life and culture is totally regulated by the Ordnung. For outsiders who don’t know that the Ordnung is, it is an unwritten list of dos and don’ts that vary from one Amish community to another. All community members must publicly affirm their agreement with the Ordnung twice a year. Unfortunately, in many Amish communities, the Ordnung sometimes seems to take precedence over the Bible, particularly when keeping the Ordnung is viewed as a requirement to gain to heaven.

The article that follows, published as my monthly “e-teaching” in May of 2022, explores why the early church had no Ordnung but the commandments of Christ, and why the early Christians rejected an additional Ordnung that some attempted to introduce.

Before I moved to Smicksburg, Pennsylvania, I always assumed that Amish communities across the nation were all the same. Like most “English” Americans, I thought that the people who drove horse-drawn buggies all followed a uniform way of life. Once I relocated, however, into the heart of Pennsylvania’s third-largest Amish community, and in proximity to several other Amish communities, I began to realize there were differences that make just about every Amish community unique in some way. I learned that there was something called the “Ordnung,” that governed every aspect of Amish life, and that every community’s Ordnung is different. So there are actually hundreds of different Ordnungs among the Amish. Some are more conservative and some are more liberal.

As an example, I learned that it is OK for Smicksburg Amish, among whom I live, to ride in cars and even pay English drivers to drive them, but they are not permitted to own or drive cars. The Johnsonburg Amish, however, just 30 minutes away, are permitted to own vehicles, but they are not allowed to drive them. So they also hire English drivers.

I’ve heard some Amish folks say that the Ordnung is a guide, like road signs that help us navigate to a destination. Others compare it to a fence that keeps us from crossing into forbidden or dangerous territory. We all know, of course, that road signs and fences are good things, and who would argue against anything that keeps us from sinning?

That being said, I’d like to take a look at the first two Ordnungs that were introduced to the early church—the church founded by Jesus and His apostles that we read about in the New Testament. You may be interested to know that one of those Ordnungs was fully embraced by the early church, while the other one was completely rejected. Let’s first consider the Ordnung that was embraced.

The First Ordnung

The early church focused on, and strove to obey, the commandments Jesus gave them, because that is exactly what He commanded them to do. After His resurrection, He commissioned them:

And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age” (Matt. 28:18-20).

So, Jesus commanded His eleven apostles to make disciples of all nations, teaching them to observe everything He had commanded them. And that is just what they did. The commandments He gave them came to be known as “the Law of Christ,” as they are called by Paul in Galatians 6:2 and 1 Corinthians 9:21. In fact, in Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians, he contrasted the “Law of Moses” with “the Law of Christ” (see 1 Cor. 9:19-23). Just as the Law of Moses consisted of all the laws that God gave Israel through Moses, so the Law of Christ consists of everything Jesus commanded His disciples. That would include, for example, everything Jesus commanded in His Sermon on the Mount (see Matthew 5-7). It would also include His “Great Commission” that I just quoted from Matthew 28:18-20.

Some folks claim that the “Great Commission” was only given to Jesus’ eleven apostles. That idea, however, is disproven right within Jesus’ Great Commission, because in it, He told the Eleven to teach people of every nation to observe everything He had commanded them. Of course, everything He commanded them included the Great Commission. So Jesus’ original apostles taught their disciples to also, “Go…and make disciples of all the nations…teaching them to observe” all He had commanded. The Great Commission is a never-ending commandment that is binding upon every Christian generation.

In any case, the first and only Ordnung that the early church embraced was the Law of Christ. There is no evidence that the apostles added hundreds, or thousands, of additional laws or rules to the Law of Christ as guidelines or fences for the early Christians. In fact, during the subsequent centuries that followed, for at least 1,500 years, no true Christians ever saw a need to add hundreds or thousands of additional rules to the Ordnung that Christ gave the church—His commandments. And for good reason that we will soon see.

Beyond this, there is a lot of biblical evidence that the apostles strongly opposed adding any additional laws or rules to the Law of Christ, as indicated by how they reacted to some Jewish Christians in the early church who attempted to add the Law of Moses to the Law of Christ. Another way of describing what happened is that some teachers introduced a second Ordnung to Christ’s Ordnung.

The Second Ordnung, and the Apostle’s Reaction

Here are the details: Some Jewish professing Christians began teaching that if Gentiles (non-Jews) wanted to be saved, they had to be circumcised as required in the Law of Moses, as well as keep the Mosaic Law’s many other regulations (see Acts 15:1-5). They tragically did not understand that God gave the Mosaic Law to only one group of people—the descendants of Israel—and that He gave it to them only temporarily, until their Messiah would come and inaugurate the new covenant. They also did not understand that God was saving Gentiles the same way He was saving Jews—by grace through faith, and not by their works (see Ephesians 2:8-9).

Their false teaching caused such a stir in the early church that a convention was called in Jerusalem that included the most preeminent apostles, including Paul, Peter and James. The entire story is recorded in Acts 15, and you can read it for yourself. At that convention, some Pharisees who had believed in Jesus stood up and, concerning the new believers among the Gentiles, said, “It is necessary to circumcise them and to direct them to observe the Law of Moses” (Acts 15:5).

There was much discussion. Peter eventually spoke:

Brethren, you know that in the early days God made a choice among you, that by my mouth the Gentiles would hear the word of the gospel and believe. And God, who knows the heart, testified to them giving them the Holy Spirit, just as He also did to us; and He made no distinction between us and them, cleansing their hearts by faith. Now therefore why do you put God to the test by placing upon the neck of the disciples a yoke which neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear? But we believe that we are saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, in the same way as they also are” (Acts 15:7-11).

I so appreciate Peter’s honesty. He declared what everyone at that convention knew was true, that none of them, or their forefathers, had kept the Law of Moses. How hypocritical it would have been for them to expect Gentile believers to obey laws that none of them had consistently kept!

And that reminds me of what I’ve observed among some of my local Amish friends. Although phones are forbidden in the very-conservative Smicksburg community, those “in the know” have told me that there are hundreds of secret phones among them. Home electricity is forbidden within the Ordnung of the more liberal Johnsonburg community, but many Amish there have it. That rule is not enforced. Can you imagine them telling other Amish who were considering relocating to their community, “If you move here, you should know that home electricity is forbidden!”?

Did you also notice that Peter reminded everyone at the convention how God used him to first proclaim the gospel to the Gentiles? You can read all about that in Acts 10. Peter was divinely directed to visit the household of a Gentile man named Cornelius. As Peter told Cornelius’ household about Jesus, he proclaimed:

“And He ordered us to preach to the people, and solemnly to testify that this is the One who has been appointed by God as Judge of the living and the dead. Of Him all the prophets bear witness that through His name everyone who believes in Him receives forgiveness of sins.”

While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who were listening to the message. All the circumcised believers who came with Peter were amazed, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles also. For they were hearing them speaking with tongues and exalting God. Then Peter answered, “Surely no one can refuse the water for these to be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we did, can he?” And he ordered them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ (Acts 10:42-48).

Clearly, God accepted and forgave the Gentiles who believed Peter’s message—as evidenced by the miracle of them speaking in other tongues, just as had occurred on the day of Pentecost to Peter and more than 100 other Jewish Christians (see Acts 2:1-4). God’s forgiveness was obviously not dependent upon them being circumcised or keeping the Mosaic Law. They were saved by grace through faith (see Ephesians 2:8-9).

After Peter was done speaking at the convention, Paul and Barnabas then stood to recount many of the miracles God had done through them to get the attention of Gentiles, and they reported how God had transformed Gentiles without any requirement of circumcision or their adopting the regulations of the Mosaic Law.

Finally, the apostle James stood up and quoted an Old Testament passage that foretold how God would one day save Gentiles. He then recommended that the convention attendees send a letter to all the new Gentile believers in order to inform them there was no need for them to be circumcised and start keeping the Law of Moses. James did recommend, however, that the new Gentile believers avoid a few practices that were particularly offensive to Jews, but not as a requirement for salvation.

So the early church soundly rejected the second Ordnung that was introduced, an Ordnung that would have added hundreds of additional laws to the Law of Christ. Perhaps even more significant is that the rejected Ordnung was one that actually had divine origins. God Himself had given it through Moses. But the early apostles understood that it was never intended to be binding upon Gentiles, and most of them eventually understood that it was not binding on Jewish believers in Jesus either.

Now read slowly: If the early church rejected an ancient, divinely-given Ordnung that would have misled many into thinking salvation was not due to God’s grace, but that salvation depended on people keeping a set of laws that no one had ever fully kept, should we not pause and think before we embrace any Ordnung of human origin that similarly adds hundreds, or even thousands, of laws and regulations to the Law of Christ, especially if those laws and regulations mislead people into thinking their salvation is not due to God’s grace, but depends on keeping those laws—and especially when no one actually keeps them all?

It is an irrefutable fact that the early church, led by the original apostles, taught their disciples to obey all that Jesus had commanded them, and they did not add any fence laws or manmade rules to the Law of Christ. They, in fact, universally rejected a second potential Ordnung that some false teachers attempted to introduce.

Interestingly, the original Anabaptists of the 16th-century—from which most modern Amish people are descended—all rejected the Ordnung that the Roman Catholic Church had added to the Law of Christ. They rejected every manmade church doctrine and law that could not be found in the New Testament. How odd it is that modern Amish churches, in contrast with the original Anabaptists and the apostles of Jesus Christ, have adopted second Ordnungs that contain hundreds, and sometimes thousands, of additional rules that can’t be found in the Law of Christ, and a vow to obey those rules is required for church membership. Church members who unrepentantly break any Ordnung rule are excommunicated and told that they will go to hell.

By what authority do Amish church leaders have to make such claims? Have they forgotten that Jesus is the Head of His church? They invent and endorse rules that cannot be found in the Bible and tell people their eternal salvation hinges on keeping those rules! The original apostles, and original Anabaptists, would have been horrified by even the suggestion of such an idea!

Paul’s Letter Against “Legalism” (Salvation by Works)

This important topic is not only found in the Acts 15 story of the Jerusalem apostolic council. The apostle Paul actually wrote an entire letter on this subject, namely, his letter to the Galatians. The Galatian church had come under the same influence of Jewish Christians who were teaching that Gentiles needed to be circumcised and keep the Law of Moses in order to be accepted by God. In his Galatian letter, Paul mentioned circumcision by name at least fifteen times. Below are four of those passages in which he mentioned circumcision a total of nine times:

Behold I, Paul, say to you that if you receive circumcision, Christ will be of no benefit to you. And I testify again to every man who receives circumcision, that he is under obligation to keep the whole Law (Gal. 5:2-3).

For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything, but faith working through love (Gal. 5:6).

Those who desire to make a good showing in the flesh try to compel you to be circumcised, simply so that they will not be persecuted for the cross of Christ. For those who are circumcised do not even keep the Law themselves, but they desire to have you circumcised so that they may boast in your flesh (Gal. 6:12-13).

For neither is circumcision anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creation (Gal. 6:15).

I’m sure you noticed Paul’s solemn warning to the Gentile Galatians that, if they “received circumcision,” Christ would be of no benefit to them. Paul could only have meant that Christ’s sacrificial death and the salvation He provided through it would be of no benefit to them. What could be more tragic than that?

Being a circumcised Jew himself (see Phil. 3:5), Paul certainly was not saying that the state of being circumcised automatically nullified all the benefits provided by Christ. He obviously believed that he, as a circumcised Christian, was benefitting from Christ. His concern regarding the Gentile Galatian believers was, of course, their basis of salvation. They were in danger of transferring their faith in Christ for salvation to faith in circumcision for salvation.

This concept is underscored again in two of the other above-quoted verses. In one of the final sentences that brings his Galatian letter to a conclusion, Paul wrote, “For neither is circumcision anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creation” (Gal. 6:15). That is, it doesn’t make a bit of difference if a person is circumcised or not circumcised. All that matters is if a person is a “new creation,” that is, one who has been spiritually reborn through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.

Just a few sentences earlier, Paul similarly wrote, “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything, but faith working through love” (Gal. 5:6). Again, circumcision has no part in salvation. Salvation is by faith, and the proof of genuine faith is love. When people believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, God’s love is poured out within their hearts through the Holy Spirit who comes to live inside them (see Romans 5:5). The first fruit of the indwelling Spirit is love, something Paul tells us in the same chapter of Galatians (see Galatians 5:22). So “faith working through love” is what matters, not circumcision.

The Application to Us

Obviously, it would be safe to conclude that Paul would say the same thing about anything that anyone might claim is essential for salvation other than faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, faith that results in a new creation who manifests love. If someone, for example, made the claim that to be saved, one must become a member of a certain church denomination, be baptized using a certain formula, cut their hair or trim their beard in a certain way, wear a certain uniform every day, never own a phone, never drive a car, and so on, Paul would solemnly warn them, “If you do those things in order to be saved, Christ will be of no benefit to you.”

This is an irrefutable conclusion. If you agree with Paul that making circumcision a requirement for salvation nullifies the benefits of Christ, you must agree that making anything a salvation requirement—other than faith in the Lord Jesus Christ—also nullifies the benefits of Christ.

“But,” some will say, “the Bible says that faith without works is dead and cannot save anyone.” Yes, that is true. True faith always produces works. Genuine faith in the Lord Jesus Christ always results in obedience to His commandments. If I believe that He is Lord, I will strive to obey Him. Adherence to manmade rules and traditions, however, is not an indication of faith in the Lord Jesus Christ any more than adherence to Chinese laws is an indication of United States citizenship. Manmade laws are by definition not God’s laws. When professing Christians subscribe to manmade laws thinking that they must adhere to them to be saved, they reveal that their faith is not in Christ for salvation. Rather, their faith is in their own works, and worse, works that aren’t even prescribed by God and that do not have the indwelling Spirit as their source. Just as Paul told the Galatians, he would tell such folks that Christ is of no benefit to them.

Salvation is a gift granted to us by God’s grace and received through faith in Christ. It is not something we earn through our own works. And along with forgiveness of our sins, God also grants us the gift of His indwelling Spirit who motivates and empowers us to live righteously. As Paul wrote to the Ephesian Christians:

For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, so that no one may boast. For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand so that we would walk in them (Ephesians 2:8-10).

That passage, I think, should be memorized by every Christian, because it is so important and concise. Salvation is a gift. By definition, gifts are not earned. So salvation is not the result of our works, just as Paul said. Salvation does, however, result in our doing good works.

The “equation of salvation” is not rightly expressed by this formula: Good Works = Salvation.  That is legalism. Neither is it rightly expressed by this formula: Faith + Good Works = Salvation. That is semi-legalism. Rather, it is best expressed by this formula: Faith = Salvation + Good Works. True faith in the Lord Jesus Christ results in a spiritual rebirth, a salvation that is always accompanied by obedience to Christ’s commandments.

Notice also what Paul wrote in Ephesians 2:8-10 about the nature of those good works that originate from the gift of salvation. They are a result of God’s “workmanship” in us. They are works that “God prepared beforehand.” So naturally, they align with God’s will and God’s commandments. They are primarily acts of loving one’s neighbor. They are certainly not works that have their origins in manmade traditions or cultural rules. Born-again, Spirit-indwelt, new creations are not inspired and empowered by God to follow manmade religious rules and traditions! They are inspired and empowered by God to follow His laws!

Human Traditions

So is it wrong for Christians to follow manmade traditions? Yes, if they contradict or subvert biblical truth. Jesus once said to some Jewish leaders: “Why do you yourselves transgress the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition?” (Matt. 15:2). He also said, “You are experts at setting aside the commandment of God in order to keep your tradition” (Mark 7:9).

Again, if I keep manmade traditions because I think I must keep them to be saved, then following those manmade traditions contradicts biblical truth. On the other hand, if I keep them to express love for my neighbor, then keeping them is not wrong. In fact, keeping them is a form of doing good.

Let me offer a biblical example. Although Paul strongly warned the Gentile Galatian believers against being circumcised (as we have already read), he himself once circumcised a Gentile convert:

Paul came also to Derbe and to Lystra. And a disciple was there, named Timothy, the son of a Jewish woman who was a believer, but his father was a Greek [a Gentile], and he was well spoken of by the brethren who were in Lystra and Iconium. Paul wanted this man to go with him; and he took him and circumcised him because of the Jews who were in those parts, for they all knew that his father was a Greek (Acts 16:1-3).

Why did Paul circumcise Gentile Timothy? It was because he wanted Timothy to help him spread the gospel in a region where there were many Jews, and no Jew would listen to an uncircumcised Gentile teach them about God. So, in order to remove a barrier to the gospel, Paul circumcised Timothy. But you can be sure that Paul didn’t tell Timothy, “I’m doing this because you can’t be saved unless you are circumcised.” Absolutely not!

Paul’s concern regarding the Gentile believers in Galatia was that they were “seeking to be justified by law” (Gal. 5:4), a very grave error. In fact, Paul believed it was a spiritually-deadly error:

You have been severed from Christ, you who are seeking to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace (Gal. 5:4).

People sometimes ask, “Is it possible to fall from grace?” According to Paul, the answer is “yes”—if someone who formerly was trusting Jesus for salvation begins to trust his works. It was Paul, not me, who told the Galatians that they had been “severed from Christ” and had “fallen from grace.”

The Gentile Galatian believers were not only lining up to be circumcised, believing it was required for salvation, but they were also starting to observe Jewish “days and months and seasons and years” (Gal. 4:10), all because they had been duped by false teachers who taught such things were required for salvation. Paul was very worried: “I fear for you, that perhaps I have labored over you in vain” (Gal. 4:11). Everything that had been gained for the gospel in Galatia was in danger of being lost!

And that is why Paul opened his letter to the Galatians by bluntly expressing his shock at what was happening among them:

I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you by the grace of Christ, for a different gospel; which is really not another; only there are some who are disturbing you and want to distort the gospel of Christ (Gal. 1:6-7).

Paul called the Jewish circumcision message a “different” and “distorted” gospel that was not aligned with the gospel of “the grace of Christ.” He considered their false doctrine so deadly that he went on to say:

But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed! As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you received, he is to be accursed!

And Paul didn’t stop with wishing for a curse upon the false teachers. Near the end of his letter, he wrote in exasperation: “I wish that those who are troubling you would even mutilate themselves” (Gal. 5:12). Other less-subtle English translations use the word “castrate” instead of “mutilate.” If the Jewish teachers were so sure of the spiritual benefits of some foreskin removal, maybe they should try, on themselves, a full genital removal!

Modern Amish Ordnungs

In light of all we’ve considered so far, let’s now return to thinking about modern Amish Ordnungs. It goes without saying that, if anyone believes they must keep the Ordnung to be saved and reach heaven, they are no different than the deceived Galatians who believed that they had to be circumcised and keep the Mosaic Law. Such Amish people are not trusting Jesus for salvation but are trusting in their works, and even worse, they are trusting works that are not grounded in God’s Word. For example, there is nothing in the Bible that says it is wrong to own and drive a car, or that we must drive horse-drawn buggies. If you are driving a buggy because you think you must to get to heaven, you are trusting in your works and Christ will be of no benefit to you. And the same could be said for any other Ordnung rule if you are keeping it because you think you must to get to heaven.

If, however, you are keeping the Ordnung out of love for others and not because you think you must keep it in order to get to heaven, that is different. You could do that and still maintain faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, trusting Him alone for salvation.

That is exactly what the Apostle Paul did. He knew that keeping the Mosaic Law was not necessary for him to be saved. However, in order to not erect Jewish barriers to the gospel, he kept the Law of Moses when he was around Jews. And in order to not set up barriers to the gospel to Gentiles, he did not keep the Law of Moses when he was around them:

For though I am free from all men, I have made myself a slave to all, so that I may win more. To the Jews I became as a Jew, so that I might win Jews; to those who are under the Law [of Moses], as under the Law though not being myself under the Law, so that I might win those who are under the Law; to those who are without law [Gentiles, to whom God never gave the Law of Moses], as without law, though not being without the law of God but under the law of Christ, so that I might win those who are without law. To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak; I have become all things to all men, so that I may by all means save some. I do all things for the sake of the gospel, so that I may become a fellow partaker of it (1 Cor. 9:19-23).

Clearly, Paul did not believe that he, a Jew, was required to keep the Law of Moses. Just as clear is the fact he also believed that he, as a Christian, was required to keep the Law of Christ.

So too, newly born-again people of Amish background should know that God does not require them to keep any manmade rules of their community’s Ordnung, but He does expect them to obey all that Christ commanded.

Should such people, however, keep the Amish Ordnung when they are around Amish people who are not yet born again in order to not set up a barrier to the gospel, in hopes of winning them to genuine salvation by grace through faith?

That is, I believe, an individual decision. But we should keep in mind that many Amish-background believers continue to live in full view of Amish neighbors, unlike Paul who alternately traveled between the somewhat-separated worlds of Jews and Gentiles. Paul was primarily an “apostle to the Gentiles” (Rom. 11:13; 1 Tim. 2:7), so he spent limited time keeping the Mosaic Law trying to not offend Jews.

Also keep in mind that, by continuing to keep the Amish Ordnung, Amish-background believers potentially could strengthen the self-deception of Amish people who think the Ordnung must be followed in order to one day go to heaven. By not keeping the Ordnung but keeping the Law of Christ, Amish-background believers send a clear message to unregenerate (non-born-again) Amish people that they believe keeping the Ordnung is not essential for salvation.

If I was an idol-worshipper prior to being born again, I would not continue to worship idols in order to try to win my idol-worshipping friends. Rather, I would want every idol worshipper to know I was no longer worshipping idols and was now worshipping the one true God.

Beyond all of that, born-again Amish-background believers who continue to keep the Ordnung might mislead non-Amish unbelievers into thinking that all the Amish lifestyle rules are required by God, which would hinder them from believing the gospel.

All of this is to say, if you are an Amish-background believer who decides to continue following the Ordnung, you have a moral obligation to tell unregenerate Amish as well as unregenerate non-Amish that your keeping the Ordnung has nothing to do with salvation, just as Paul made efforts to convey to unregenerate Jews and Gentiles that keeping the rules of the Mosaic Law had nothing to do with salvation. Remember, Paul was circumcised, and he circumcised Timothy, but he certainly never let anyone think that he or Timothy believed that circumcision was essential for salvation.

Of course, any Amish person who is born again and who begins to try to lead unregenerate Amish people to a genuine faith in Jesus Christ—a faith that includes believing the Ordnung is not essential for salvation—may soon find himself or herself excommunicated by their Amish community. Among regenerate Amish communities, however, that would not be the case. Still, the question remains if regenerate Amish communities should follow any form of Amish Ordnung. By keeping their hundreds, and sometimes thousands, of lifestyle rules, they run the risk of misleading Amish and non-Amish unbelievers that they believe keeping their lifestyle rules is essential for salvation.

Amish Ordnungs, of course, are the reason why virtually no outsiders ever join any Amish communities, regenerate or unregenerate. All outsiders naturally realize that if they were to join any Amish community, they would be expected to conform to all the Ordnung rules. If you are a part of a regenerate or unregenerate Amish community, be honest about this! You would only allow people to join your community who agreed to conform to your Ordnung. And if they agreed to conform and you allowed them to join, but then they did not conform, you know they would be excommunicated. If you say, “No, we would allow them to remain,” then your unenforced Ordnung is just a list of suggestions which anyone in your community can keep or not keep! So what is the point of your Ordnung?

Common Objections Answered

— “But our regenerate Amish community has arrived at our Ordnung by consensus! It has not been forced upon us by a bishop. Our Ordnung rules represent our agreed-upon convictions!” some say.

Still, together, you’ve set up rules that are not found in the Law of Christ, and you won’t allow anyone to join your community unless they agree to keep your Ordnung. Here’s another way of saying it: In your section of Christ’s church and body, Christians who only follow the Law of Christ aren’t welcome to join you. They must agree with all your lifestyle rules. Are you helping or hindering the growth of God’s kingdom, the kingdom where He is the King who makes the rules? Are you working for or against the unity of the church for which Jesus prayed in John 17:21?

There were, of course, differences of conviction among believers in the early church regarding lifestyle choices that were not specifically addressed in the Law of Christ. For example, some of the early Christians were persuaded that it was wrong for them to eat meat that had been sacrificed to an idol. Others, like Paul, believed there was nothing wrong with the practice. But neither side created an Ordnung over it, dividing into separate churches. Paul admonished both sides to be considerate of each other and walk in love, and especially those whose consciences were “strong” rather than “weak” (see 1 Cor. 8:1-13).

I am certain that, even within regenerate Amish communities, there are differences of convictions. As in any and all groups, stronger personalities dominate, and the convictions of those folks become the rules of the Ordnung, and those who disagree either outwardly conform or leave the group.

All of this is to say, why not discard any and all manmade rules and just follow Christ and His rules? Why not just be respectful and considerate of those followers of Christ whose personal convictions differ from yours, which is an act of obedience to Christ’s commandment to love one another?

Besides all of that, the truth is, no matter how rigorous or lax any Ordnung is, whether it is contrived by regenerate or unregenerate Amish, very few folks under any Ordnung are actually keeping it in its entirety, simply because everyone has different personal convictions. So every Ordnung makes liars out of people who declare that they will keep all the Ordnung but who in reality don’t!

—”But the Ordnung rules are like fences and road signs keep us on the right path!”

Are you saying that God’s commandments and His indwelling Holy Spirit are not enough to accomplish that today, as they were 2,000 years ago for the early church? Are you born again or not?

—”But everyone follows rules that are not in the Bible! For example, there are speed limits on highways! Those rules are good for everyone!”

First, there is no danger that any speed limit sign might mislead anyone into thinking they will go to hell if they don’t obey it! I never saw a speed limit sign that said, “If you exceed 55 miles per hour, you will go to hell when you die!” Yet Ordnungs definitely have the potential to mislead people into thinking they must be obeyed to escape hell. In fact, in unregenerate Amish communities, that is exactly how Ordnungs are portrayed.

Second, many drivers, if not most drivers, regularly exceed speed limits, proof that rules really don’t change behaviors. People follow their convictions. People who care about others drive safely, according to what they deem to be safe, which may include exceeding the speed limit at times.

In reality, good people don’t need external laws to govern their behavior because they are internally governed by moral principle. That is why Paul wrote, “Law is not made for a righteous person, but for those who are lawless and rebellious” (1Tim. 1:9). If you think you need hundreds or thousands of external laws to govern your behavior, you are admitting that you are not internally motivated to do what is right. And that is an admission that you are not born again and you do not have the Holy Spirit living in you.

The fact is, people who are born again don’t even need God’s commandments to govern their behavior, because they have the Holy Spirit living in them to guide them. That is why Paul wrote, “But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the Law” (Gal. 5:18). Under the new covenant, God’s laws are written in our hearts (see Heb. 8:10).

So if born-again people don’t even need God’s commandments (externally) to govern their behavior, how much more do they not need any manmade rules to govern their behavior!

In summary, Amish Ordnungs, whether contrived by unregenerate or regenerate Amish communities, are not only affronts against God, as they betray a belief that His commandments and Holy Spirit are insufficient to produce behavior that pleases Him, but they are also tacit admissions that adherents are not righteous people who are self-governed by inward convictions, but unrighteous people who need external laws. Worse, those lists of rules make liars out of every Amish person, as they pledge to follow them, but don’t. Even worse, those lists of rules divide unregenerate Amish people and communities into factions and, among regenerate Amish communities, divide Christ’s body.

What is even more telling about Amish Ordnungs is that, among many Amish communities that are governed by thousands of rules, there is sexual immorality, including even child abuse and incest, as well as drunkenness and alcoholism, drug abuse, hatred, unforgiveness and broken relationships, dysfunctional families and marriage conflict, depression and mental disorders, and a host of other problems and sins that are clearly condemned in the Bible. Some Amish folks who are obediently driving horse-drawn buggies and wearing straw hats are sexually molesting children! There is an Amish community near me in which, over the past year, three men have gone to prison for molesting children! The reason is because, if you are not born again, you are, as the Bible says, a slave to sin (see John 8:34; Rom. 6:6-20).

It is not just Amish child molesters who are slaves to sin. All unregenerate Amish people are slaves to sin. Amish folks who aren’t born again (just like “English” folks who haven’t been born again) have difficulty keeping God’s basic commandments, much less all the manmade rules of their Ordnung. The solution to the entire mess is the new birth through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ! People who are born again have the desire and power to obey Jesus’ commandments, as Jesus Himself promised:

Come to Me, all who are weary and heavy-laden, and I will give you rest. Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For My yoke is easy and My burden is light (Matt. 11:28-29).

And as the apostle John echoed:

For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments; and His commandments are not burdensome (1 John 5:3).

The reason Jesus’ commandments are not burdensome is because He transforms those who believe in Him by His grace. In their hearts, they love Him, and they want to obey Him. And by the power of the indwelling Holy Spirit, they can obey Him! The problem in unregenerate Amish communities is hearts that have not yet been transformed by the grace of God. That’s it. And it is so tragic, because the entire basis of the original Anabaptist movement of the 16th century was the new birth by grace through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.

How Far Fence Laws Can Go

Amish folks aren’t the first people who’ve promoted the idea of fence laws. Many of the Jews in Jesus’ day followed thousands of fence laws that were designed to keep them far from disobeying God’s laws. For example, the Mosaic law declared, “You shall not boil a young goat in its mother’s milk” (Ex. 34:26). This law related to an occult fertility rite practiced by the Canaanites—whom the Israelites dispossessed after their deliverance from Egypt. God didn’t want His people practicing pagan superstitions. The Jews, however, ignored the spirit of that particular law and created fence laws to prevent anyone from getting anywhere close to breaking the letter of it.

For example, a person might, at the same meal, drink goat’s milk and eat goat meat. There was some chance—albeit a slim one—that the milk might be from the mother of the goat that was being eaten. Once mixed in the stomach and heated there, a “boiling” of sorts would occur, and one would be guilty of boiling a goat in its mother’s milk! So, a fence law was established to prevent such a “transgression” from ever occurring. That law forbade the eating of any meat and dairy product together, because you never know if some goat’s meat may have mixed with some beef at the slaughter house, or if some goat’s milk may have been mixed with some cow’s milk at the dairy!

If one ate any meat product, he must wait a specified time for it to be fully digested before consuming any dairy product, and vice versa, lest they mix in one’s stomach. And all meat and dairy products must be kept in separate kitchens, lest there be any accidental mixing of the two. Moreover, completely separate dishes must be kept for eating meat and dairy products, because there was a chance that a small particle of cheese might remain on your plate from a previous meal. If that cheese was made from goat’s milk, and if you happen to eat some goat’s meat on that same plate, that goat’s meat might be from a goat whose mother’s milk was used to make the cheese, and thus when combined in your stomach, you’d be guilty of boiling a young goat in its mother’s milk! (It was because of these fence laws that I found it impossible to order a cheese pizza with pepperoni the last time I visited Israel.)

There were at least 1,500 fence laws surrounding the single commandment that forbade working on the Sabbath. Walking across a field on the Sabbath was forbidden, because you might inadvertently cause a grain of wheat to separate from its stalk, thus making you guilty of reaping on the Sabbath. Your foot might also step on a grain that had fallen on the ground, and by stepping on it, you might cause the wheat to be separated from the chaff, making you guilty of threshing on the Sabbath. It was also possible that your garment could create a breeze that would cause the chaff to blow away, making you guilty of winnowing on the Sabbath. And if a bird saw that grain and swooped down to eat it, you would be guilty of storing grain on the Sabbath!

Eventually, all those fence laws came to be considered as binding as the Mosaic Law, and they were compiled into what is called the Mishna. If there was disagreement between the two, the Mishna, by its own testimony, actually superseded the Mosaic Law. This Jesus condemned, citing an example of how the scribes and Pharisees invalidated the fifth commandment, and by their tradition released people from responsibility of caring for their elderly parents. Their doctrines were “precepts of men,” which proved that their hearts were far from God. Tragically, the same phenomenon can be observed in Amish culture today, where traditions take precedence over God’s Word. How it must grieve God. And the fence laws of the Jews couldn’t save or transform anyone, just like Amish Ordnungs.

Imagine This…

If you are Amish, I want to ask you to imagine something. Imagine waking up one morning to a world without any Ordnung. I know that sounds unimaginable if you are Amish. But just try to imagine it for a moment. Imagine that all the bishops and ministers in your community met and agreed to abolish the Ordnung, so from then on, no one would be expected to obey any manmade rules, but only Christ’s commandments. No one would have to worry any longer about being watched, discovered, judged, put on trial, shunned or excommunicated for anything that at one time was part of the Ordnung. What would happen in your community? Would anyone’s behavior change?

I’m sure you agree that most Amish people’s behavior, if not all Amish people’s behavior, would change, at least to some degree. Many would start doing things that were formerly forbidden and stop doing things that were formerly expected. And their change of behavior would reveal their former motive for their former behavior. They did what they did, not because they wanted to, but because they were expected to. They would have preferred otherwise, but they did what they did out of fear of losing the approval of the group. Any Amish person who is honest will admit that is the reason they keep their community’s Ordnung to the degree that they do. And any Amish person who is honest will also admit that is also the reason they all regularly or occasionally secretly transgress their community’s Ordnung—as long as they think they likely won’t be caught.

Now take this imagination one step further. Just as all Amish people obey their community’s Ordnung out of fear of losing the approval of the group, there is also a possibility that many Amish people obey Christ’s commandments for the very same reason. That is, they aren’t obeying Christ’s commandments because they love Him or because they are born again, but because they want the approval of other Amish people. Their “holiness” is just a show. If they weren’t under peer pressure to act Amish, they would be disobeying both their Ordnung and Christ’s commandments.

Yet I can assure you, if your Amish community abolished the Ordnung as well as any expectation that anyone keep Christ’s commandments, those who are born again within the community might, with everyone else, no longer keep any of the former Ordnung’s rules, but they would not cease obeying Christ’s commandments. The reason is because they want to keep Christ’s commandments, because they are born again and indwelt by the Holy Spirit.

Here’s another test: Imagine how you would act if you found yourself in a state of the U.S. where there were no other Amish people. Imagine being hundreds of miles from any Amish community, so there was no chance of anyone reporting you to your bishop for transgressions against the Ordnung. How would you act? If you would behave differently far away from other Amish people, that reveals your motive for how you behave now when you are around other Amish people. You are motivated by fear of losing the approval of your group. Far from other Amish eyes, there would be no chance of being rejected, so all your motivation to obey the Ordnung would be gone. Many Amish readers won’t need any imagination for what I’ve just described, because they’ve already done what I’ve described on their vacations. One English driver told me that most Amish people whom she drives for any extended trip change their clothes to make themselves indistinguishable from non-Amish people. On the beach, Amish women are wearing bikinis (and no head coverings)!

If you would disobey any of Christ’s commandments when far away from other Amish people, that is sure proof you have not been born again. The outstanding characteristic of a born-again person is that he or she wants to obey Jesus’ commandments.

All of this is to say, not only can the Ordnung not save you, it also can’t transform you or make you obey God. All it does is constantly condemn you—all your life. All those fences and road signs just tempt you to do the opposite of what you want to do because you are a slave to sin. The only solution to your slavery to sin is faith in Jesus, who longs to forgive you, deliver you, transform you, empower you, guide you, and one day welcome you into His eternal kingdom.

What are you waiting for? Stop hoping your works will save you! Repent of your sins and believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, making Him your Lord! He will forgive you and put His Holy Spirit in you. You will be a “born-again” “new creation in Christ,” with an inward love, joy, and peace that you never dreamed of!

To subscribe to David Servant's periodic e-teachings, click here.


The Amish Papers » A Tale of Two Ordnungs

“You Have Heard…But I Say”—Jesus’ Six Counterpoints: Moral Upgrade or Moral Reclamation?

by David Servant

No doubt you’ve heard of Mennonites. Perhaps also of the Amish. Maybe even the Brethren and Hutterites. All fall under the heading of “Anabaptists,” who trace their roots to 16th century Germany and Switzerland. Their predecessors were part of what is known as the Radical Reformation, a response to perceived corruption in both Roman Catholicism and the expanding Magisterial (state-wedded) Protestant movement led by Martin Luther, John Calvin, and others.

The early Anabaptists, like the early Christians, were pejoratively named by their persecutors, but in their case because of their distinct doctrine of re-baptizing adults who had already been baptized as babies. The word anabaptist means “one who baptizes again.” Anabaptists noticed that infant baptism, practiced by both Roman Catholics and the Protestants of their day, wasn’t found in the New Testament, and that the apostles seemed to baptize only those who were old enough to understand the gospel, repent of their sins and follow Christ.

Bible Verses About The Holy Spirit

The Holy Spirit is the third Person of the Holy Trinity, and the promised Helper mentioned by Jesus that would come after He ascended to heaven. If you are hoping to learn more about the Holy Spirit, Scripture is filled with verses that reveal more about His character and His work in our lives.

We’ve collected several verses below about the Holy Spirit. We’ve also included every mention of the word “Holy Spirit” in the NASB translation. We hope that these verses are a help to you as you study God’s Word.