Hi everyone, I have some questions... I actually considered myself an Anabaptist for a while, but there are some things I don't know.
I know the answers to my question will depend on which particular group you're answering for, so please just say whichever that is.
I. Does your group believe the bible is inerrant?
Some Anabaptists do. Most Quakers do not. Biblical inerrancy is not a criterion for being considered Anabaptist or Quaker.
I'm not quite sure what you mean by "your group." The membership of this CF forum is very diverse across the spectrum of Anabaptist, Quaker, Brethren and Free Church Protestants. If you want to know what our individual faith traditions hold, or what we individually hold, we can each answer for ourselves.
I come from a Mennonite Brethren background, and am now a member of a Friends church. I am not an inerrantist, but I do love, revere and study the Bible.
II. Does it believe in sola scriptura?
Again, you will find some variation on this. In the sense of holding Tradition as equal with scripture, I think you will not find Anabaptists, Quakers or other Free Church Protestants who hold that view. However, the activity of the Holy Spirit within the believer, and especially within the local congregation is given great importance. In some Anabaptist and Quaker groups, you will find the "inner light" or the counsel of brothers and sisters in light of scripture to be held in very high regard. Anabaptists tend to be Bible people who interpret scripture together in community. Some Quakers hold the "inner light" of the Holy Spirit on par with or even possibly above the Bible.
Personally, a Bible-in-community hermeneutic would be the view you will see me coming from.
III. What is the "meaning" of Christs life and death?
You mean you think there is only one?
Number 3 is something I am most curious about... A lot of denominations make quite a bit out of Christ's death, they make it sound like God needed or craved blood, and overall, really, the way most people talk about it sounds beastly.
I personally find the Anselmian view of satisfaction/penal substitutionary atonement not very attractive, either. But it is just a theory. It is one way of looking at the Atonement, which made sense to people living within the framework of Medieval feudalism. There are older views and newer views.
Again, although some Anabaptists would say the Anselmian view is the only correct one, you will find a much wider range than that. For Mennonites, being a disciple of Christ is central, and the theories are of secondary or tertiary importance.