Discussion Questions

Steven Russell describes the “400 silent years” as a time when Jews “knew that they didn’t have a prophet, but they knew they should”; how does that longing expose what God intends prophecy and revelation to do in His people, and how does it challenge modern assumptions that God’s silence (or felt silence) is normal? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If Jews knew they should have a prophet but didn’t, what does that show about what God wants prophecy and revelation to do in His people? How does that challenge the idea that God’s silence is normal?

In 1 Maccabees, the rededicated temple community stores the defiled altar stones “until the prophet comes who will tell us”; what does that posture of restraint teach about waiting for God’s word before acting, and where do modern churches tend to improvise solutions when God has not spoken? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Why did the temple community store the altar stones “until the prophet comes who will tell us”? Where do churches today rush to act or make up plans when God hasn’t clearly spoken?

The speaker insists the Apocrypha “don’t claim to be God’s word,” yet says they reveal how deeply Jews yearned to hear God again; what does this suggest about the difference between sincere religious yearning and actual divine authority, and how can Christians confuse the two today? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What’s the difference between really wanting to hear from God and actually having God’s authority behind a message? How do Christians today mix up strong feelings of faith with God’s true word?

Russell says some apocryphal books are more like “stories… maybe a parable” (Tobit, Judith) while others record history (Maccabees); how should the church practice discernment when a text may be morally inspiring or identity-forming but historically questionable—and what does that imply for how early Christians would have handled edifying literature? JumpstartAnother way to ask: How should the church judge a book that feels morally helpful but might not be real history? What does that suggest about how early Christians treated other uplifting writings?

The conversation notes it took until Athanasius in AD 367 (and Carthage 393) to list the exact New Testament books we use; how does that history reshape the way we talk about certainty, providence, and authority in canon formation—especially in traditions that speak as if the canon dropped from heaven fully formed? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Since it took centuries to agree on the exact New Testament list, how should that change the way we talk about certainty, God’s guidance, and authority in how the canon formed? How does it challenge the idea that the canon showed up instantly and perfectly formed?

Russell stresses that early churches agreed solidly on “the gospels and Paul’s letters,” with more debate about books like Hebrews and Revelation due to geography and circulation; what does this imply about what the earliest Christians considered “core,” and how might that confront modern Christian habits of building doctrine on disputed or less-central texts? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If early churches were most sure about the Gospels and Paul’s letters, what does that say about what they saw as most central? How might that challenge us when we build big doctrines on books that were debated more?

Jerome hesitated to translate the Apocrypha because “the rabbis… didn’t have” those books, but Damasus told him, “Do them anyway”; what does this episode reveal about the interplay of church authority, Jewish tradition, and practical church usage—and where do you see similar pressures shaping what Christians treat as “Bible-level” today? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What does Jerome translating the Apocrypha anyway—despite Jewish leaders not using them—show about church authority, Jewish tradition, and what churches found useful? Where do you see similar pressures today deciding what people treat like it’s “Bible-level”?

The speaker says the Apocrypha were published in Protestant Bibles until the American Bible Society cut them in the early 1800s to print more cheaply; how does this “economics-and-efficiency” factor unsettle the way modern Protestants talk about the Apocrypha as if the issue were only theological, and what other “practical” forces shape our spiritual instincts? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If the Apocrypha were removed partly to save printing costs, how does that complicate the claim that the issue was only about theology? What other practical things today shape what Christians feel is spiritually right or important?

Russell highlights a Maccabees passage where prayers for the dead arise after discovering fallen soldiers wore idol amulets, calling it “in a limbo” compared with Old and New Testament teaching; how should Christians handle doctrines that appear in intertestamental practice but not clearly in canonical Scripture, and what does that reveal about God’s concern for purity of worship and repentance? JumpstartAnother way to ask: How should Christians respond to beliefs or practices seen between the Testaments (like prayers for the dead) but not clearly taught in Scripture? What might this show about God caring about pure worship and real repentance?

Near the end, Russell says he doesn’t see anything in the Apocrypha that “spiritually helps us that’s not also available” in Scripture, and that some stories “miss the point spiritually,” even while acknowledging Wisdom/Sirach offer “good advice”; what concrete criteria should a serious Christian community use to decide what to read devotionally versus historically, and how might this challenge modern evangelical ideas of “freedom” in what we consume for spiritual formation? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What clear rules should a church use to decide what to read for spiritual growth versus just for history or background? How might those rules challenge the idea that Christians can freely consume anything and still be shaped well?