Discussion Questions

Philip Schaff calls Tertullian “the father of Latin theology and Latin church language,” and compares the force of his personality to Paul and Luther; what does this suggest about how God uses sharp, even abrasive personalities to serve the church, and what dangers would Tertullian’s “fiery” style create if it became a model for Christian speech today? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What does Tertullian’s strong, even harsh personality show about how God can use difficult people to help the church? What problems would happen if his “fiery” way of talking became the normal model for Christians today?

The speaker says Tertullian’s writings mean “we don’t have to be guessing about” who he was, because his books “speak…for who he is”; what does that imply about how early Christians expected public teaching and writing to reveal a person’s real commitments, and how does that challenge modern ways of curating a “brand” while keeping parts of life private? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If Tertullian’s books clearly show who he really was, what does that say about how early Christians expected public teaching to match a person’s real life? How does that challenge today’s habit of building a public “image” while keeping parts of life hidden?

Tertullian insisted Christianity “can’t be locked in the Greek language,” and he helped invent Latin Christian vocabulary (including coining “Trinity”); what does this show about God’s intention for the gospel to cross cultures, and how should that shape the way churches today translate or explain theology without dumbing it down? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If Christianity can’t stay only in Greek and Tertullian helped create Latin Christian words (like “Trinity”), what does that say about the gospel crossing cultures? How should churches today translate and explain theology clearly without watering it down?

The teacher contrasts Origen’s speculative “what if” approach with Tertullian’s “meat and potatoes” mindset; where do modern Christians drift into speculation or loopholes as a way to avoid obedience, and what would it look like to adopt Tertullian’s “Jesus said do it” posture in a specific disputed area? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Where do Christians today use “what if” questions or loopholes to avoid obeying Jesus? In one debated issue, what would it look like to simply say, “Jesus said to do it,” and follow through?

Tertullian’s Apology answers pagan rumors and argues Christianity “makes the most sense beyond everything,” including the line “The more you mow us down, the more we grow”; how does that picture of God’s power operating through suffering confront modern assumptions that God’s favor is proved by safety, influence, or cultural acceptance? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If the church grew even when it was persecuted (“the more you mow us down, the more we grow”), what does that teach about God working through suffering? How does that challenge the idea that God’s favor means safety, power, or being liked by the culture?

When discussing separation from the world, the speaker says Tertullian wasn’t inventing new standards so much as pressing hard where Christians were already compromising; what present-day compromises would Tertullian likely treat as obvious “toe-stepping” issues (luxury, entertainment, modesty, political involvement), and why do we prefer “gray areas” instead of clarity? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What compromises in the church today would Tertullian probably call out as clearly wrong (like luxury, entertainment, modesty, or politics)? Why do we often prefer “gray areas” instead of clear lines?

Tertullian raises uncomfortable career questions like, “How are you gonna be a Christian and be this?” (e.g., a teacher required to participate in pagan practices); what jobs or roles today place believers in routine cooperation with values opposed to Christ, and how should a church help someone discern whether they must refuse, quietly endure, or leave? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What jobs today regularly pressure Christians to support values that go against Jesus? How should the church help someone decide whether to refuse, endure quietly, or leave that role?

In opposing Marcion’s claim that the Old Testament God differs from the New Testament God, the speaker says the early church acknowledged real differences (war, oaths, divorce) without solving it by creating “two gods”; how does this reveal God’s patience and progressive revelation, and how does it confront evangelical instincts either to flatten the differences or to discard the Old Testament as irrelevant? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If the Old Testament and New Testament show real differences (like war, oaths, and divorce) but not “two gods,” what does that teach about God being patient and revealing truth over time? How does that challenge Christians who either try to ignore the differences or treat the Old Testament as unimportant?

The speaker says Tertullian’s anti-modalist work is valuable because it clarifies what the church believes about Father and Son, and he even says reading Tertullian made the Trinity “make sense” after a Jehovah’s Witness background; what does that suggest about the relationship between doctrine and worship—how might a clearer Trinity reshape prayer, obedience, and trust in God’s character? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If clearer teaching about the Father and the Son helped the Trinity “make sense,” what does that show about how doctrine affects worship? How might understanding the Trinity better change your praying, obeying, and trusting God?

Tertullian eventually embraced Montanism and began calling mainstream Christians “the natural/soulish man” while claiming “we’re the spiritual ones”; what warning does this give about rigor and strictness becoming spiritual pride, and how can a community pursue serious obedience without creating a two-tier Christianity of “ordinary” versus “spiritual”? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What warning do we learn from Tertullian becoming strict and then acting like he was more “spiritual” than other Christians? How can a church pursue serious obedience without making two levels of Christians—“ordinary” and “spiritual”?