Skip to content

Add your phone number?

Optional. Nothing is sent unless you choose it.

The Historic Faith
Sign in

Jumpstarter 8 of 10

Ideas to help restart your discussion
Question 8
Bercot argues that early Christian writings are not a “second canon,” but they can reveal the historic “course or performance” of the New Testament church. How can Christians honor Scripture as uniquely authoritative while still allowing the earliest Christian witness to correct modern blind spots?
Another way to ask: Bercot says early Christian writings are not Scripture, but they can show how the early church lived out the New Testament. How can we treat Scripture as the highest authority while still letting early Christians correct our blind spots?

Direct Answer

Christians can honor Scripture’s unique authority by not treating early Christian writings as a second canon, while still using them as historical witnesses to how the first generations understood and practiced the apostolic faith. In the transcript, their value is especially in showing the church’s course, ordinances, applications of commands, and essential doctrines.

Support from Transcript

- Bercot says the writings are “not some kind of second canon” that must be understood like Scripture. - He says it is “not essential that we clarify every ambiguity in them.” - Their main purpose is to determine the “historic course or performance of the New Testament Church.” - They are also a primary source for knowledge about “oral apostolic tradition.” - They reveal “the course or performance of the first few generations of Christians” in key doctrinal areas. - They also show what the primitive Church considered “the essential doctrines of Christianity.”

Discussion Follow-ups

The transcript supports using early Christian writings as corrective historical testimony, not as an authority equal to Scripture.