Discussion Questions

David Bercot argues that the faithfulness of the second- and third-generation Christians matters because they claimed to preserve “what the apostles themselves taught.” What does this suggest about God’s intention for how His truth would be guarded and transmitted after the apostles died? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Bercot says the faithfulness of second- and third-generation Christians matters because they said they kept what the apostles taught. What does this show about how God wanted His truth to be protected and passed on after the apostles died?

The chapter says the early Christians believed “there was no further special revelation after the apostles.” How does that assumption challenge modern Christian tendencies to accept new teachings, movements, or interpretations that seem disconnected from apostolic Christianity? JumpstartAnother way to ask: The chapter says early Christians believed God gave no new special revelation after the apostles. How does this challenge Christians today who accept new teachings or movements that seem separate from apostolic Christianity?

Bercot considers whether the early Christian writers may have been “liars—apostates who were purposefully misrepresenting Christ and the apostles.” How should their godly lives, sufferings, imprisonments, tortures, and martyrdoms affect the way we evaluate their testimony? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Bercot asks if early Christian writers were liars who twisted the words of Christ and the apostles on purpose. How should their holy lives, suffering, prison, torture, and deaths affect how we judge their witness?

The chapter asks, “How many people would suffer torture and death for something they knew was a lie?” What does the willingness of early Christians to die rather than deny Christ reveal about the seriousness with which they understood faithfulness, truth, and discipleship? JumpstartAnother way to ask: The chapter asks, “How many people would suffer and die for something they knew was a lie?” What does the early Christians’ willingness to die for Christ show about how seriously they took truth, faithfulness, and discipleship?

Bercot argues that deliberate apostasy among the second-century Christians is “highly unlikely.” Why might many modern Christians still be quick to distrust the early church while readily trusting much later theological traditions or contemporary teachers? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Bercot says it is very unlikely that second-century Christians turned away from the faith on purpose. Why do many Christians today quickly distrust the early church but easily trust later traditions or modern teachers?

The chapter raises the possibility that early Christians may have “somehow misunderstood what the apostles had taught,” but then points to figures like Polycarp and Clement of Rome who received the gospel directly from the apostles. What implications does this have for how we weigh early Christian interpretations against our own modern readings of Scripture? JumpstartAnother way to ask: The chapter asks if early Christians may have misunderstood the apostles, but then points to people like Polycarp and Clement of Rome, who learned from the apostles directly. How should this affect the way we compare early Christian views with our own modern reading of the Bible?

Bercot asks, “If they did [misunderstand the apostles], what hope is there for us?” How does this question confront modern confidence in individual interpretation, personal Bible study, and denominational assumptions about being more faithful than earlier generations? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Bercot asks, “If they misunderstood the apostles, what hope is there for us?” How does this question challenge our confidence in personal Bible study, private interpretation, and the belief that our denomination is more faithful than earlier Christians?

The chapter accepts the idea that change may have come about “slowly, almost imperceptibly,” through accumulated drift over time. What kinds of slow drift might be happening in churches today in areas like obedience, grace, assurance, discipleship, wealth, entertainment, or moral compromise? JumpstartAnother way to ask: The chapter says change may have happened slowly, almost without people noticing. What slow changes might be happening in churches today in areas like obedience, grace, assurance, discipleship, money, entertainment, or moral compromise?

Bercot says that gradual drift is “hardly a reason to discredit the Christians of the 2nd century” but rather “a good reason to discredit Christians of the 20th and 21st centuries.” How does this reversal challenge the modern assumption that newer forms of Christianity are usually clearer, freer, or more biblically mature? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Bercot says slow drift is not a good reason to reject second-century Christians, but it may be a reason to question Christians of the 20th and 21st centuries. How does this challenge the idea that newer Christianity is usually clearer, freer, or more biblical?

If the second-century Christians had “less than one century of drift” while modern Christians have had “19 and 20,” what concrete changes might a believer or church need to make in order to take early Christian witness more seriously and examine modern practices more critically? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If second-century Christians had less than 100 years of drift, while modern Christians have had 1,900 to 2,000 years, what real changes might believers or churches need to make to take early Christians more seriously and question modern practices more carefully?