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 simply saying “if everyone would just go by the Bible, we could all be one” has not worked because Christians cannot agree on what the Bible teaches; what does this force us to reconsider about the modern Protestant assumption that individual Bible interpretation is sufficient to preserve unity?
Another way to ask: Bercot says it has not worked to simply say, “If everyone followed the Bible, we would all be united,” because Christians disagree about what the Bible teaches. What does this make us rethink about the idea that personal Bible interpretation is enough to keep Christians united?

Direct Answer

Bercot says this assumption must be reconsidered because “just go by the Bible” has already been tried and has not produced unity among Bible-believing Christians. He argues that individual or denominational interpretation needs help from the historic witness of the next generation after the apostles.

Support from Transcript

- He says not to answer, “Well, if everyone would just go by the Bible, we could all be one.” - He calls that “plan A” and says, “That’s what the reformers tried.” - He adds that “millions of Christians have been trying” the same thing ever since. - “Plan A hasn’t worked because we can’t agree on what the Bible teaches.” - He proposes “plan B, the common-sense approach.” - He says the available “third-best system” is to ask “the next generation of Christians.”

Discussion Follow-ups

The transcript does not deny the Bible’s authority; rather, it questions whether isolated interpretation is enough to unite Christians. Bercot’s concern is interpretive agreement, not replacing Scripture with another canon.