Skip to content

Add your phone number?

Optional. Nothing is sent unless you choose it.

The Historic Faith
Sign in

Jumpstarter 2 of 10

Ideas to help restart your discussion
Question 2
When Bercot says we “shouldn’t try to fudge… the record of history to fit our point of view,” where do you see modern Christians (including your own circles) tempted to do that on spiritual-gifts questions—and what are the heart-level reasons we might prefer “our” conclusion over what the record actually shows?
Another way to ask: Where do you see Christians today tempted to twist or ignore church history to support their view on spiritual gifts? Why might we want our side to be right more than we want the truth?

Direct Answer Bercot suggests Christians are tempted to cherry-pick history—quoting a few miracle statements to prove “charismatic” emphases, or explaining them away to protect “cessationist” assumptions—because we want our camp to look right and safe. At the heart level, the transcript implies pride, fear of deception, and loyalty to a movement can drive us more than plain honesty.

Support from Transcript:

  • He admits his own starting bias: “I was raised to believe… gifts… ended with the apostles,” then he found early evidence that challenged it.
  • He cautions against using history as a weapon: whether gifts continued “has little bearing” on evaluating claims today.
  • He critiques selective quoting: the miracle quotes “would fill up about one page” out of “10 volumes,” making it easy to “portray the early Christians as being very focused” when they weren’t.
  • He notes some quotations used in magazines are taken from contexts that seem to refer to apostolic times, not the writer’s day—implying misuse of evidence.
  • He frames the issue as “volatile,” with “very strong views,” which naturally tempts people to “play with the record… to fit our point of view.”
Discussion Follow-ups What fears (being deceived, losing identity, losing control) most often push Christians to bend evidence rather than face it?