Jumpstarter 7 of 10

Ideas to help restart your discussion

Question 7

Bercot claims Western Christianity since “around the year 400” has been deeply shaped by Augustine, and he names Luther’s *Bondage of the Will* and “total depravity” as a reason Calvinists “won’t like” this lesson; what is most personally threatening about Bercot’s insistence that even after the fall humans still have real (though diminished) freedom to obey, not just the capacity to sin?

Another way to ask: Why does Bercot’s claim—that even after the fall we still have some real ability to obey God, not just to sin—feel threatening to some Christians? What about it challenges you personally?

Direct Answer Based on Bercot’s teaching, what feels threatening is that real (though diminished) freedom makes humans genuinely responsible to respond, obey, and endure tests—so we can’t excuse sin or unbelief as unavoidable fate. It also challenges the comfort of thinking everything is determined and that our choices don’t truly matter.

Support from Transcript:

He warns Calvinists: “you’re not going to like their answer,” and later connects that to Augustine’s view of the will.
He summarizes Augustine/Luther: after the fall “humans no longer have free will… We can only do evil… totally depraved from birth.”
He says early Christians “took sharp disagreement” and held that after the fall humans “still had free will… diminished… but… still had the power to do good or evil.”
He adds: “we can choose to obey Him… not… perfectly… but we can choose to obey Him… We are not totally depraved, but we are fallen.”
He contrasts models of God’s work: not “robots… mere pieces of wood,” but “God working together with us… as partners with our free will.”

Discussion Follow-ups Does this view increase hope (you can really respond) or increase burden (you have fewer excuses)? How do you keep responsibility from turning into self-reliance, given Bercot’s repeated emphasis on grace?

Jumpstarter 7 of 10

Add your phone number?

Thank you!

Jumpstarter 7 of 10