Discussion Questions

David Bercot claims that “when it comes to knowledge about God, we have only one ultimate source, and that’s the Bible”; how does that statement reshape the authority you give to sermons, commentaries, study Bibles, and popular teachers in your own discipleship? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If the Bible is the only final source for knowing God, how should that change how much you trust sermons, commentaries, study Bibles, and popular teachers in your own faith?

He says the Holy Spirit “is never going to guide us to a different understanding of Scripture than he gave to the first century Christians”; what does that reveal about God’s intentions for unity and continuity in the faith, and what modern assumptions does it challenge about “new insights” or “fresh revelation”? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If the Holy Spirit won’t lead us to a different meaning of Scripture than the first Christians had, what does that say about God wanting the faith to stay united and steady? What “new insight” ideas today does that challenge?

Bercot argues that if we are not “truth-oriented,” we will “quench the Spirit” because “the only thing he can guide us towards is truth”; what would it look like in real life for a Christian to brush aside the Spirit’s help because they don’t actually love truth, and how would you recognize that in yourself? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What would it look like for a Christian to ignore the Holy Spirit’s guidance because they don’t really love truth? How could you spot that problem in yourself?

Using Jude 1:3, he insists “the faith was once for all delivered” and “didn’t develop over time”; how do you decide whether a belief or practice in your church is part of that once-for-all faith or a later development that might need to be questioned? JumpstartAnother way to ask: How do you tell if something your church teaches is part of the faith “once for all delivered” (Jude 1:3) or a later idea that should be questioned?

He appeals to 1 John 2:14 to argue that Christians at the end of the first century “correctly understood the Christian faith”; what assumptions about early Christianity (its clarity, stability, and spiritual strength) are built into that claim, and how does it confront the way many modern Christians talk about “recovering” truth? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If first-century Christians understood the faith correctly (1 John 2:14), what does that assume about how clear and strong early Christianity was? How does that push back on the way people today talk about “recovering” truth?

The “blank slate” requirement implies that prior Christian instruction—even good instruction—can be “the biggest single obstacle to finding God’s complete truth”; what parts of your own theological “slate” feel most protected from examination, and what fears come up when you imagine being wrong about them? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Which beliefs you already hold feel hardest to question, even if you might be wrong? What fears come up when you think about rechecking them?

Bercot’s Jehovah’s Witness story highlights a mindset where “you’re not allowed to question it” and where members assume they “have a complete understanding of the Bible”; where do you see similar patterns of untouchable authority or taboo questions in modern evangelical culture (even if unspoken), and what does that do to honest truth-seeking? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Where do you see “don’t question this” attitudes or taboo questions in modern evangelical culture? How does that affect honest searching for truth?

He reads the Apostles’ Creed and concludes that “most of the doctrines that Christians argue about today were considered…non-essentials,” adding, “our problem isn’t that we don’t believe enough, it’s that we’re dogmatic about too many things”; which doctrines your church treats as “must-believe” would likely not have been treated that way by early Christians, and what would be gained—or lost—if you loosened your grip on them? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What beliefs does your church treat as “you must believe this” that early Christians may have seen as non-essential? What might you gain or lose by holding those beliefs more loosely?

Bercot says what’s missing today is “the lifestyle teachings of the New Testament” because many have been taught they can “safely ignore many of the New Testament commandments,” often by calling them hyperbole or culture-bound; which specific commands of Jesus or the apostles do you most often hear explained away, and what motives (comfort, reputation, money, freedom, safety) might be driving that? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Which commands of Jesus or the apostles do you most often hear people explain away as “just exaggeration” or “only for that culture”? What personal reasons (comfort, reputation, money, freedom, safety) might be behind that?

When he harmonizes Paul and James by distinguishing initial salvation (grace through faith apart from works) from ongoing/future salvation (where obedience matters), what tensions does that create with common evangelical ideas about assurance and “once saved always saved,” and how would adopting his framework change the way you repent, obey, and evaluate your spiritual condition week to week? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If Paul and James fit together by saying we are first saved by grace through faith, but future salvation includes obedience, how does that challenge “once saved always saved” and easy assurance? How would that change how you repent, obey, and check your spiritual life each week?