Jumpstarter 5 of 10

Ideas to help restart your discussion

Question 5

Bercot highlights an “incredible irony”: some conservative Mennonites require black cars and black hats while mocking early Christians who argued (with biblical symbolism) for white; what church standards or cultural expectations do we treat as “obviously normal” even though they have little or no scriptural grounding?

Another way to ask: What church rules or cultural expectations do we treat as “just normal,” even though they have little or no clear support in Scripture? Why do we assume they are obviously right?

Direct Answer Bercot’s example warns that we can treat our own group’s customs as unquestionably “normal,” even with “no scriptural precedent,” while ridiculing earlier Christians whose practices had clearer biblical reasoning.

Support from Transcript:

He calls it “the incredible irony” that the magazine’s church “requires its members to drive black cars” and “wear black hats to church.”
He contrasts this with early writers who at least had “strong scriptural reasons” for white, since white symbolizes righteousness throughout Scripture.
He asks, “What possible reason could anyone use” for black cars/hats, saying “there is no scriptural precedent whatsoever.”
He notes inconsistency: men required to wear “white shirts… and black pants” on Sundays, yet they mock white clothing.
He frames it as “a double standard” and “the fruit of presentism”: what “my church requires today is never absurd,” but second-century practices are labeled “ridiculous.”
He states the broader danger: “A person can never hope to see God’s truth… as long as he is bound up in the trap of presentism.”

Discussion Follow-ups What current expectations in our churches function like “black cars and black hats”—strongly enforced but weakly explained? How might we evaluate them more honestly without mocking people who keep them?

Jumpstarter 5 of 10

Add your phone number?

Thank you!

Jumpstarter 5 of 10