Jumpstarter 5 of 10

Ideas to help restart your discussion

Question 5

Jesus’ instruction in Matthew 5:41 (“whoever compels you to go one mile, go with him two”) is applied directly to Boston; if Christians had obeyed Jesus, Bercot says, “there would have been no Boston Massacre” and even “there wouldn’t have been British soldiers in Boston”; what chain of cause-and-effect is he claiming, and where do you feel resistance to that conclusion?

Another way to ask: Bercot says if Christians had obeyed Matthew 5:41, there would have been no Boston Massacre and maybe no soldiers in Boston at all. What step-by-step chain of events is he claiming, and what part of it is hardest for you to accept?

Direct Answer Bercot’s cause-and-effect claim is that Jesus-style nonresistant, above-and-beyond cooperation would have prevented the mob conflict; and since troops were stationed to protect against violent mobs, the absence of mob violence would remove the need for troops in Boston.

Support from Transcript:

Bercot compares Boston to Jesus’ context and quotes Jesus: “Whoever compels you to go one mile, go with him too…don’t just obey… but do more than they ask” (Matthew 5:41).
He concludes plainly: “If the Christians in Boston had obeyed Jesus, there would have been no Boston Massacre.”
He extends it: “In fact, there wouldn’t have been British soldiers in Boston in the first place.”
He explains the troops’ purpose: “The reason they were there was to protect the citizens and officials against the violent Boston mobs.”
He states those mobs “were run by Samuel Adams, a churchgoing, professing Christian,” tying Christian disobedience to the presence of troops.

Discussion Follow-ups The transcript asserts a strong causal link; do you resist it because it feels unrealistic, or because it challenges accepted patriotic stories? What would “go the second mile” look like when you believe the authority is unjust?

Jumpstarter 5 of 10

Add your phone number?

Thank you!

Jumpstarter 5 of 10