Discussion Questions

David Bercot says the church’s 40-year peace (AD 260–300) “seemed like a blessing,” yet it helped the church “lose its first love”; what does that claim suggest about what God may be doing (or protecting us from) through persecution, and how does it challenge the way modern Christians typically pray for comfort, safety, and cultural acceptance? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If a long time of peace made the church “lose its first love,” what might God be doing through persecution to protect the church? How does that change the way we pray for comfort, safety, and being accepted by society?

The chapter describes how “theology, beyond the basics,” shifted from secondary to central, and “theological battles raged across the empire”; what do you think the early Christians originally meant by keeping theology “beyond the basics” secondary, and how might that expose something unhealthy in how Christians today prioritize being right over being faithful? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What do you think early Christians meant by keeping “theology beyond the basics” from becoming the main focus? How might this challenge Christians today who care more about being right than being faithful?

Bercot links the rise of bishops “jockeying among themselves for power” to Jesus’ teaching that greatness must look like servanthood rather than “lording it over”; what kinds of church leadership behaviors today most resemble “the rulers of the Gentiles,” and what would it cost a church—practically—for leaders to embrace Jesus’ model without exception? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What church leader behaviors today look like “lording it over” people instead of serving them? What would a church have to give up or change if leaders followed Jesus’ servant model all the time?

The chapter notes that “for the first time, Christians began assuming governmental positions,” and it frames this as part of losing separation from the world; what assumptions about holiness, witness, and mission are being challenged by the idea that taking government power is spiritually dangerous? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Why might gaining government power be spiritually dangerous for Christians? What does that idea challenge about how we think about holiness, witness, and mission?

During Diocletian’s persecution (303–311), Bercot says “many Christians compromised,” yet “the church as a whole stood firm” and remained “ready to die for their king”; what do those statements reveal about God’s purpose for the church’s loyalty, and what forms of “compromise” do you think are most common now when dying for Christ is not the cost? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What does it show about God’s goal for the church when many Christians failed, but the church still stayed loyal to Christ? When we don’t face death for our faith, what kinds of compromise are most common today?

Bercot portrays Satan’s strategy shifting from “brute force” to “guile,” essentially joining the church in order to corrupt it; what signs would you look for to discern when “help” from the world is actually temptation, and what examples today feel most like that kind of guile? JumpstartAnother way to ask: How can you tell when “help” from the world is really a trap that pulls the church off track? What are some examples today that feel like that kind of sneaky temptation?

The Edict of Milan offered “freedom to follow the religion which they choose” so that “whatever heavenly divinity exists may be favorably inclined” to the empire; how does that stated motive reshape the way you interpret political claims of “religious liberty,” and where do you see Christians today tempted to accept peace on the world’s terms? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If the empire supported “religious liberty” mainly to get divine favor and keep peace, how should that change how you hear political talk about religious freedom today? Where are Christians tempted to accept peace only on the world’s terms?

Constantine rebuilt prayer houses at public expense, enlarged them by statute, and made them more magnificent to attract unbelievers; what does this reveal about Constantine’s confidence in human methods versus God’s, and how does it confront modern church strategies that rely on attraction, excellence, beauty, and scale to produce spiritual fruit? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What do Constantine’s big, beautiful church buildings suggest about trusting human methods instead of God’s ways? How does that challenge churches today that rely on being impressive, excellent, or large to produce spiritual growth?

Constantine paid clergy salaries, granted tax exemptions, and gave the Lateran Palace to the bishop of Rome—“no strings attached… or so it seems”; how do these benefits change what church leaders might fear losing or feel pressured to protect, and what modern “no-strings-attached” arrangements (funding, endorsements, platforms, institutional security) might be shaping Christian obedience? JumpstartAnother way to ask: How could salaries, tax breaks, and free property make church leaders afraid to lose certain benefits or feel pressure to protect them? What “no-strings-attached” support today (money, endorsements, platforms, job security) might be shaping how Christians obey?

In the Donatist controversy, state money and recognition raised the question of which bishop would get the salary, exemptions, and building—leading to appeals up to Constantine and setting a precedent for emperors to convene councils; how does this story challenge modern assumptions that state involvement is neutral or beneficial to the church, and what specific boundaries would need to exist today to keep “the wall between church and state” from crumbling inside our own congregations? JumpstartAnother way to ask: How does the Donatist story show that government support can pull the church into power struggles? What clear limits would churches need today to keep government influence from slowly taking over inside the church?