Jumpstarter 9 of 10

Ideas to help restart your discussion

Question 9

The chapter contrasts obedience to Christ with military/state codes (Tsarist Russia’s articles; U.S. military justice) that demand obedience unless an order violates the state’s standards rather than Jesus’ commands; what would it look like to actually live as if “our absolute obedience belongs to him” when your job, church culture, or family expectations reward compliance?

Another way to ask: What would it look like to live like Jesus deserves your highest obedience when your job, church, or family rewards you for simply going along?

Direct Answer It would mean treating Jesus as your direct, personal King and refusing compliance whenever an authority’s demand contradicts what Christ has already taught, even if that costs you approval or security. Bercot’s point is that other standards—state, institutional, or cultural—are irrelevant where Jesus has spoken.

Support from Transcript:

Bercot critiques Tsarist Russia’s soldier code: obey orders “without considering whether it is good or not,” and refusal only if it breaks “allegiance to the Tsar,” not Christ.
He says U.S. military justice similarly requires obedience unless contrary to the Constitution or laws—again, not Jesus’ commands.
His verdict: “But is such a code of conduct acceptable before Christ as to his citizens? Not in the least.”
He states the positive standard: “He made it clear that our absolute obedience belongs to him. He is our personal king.”
He adds the practical test: “It doesn’t matter what other authorities…may say…What they say is irrelevant, so long as our king has already spoken.”

Discussion Follow-ups Where do you most fear the consequences of disobedience to human authority? What habits could help you discern when compliance is fine and when it becomes disloyalty to Christ?

Jumpstarter 9 of 10

Add your phone number?

Thank you!

Jumpstarter 9 of 10