Skip to content

Add your phone number?

Optional. Nothing is sent unless you choose it.
The Historic Faith
Sign in

Jumpstarter 4 of 10

Ideas to help restart your discussion
The Kingdom that Turned the World Upside Down  /  Chapter 9, But What If  /  Discussion Questions
All Questions
Question 4
The Stephen Roy Carr story portrays a violent fugitive living five days with a non-resistant Mennonite family without harming them; what do you think Bercot wants that story to prove, and what alternative explanations might someone raise—and how would you evaluate them?
Another way to ask: A violent fugitive lived with a non-resistant Mennonite family for five days and did not hurt them. What does Bercot want this story to prove, what other reasons could explain it, and how would you decide what to believe?

Direct Answer Bercot seems to use the Carr story to argue that non-resistance and hospitality, paired with trust in God, can result in real protection—even from dangerous criminals. He presents it as evidence that “entrusting” one’s family to Christ is not foolish.

Support from Transcript:

  • Carr is described as “ready to kill anyone,” and had already shot two campers, killing one.
  • The Weavers, “conservative Mennonites,” had “heard nothing” about the murder, yet they “gladly provided” food and shelter.
  • Carr stayed “five days,” but “neither harmed them nor stole from them,” despite being a desperate fugitive.
  • Bercot frames the broader point right before/after: harm to kingdom families is “very rare” outside persecution.
  • He uses this story alongside others (motel singing; wheelbarrow faith) to show trust in God can be practically effective.
Discussion Follow-ups Alternative explanations could include Carr’s temporary self-interest (hiding), the family’s calmness affecting him, or mere coincidence. How you evaluate it may depend on whether you see it as a providential pattern or an illustrative anecdote rather than a guaranteed outcome.

Jumpstarter 4 of 10
Back Questions Next