Discussion Questions

David Bercot compares modern “Bible-believing Christians” ignoring the early Christians to the Pharisees dodging Jesus’ question about John the Baptist’s authority; where do you see that same “we don’t know” posture in your own church background, and what would it cost you personally to take a real position? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Where have you seen your church background say “we don’t know” to avoid taking a stand, like the Pharisees did? What might it cost you personally to take a clear position?

The chapter argues that we hesitate to call the early Christians heretics because of their “unconquerable faith and genuine Christian love,” and because our New Testament canon was assembled by them; how does that combination of facts pressure the way you evaluate doctrine, authority, and “who gets to be trusted”? JumpstartAnother way to ask: How does it affect your view of doctrine and authority that early Christians showed strong faith and love and also helped form the New Testament canon? Who do you think should be trusted, and why?

Bercot claims that “many of our evangelical doctrines on salvation are nearly identical to the teachings of the Gnostics”; which specific evangelical assumptions about salvation (grace, faith, obedience, assurance, freedom) feel most vulnerable to that charge, and what evidence would you require before you’d reconsider them? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Which evangelical beliefs about salvation (grace, faith, obedience, assurance, freedom) seem most open to the claim that they sound like Gnostic ideas? What proof would you need before you would rethink them?

He tells the story of a friend who agreed with early Christian beliefs until he heard something that didn’t match his views and concluded, “They certainly were off base there”; when have you felt that reflex in yourself, and what does it reveal about how you decide who is “off base”—you, your tradition, or the early Christians? JumpstartAnother way to ask: When have you agreed with early Christian ideas until you heard one you didn’t like and thought, “They were wrong there”? What does that show about who you assume is “off base”—you, your tradition, or the early Christians?

The chapter warns that Jesus may judge us “with the same measure” we use when we “condemn without mercy the honest interpretations of others”; what concrete behaviors (online arguments, denominational labeling, social exclusion, pulpit rhetoric) would need to change if you took that warning literally? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If Jesus judges us by the same standard we use on others, what specific habits would you need to change (online arguing, labeling groups, excluding people, harsh preaching)? What would you do differently?

Bercot says the early Christian writings are not inspired, yet they provide a “reference point” because they show what Christians believed at the close of the apostolic age; how should that reference point function in your Bible interpretation without becoming a second “scripture,” and what would that look like in a real disagreement in your church? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If early Christian writings aren’t inspired but still show what believers thought right after the apostles, how should they guide your Bible reading without becoming a second Bible? What would that look like in a real church disagreement?

He challenges the inconsistency of quoting the early church when it supports “our beliefs” but dismissing it when it doesn’t; what doctrines or practices do you think your tradition is most tempted to selectively support that way, and how can a group like yours practice intellectual honesty instead? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Where is your tradition tempted to quote the early church only when it agrees and ignore it when it doesn’t? How can your group be more honest and consistent about that?

Using Justin Martyr’s millennial views, Bercot highlights early Christian unity on essentials alongside diversity on non-essentials, with an “amicable” spirit and little bickering; what issues today function like “millennium debates” (important but not essential), and what would it require for your church to become less dogmatic without becoming less obedient? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What topics today are important but not essential, like debates about the millennium? How could your church hold those views less tightly without caring less about obeying Jesus?

Bercot asks whether Jesus would address today’s church like Smyrna (“you are rich” despite poverty) or Laodicea (“wretched…poor, blind, naked” despite wealth); what indicators would you use to discern God’s evaluation of a church—especially when modern measures (numbers, budgets, experiences, influence) can be misleading? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Would Jesus describe today’s church more like Smyrna or Laodicea? What signs would you use to tell what God thinks of a church when numbers, money, and influence can fool us?

The chapter contrasts early Christianity’s cross-bearing revolution with the post-Constantinian attempt to “improve Christianity through human means,” warning that “the world converted much of the church”; what “human means” (growth strategies, amenities like recreation centers, political power, prosperity messaging) most shape Christianity around you, and what would a practical “divorce from the world” look like in your money, entertainment, ambitions, and church life? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What “human methods” most shape the Christianity you see (growth plans, big programs, politics, prosperity talk)? What would separating from the world look like in your spending, entertainment, goals, and church life?