Discussion Questions

David Bercot argues that modern evangelicals often assume they match both early Christians and Luther; after hearing his summary of Luther’s view (“total depravity” leading to “arbitrary” predestination), what parts of Luther’s picture of God feel hardest to reconcile with God’s mercy and justice, and why? JumpstartAnother way to ask: After hearing Luther’s view (total depravity and predestination), what parts of his view of God are hardest to fit with God being merciful and just, and why?

Luther is quoted saying the “highest degree of faith” is believing God is merciful while “sav[ing] so few and damn[ing] so many” and “makes us necessarily damnable”; what kind of worship, love, and assurance would logically grow out of that view, and what kind of spiritual/emotional damage might it produce? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If you believed God saves very few and damns many, what kind of worship, love for God, and confidence would that create? What spiritual or emotional harm could it cause?

Justin Martyr tells the Romans that without free choice, praise/blame and reward/punishment collapse; how does his argument connect God’s judgment to God’s character, and what does it imply about why God gives commands in the first place? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Justin Martyr says without free choice, praise and punishment don’t make sense. How does that connect God’s judgment to what God is like, and why would God give commands at all?

Clement, Archelaus, and Methodius treat denial of free will as morally serious (even “impiety toward God” because it makes Him “author of human evils”); where does that accusation land on modern Christian speech about God’s control over sin, and what wording do we use today that the early Christians might challenge? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Early Christians said denying free will makes God the author of human evil. How does that challenge the way Christians today talk about God controlling sin, and what phrases might they question?

The chapter lists specific “free will” Scriptures (John 3:16; 2 Peter 3:9; Revelation 22:17; Deuteronomy 30:19); how do those passages shape the early Christian assumption about who can come to Christ, and what would they say to the idea that salvation is not genuinely offered to all? JumpstartAnother way to ask: How do those “free will” verses shape the early Christian belief about who can come to Christ? What would they say to the idea that salvation isn’t truly offered to everyone?

Bercot says it was originally pagans who believed in predestination and that Luther explicitly appealed to Virgil and “heathen poets” about “unchangeable law” and “the binding chain of fate”; what do you make of Luther’s comfort with pagan fatalism language, and where might Christians today borrow non-Christian frameworks in a similar way without noticing? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What do you think about Luther using pagan “fate” language to talk about predestination? Where might Christians today borrow non-Christian ideas in a similar way without realizing it?

Bercot observes that many evangelicals claim predestination but “their prayers and actions show they really don’t”; what kinds of prayers and everyday choices would become inconsistent (or pointless) if God had already fixed who will believe, and what does your own prayer life reveal about what you actually believe? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If God already decided who will believe, what prayers and daily choices might feel pointless or inconsistent? What does your own prayer life show about what you really believe?

Origen says the doctrine of “just judgment” is meant to “incite” virtue and avoidance of sin, and he quotes Paul about “stubbornness” treasuring up wrath and God rendering “according to his works”; how does this early Christian linkage between judgment and moral responsibility confront common evangelical instincts about “works,” “legalism,” and the purpose of warnings in Scripture? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Origen links God’s judgment with real moral responsibility and says warnings are meant to push us toward virtue. How does that challenge common fears about “works,” “legalism,” and why the Bible warns us?

Origen’s illustrations for Pharaoh—rain that produces either crops or thorns, and sun that softens wax but hardens mud—suggest God’s same good action can yield opposite results depending on the person; what does that imply about God’s intention in hardening, and what responsibility does it place on how we respond to God’s kindness, miracles, and patience? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Origen says the same good action from God can soften one person and harden another. What does that suggest about why God hardens people, and what responsibility does it put on our response to God’s kindness and patience?

Origen’s reading of Romans 9:16 and the “I planted…God made it grow” analogy insists human effort is real but God’s part is “infinitely greater,” and the chapter ends by distinguishing God’s foreknowledge from causing events; how would adopting that balance change the way you talk about grace and obedience, and what concrete habits (repentance, perseverance, evangelism, resisting sin) would you need to adjust to live consistently with it? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If we held the balance that our effort matters but God’s role is far greater, and that foreknowledge isn’t the same as causing, how would it change how you talk about grace and obedience? What habits would you need to change to live that out (repentance, perseverance, evangelism, resisting sin)?