Jumpstarter 2 of 10

Ideas to help restart your discussion

Question 2

Bercot says “so much of what was preached…were Calvin’s thoughts, not those of Jesus”; what would it look like in a church’s preaching for Jesus’ words to actually function as the controlling authority rather than a theological framework imported from elsewhere?

Another way to ask: Bercot says many sermons were more Calvin than Jesus. What would preaching look like if Jesus’ words were the main authority instead of a pre-made theology?

Direct Answer Based on Bercot’s teaching, preaching ruled by Jesus would treat Jesus’ commands as binding in their straightforward sense, instead of explaining them away to protect a prior system. It would sound less like “commentary tradition” and more like submitting to what Christ actually said.

Support from Transcript:

Bercot says influential preachers absorbed Calvin so deeply that what was preached “were Calvin’s thoughts, not those of Jesus.”
He highlights Calvin’s “hesitancy to explain away Jesus’ words when his words didn’t fit into his Christo-Judaic system.”
In the oaths example, Jesus’ “do not swear at all” becomes, in Calvin’s hands, permission to swear when “necessity demands it.”
In nonresistance, literal obedience is dismissed as “eagerly seiz[ing] on syllables” and “nitpicking about words,” implying preaching can train people to distrust Jesus’ wording.
In loving enemies, Calvin removes the “radical implication” by claiming Jesus brings “no new laws,” supporting conclusions like war still being allowable.

Discussion Follow-ups What would change if a sermon’s first move was, “Jesus said X, therefore we must obey,” rather than, “Jesus said X, but he didn’t really mean it that way”?

Jumpstarter 2 of 10

Add your phone number?

Thank you!

Jumpstarter 2 of 10