Skip to content

Add your phone number?

Optional. Nothing is sent unless you choose it.

The Historic Faith
Sign in
Question 9
Bercot says defenders of Luther/Calvin are forced to claim the Reformers were “restoring the faith,” which implies the apostles’ immediate successors “quickly lost it all,” even losing crucial doctrines and Greek; what view of Christ’s promise (“Lo, I am with you always…”) and of the Holy Spirit’s guardianship of the church is at stake in that restoration narrative?
Another way to ask: If the Reformers were “restoring the faith,” does that mean the church quickly lost key truths right after the apostles? What does that imply about Jesus’s promise to stay with his church and the Holy Spirit’s role in protecting it?

Direct Answer Bercot argues the “restoration” narrative implies Christ failed to keep His promise to be with the apostles and that the church immediately collapsed into error, which he calls a “remarkable” and “absurd” claim. His alternative assumes Christ’s presence meant real continuity: “Kingdom Christians have been around from the beginning” and never disappeared.

Support from Transcript:

  • He says defenders claim Reformers were “restoring the faith,” meaning apostolic successors “quickly lost it all…crucial theological doctrines…[and] their knowledge of Greek.”
  • He calls this “a remarkable claim” and reframes it as the apostles doing “such a poor job that true Christianity didn’t last even one generation.”
  • He compares timelines: it’s “amazing” that Reformers’ gospels lasted 500 years if apostles couldn’t preserve the faith for one generation.
  • He quotes Jesus’ promise: “Lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age” (Matt. 28:20).
  • He says embracing Jesus’ “Kingdom gospel” removes the need for “fictitious scenarios about a disappearing church.”
  • He insists continuity: Kingdom Christians “have never disappeared,” though often “persecuted or marginalized.”
Discussion Follow-ups What do you assume Christ’s promise guarantees: perfect institutions, faithful minorities, or something else? How does that affect your trust in church history?