Discussion Questions

David Bercot argues that Paul had to “largely discard most of his rabbinical training” in order to serve Christ; what do you think Paul actually set aside, and what might it look like for an educated or theologically trained Christian today to “come into the kingdom as a little child” without despising learning? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Bercot says Paul had to set aside much of his rabbinic training to serve Christ. What do you think Paul actually gave up, and how can a well-educated Christian be childlike in faith without looking down on learning?

In 1 Corinthians 2:1–5, Paul links “excellence of speech” and “persuasive words of human wisdom” with a faith that can end up resting “in the wisdom of men”; where do you see modern Christian preaching or apologetics subtly training people to trust rhetoric, credentials, or systems more than “demonstration of the Spirit and of power”? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Paul warns that impressive speech and “human wisdom” can make faith rest on people instead of God. Where do you see preaching or apologetics today training people to trust style, degrees, or systems more than the Spirit’s power?

The chapter highlights how Romans “laughed” at the New Testament’s “humble diction” and called it unsuitable for serious literature; what does that reaction suggest about God’s priorities in revelation, and how does it confront our instincts about what a “credible” message should sound like? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Romans mocked the New Testament’s simple writing style. What does that say about what God values when He speaks, and how does it challenge our idea of what a “credible” message should sound like?

Justin Martyr tells the Romans to read the prophecies “none expecting to find in them polished diction”; what expectations do you personally bring to “serious” Christian teaching (style, sophistication, academic tone), and how might those expectations keep you from hearing God? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Justin Martyr said not to expect fancy writing in the prophecies. What kind of style do you expect from “serious” Christian teaching, and how might those expectations make it harder for you to hear God?

Tacyan said he was led to faith by “the unpretentious nature of the language”; why would “unpretentious” Scripture be persuasive rather than a stumbling block, and what does that imply about God’s intention to reach “the multitude” instead of primarily “literary men”? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Tacyan said the plain language of Scripture helped lead him to faith. Why might plain Scripture be convincing instead of a problem, and what does that show about who God wants to reach?

Origen compares Greek philosophers to physicians who serve the “better classes” while the apostles adapt language “to the capacities of the common people”; in what ways can modern Christian institutions (seminaries, publishing, conferences, online platforms) drift into serving a religious “better class,” and what would it take to reverse that? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Origen said philosophers served the “better classes,” but the apostles spoke in ways common people could understand. How can Christian schools, books, conferences, or online leaders end up serving a religious “elite,” and what would it take to change that?

Arnobius claims the “unlearned and ignorant” quality of the writers is “a stronger reason to believe” because “truth never seeks deceitful polish”; how do you react to the idea that “flashy language” can function as a kind of deceit, and where are you personally tempted to use polish to gain authority? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Arnobius said truth doesn’t need flashy, polished words, and that polish can hide deceit. Do you agree that “flashy language” can mislead, and where are you tempted to sound impressive to gain authority?

Bercot notes that early Christians acknowledged “grammatical errors” (breaking conventional literary Greek rules) while still defending Scripture; how does this challenge common modern assumptions about inspiration, inerrancy, and what “perfection” in Scripture must look like? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Early Christians admitted Scripture sometimes breaks normal Greek grammar rules but still defended it. How does that challenge modern ideas about inspiration, inerrancy, and what a “perfect” Bible should look like?

The chapter says the apostles “ignored the Hebrew scrolls of the scribes and adopted the Greek Septuagint,” translated quickly into other languages, and “set up no schools” to train people in originals; what does this suggest about early Christian priorities for making Scripture accessible, and how might our emphasis on “original languages” function today as either a gift or a gatekeeping tool? JumpstartAnother way to ask: The apostles used the Greek Septuagint, translated Scripture quickly, and didn’t set up schools to teach the original languages. What does that show about their goal to make Scripture easy to access, and when can studying original languages today help—or become gatekeeping?

Bercot concludes that Christianity originally centered on “Christ and His kingdom,” not “fine points of theology,” focusing on an “obedient love-faith relationship” and “bearing fruit”; if that’s true, what specific theological habits (argument addiction, system-building, identity-by-positions) might be crowding out obedience and fruit in your life or church, and what concrete changes would demonstrate a return to Jesus’ emphasis? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Bercot says early Christianity focused more on Jesus, obedience, and bearing fruit than on debating theology details. What habits like arguing, building systems, or making identity about “positions” might be crowding out obedience in you or your church, and what changes would show a return to Jesus’ focus?