What do you think?
Rate this book
Will the Theologians Please Sit Down
When Christianity was young, the focus was on Jesus Christ and His kingdom, not theology. To be sure, there are foundational doctrines that Christians have always considered essential to the faith. But somehow the things considered essential have grown from a few sentences to a long list of theological tenets, many of which were unknown to the early Christians.
In the beginning, Christians understood that the essence of Christianity was an obedient love-faith relationship with Jesus Christ. This was not just any relationship, but a relationship that produced genuine kingdom fruit.
But then something Theologians took over the church. Once they took over, the emphasis soon changed from godly fruit to orthodox theology. Christianity became Doctrianity. In this provocative work, Bercot argues that it is time to let Jesus speak through the pages of the Gospels without filtering His teachings through the denials and mental gymnastics of the theologians. It is time for the children of the kingdom to stand up for Jesus and the gospel He preached and for the theologians to sit down.
In the beginning, Christians understood that the essence of Christianity was an obedient love-faith relationship with Jesus Christ. This was not just any relationship, but a relationship that produced genuine kingdom fruit.
But then something Theologians took over the church. Once they took over, the emphasis soon changed from godly fruit to orthodox theology. Christianity became Doctrianity. In this provocative work, Bercot argues that it is time to let Jesus speak through the pages of the Gospels without filtering His teachings through the denials and mental gymnastics of the theologians. It is time for the children of the kingdom to stand up for Jesus and the gospel He preached and for the theologians to sit down.
200 pages, Perfect Paperback
First published October 15, 2009
26 people are currently reading
78 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 26 of 26 reviews
Read
August 4, 2025I picked up this book mostly because I never read Bercot, and wanted give him a read. I will say, it was not quite what I expected and I was a little disappointed, but it also offered me some good things to think about.
Things that I liked about it:
1. Bercot makes a good critique of the way “theologians” can do theological gymnastics around some of the difficult and radical teachings in scripture. This made me think about how not only trained theologians can do this, but also me and pretty much everyone.
2. He also calls into question the tendency to simply except what the “experts” have to say about a passage. This was a good push for me as I too easily trust the opinions of people who have spent significant time studying a topic.
3. He also offers some good insights on biblical translation.
Things that I didn’t like about it:
1. I did not feel that Bercot was charitable with his writing. He makes some broad statements, such as calling modern theologians “incompetent loonies”. He also sets up the book constantly referring to the scribes and Pharisees the “theologians” of Jesus’ day. I may have missed the logic of why he does this, but it felt like “poisoning the well” to me.
2. Although he defines what he means by “theologians “ at the beginning of the book, he leaves too much ambiguity in his definition and I was wondering what he meant by “theology” the entire book.
3. Bercot sets up theologians like Augustine, Luther, and Calvin as evil men who worked to corrupt the faith. I just think there has to be a more nuanced way to understand these men and their lives. I think he blames theology for things he should attribute to broken humanity.
Bercot sees a real problem in the theological world, but I think he goes too far in moving away from theology. He is right that the gospel is simple and the unlearned sometimes understand it more fully than the educated. But I also believe that the gospel is deep, and so is the nature of God. It’s the beauty of it that a child can understand it and yet spend his entire life learning and exploring and being amazed!
Things that I liked about it:
1. Bercot makes a good critique of the way “theologians” can do theological gymnastics around some of the difficult and radical teachings in scripture. This made me think about how not only trained theologians can do this, but also me and pretty much everyone.
2. He also calls into question the tendency to simply except what the “experts” have to say about a passage. This was a good push for me as I too easily trust the opinions of people who have spent significant time studying a topic.
3. He also offers some good insights on biblical translation.
Things that I didn’t like about it:
1. I did not feel that Bercot was charitable with his writing. He makes some broad statements, such as calling modern theologians “incompetent loonies”. He also sets up the book constantly referring to the scribes and Pharisees the “theologians” of Jesus’ day. I may have missed the logic of why he does this, but it felt like “poisoning the well” to me.
2. Although he defines what he means by “theologians “ at the beginning of the book, he leaves too much ambiguity in his definition and I was wondering what he meant by “theology” the entire book.
3. Bercot sets up theologians like Augustine, Luther, and Calvin as evil men who worked to corrupt the faith. I just think there has to be a more nuanced way to understand these men and their lives. I think he blames theology for things he should attribute to broken humanity.
Bercot sees a real problem in the theological world, but I think he goes too far in moving away from theology. He is right that the gospel is simple and the unlearned sometimes understand it more fully than the educated. But I also believe that the gospel is deep, and so is the nature of God. It’s the beauty of it that a child can understand it and yet spend his entire life learning and exploring and being amazed!
March 8, 2022
This book was like delectable food that ends up making you feel sick in your stomach. It started good, ended poorly.
The basic point Bercot makes is that theologians have dominated the definition of Christianity (often incorrectly), while Kingdom Christians living out the teachings of Christ have no voice. They have to understand Scripture through these theologians (because Greek, Hebrew, etc.)
Bercot rightly points out that the early church was largely uneducated people. They lived out a simple obedient love faith relationship (OLFR) with Jesus. Good. However, he then goes on a distasteful tirade against theologians, leaving little-to-no nuance for those who have embodied OLFR and are knowledgeable theologians.
He sets up us vs. them dichotomies with statements like "when we unmask the learned theologians of today, we usually find that they actually are incompetent phonies;" and, "it's the commentators and theologians who've had a few years of Greek in divinity school and who use their limited knowledge of Greek to bully others." While there is almost certainly an element of truth in what he's saying, this rhetoric is inflammatory and could provoke an anti-intellectual pendulum swing. It's worth noting that Kingdom Christians like the early Anabaptists, as he points out, were led by competent "theologians". Hmm.
The really distasteful part is the last few chapters. It's almost entirely a rant against Luther without giving him any nuanced treatment. There's not even a strawman. The book at the end is better entitled "Against Luther."
Read with caution.
The basic point Bercot makes is that theologians have dominated the definition of Christianity (often incorrectly), while Kingdom Christians living out the teachings of Christ have no voice. They have to understand Scripture through these theologians (because Greek, Hebrew, etc.)
Bercot rightly points out that the early church was largely uneducated people. They lived out a simple obedient love faith relationship (OLFR) with Jesus. Good. However, he then goes on a distasteful tirade against theologians, leaving little-to-no nuance for those who have embodied OLFR and are knowledgeable theologians.
He sets up us vs. them dichotomies with statements like "when we unmask the learned theologians of today, we usually find that they actually are incompetent phonies;" and, "it's the commentators and theologians who've had a few years of Greek in divinity school and who use their limited knowledge of Greek to bully others." While there is almost certainly an element of truth in what he's saying, this rhetoric is inflammatory and could provoke an anti-intellectual pendulum swing. It's worth noting that Kingdom Christians like the early Anabaptists, as he points out, were led by competent "theologians". Hmm.
The really distasteful part is the last few chapters. It's almost entirely a rant against Luther without giving him any nuanced treatment. There's not even a strawman. The book at the end is better entitled "Against Luther."
Read with caution.
December 28, 2018
[3.5 out of 5 stars]
"Christianity originally centered on Christ and His kingdom --- not on fine points of theology. It's rather difficult to put together a detailed theological statement just from the teachings of Jesus. That's because in essence the gospel of the kingdom is not theology. It's about people entering into an obedient love-faith relationship with Jesus, the King, and bearing fruit. Jesus didn't talk much about theology because that wasn't particularly important to Him. However, He did talk a lot about fruit. And He talked a lot about how we are to live as citizens of His kingdom. He taught us what it means to love one another and to love God. Those things ARE important to Him." [pp. 38,39]
I really don't know how to review this book. I think it's best to let David Bercot speak for himself; so if you're interested, just read the book. If you are considering reading it, be forewarned : It includes some very controversial material. It's almost a conspiracy theory of the corruption of Christianity, and therefore it's absolutely fascinating! I wish I could somehow verify all his research. I did search Luther's "Open Letter on Translating," which Bercot quoted from (Note: Bercot has a very poor opinion of Martin Luther). The part he quoted doesn't sound as bad when taken in context; however, may I suggest that Luther was slightly lacking in humility? Here's the link. Read the full letter for yourself if you are interested: https://archive.org/stream/anopenlett...
I really wish I could write a coherent review. This book is just so interesting! Highly recommended, especially if you enjoy unique opinions on controversial subjects.
"Christianity originally centered on Christ and His kingdom --- not on fine points of theology. It's rather difficult to put together a detailed theological statement just from the teachings of Jesus. That's because in essence the gospel of the kingdom is not theology. It's about people entering into an obedient love-faith relationship with Jesus, the King, and bearing fruit. Jesus didn't talk much about theology because that wasn't particularly important to Him. However, He did talk a lot about fruit. And He talked a lot about how we are to live as citizens of His kingdom. He taught us what it means to love one another and to love God. Those things ARE important to Him." [pp. 38,39]
I really don't know how to review this book. I think it's best to let David Bercot speak for himself; so if you're interested, just read the book. If you are considering reading it, be forewarned : It includes some very controversial material. It's almost a conspiracy theory of the corruption of Christianity, and therefore it's absolutely fascinating! I wish I could somehow verify all his research. I did search Luther's "Open Letter on Translating," which Bercot quoted from (Note: Bercot has a very poor opinion of Martin Luther). The part he quoted doesn't sound as bad when taken in context; however, may I suggest that Luther was slightly lacking in humility? Here's the link. Read the full letter for yourself if you are interested: https://archive.org/stream/anopenlett...
I really wish I could write a coherent review. This book is just so interesting! Highly recommended, especially if you enjoy unique opinions on controversial subjects.
December 3, 2016
Bercot, once again, makes some well-intentioned points backed by some atrocious history. He woefully simplifies the Pharisaic movement, makes a hypocritical attempt to undermine scholarly linguistic work while at the same time using knowledge of Greek and Hebrew to make his points, makes really uncomfortable comparisons of our misunderstanding of scripture to evolution (which nearly gave me convulsions) and actually argues that English is somehow a "better" language than Greek because it has more words (like a box of crayons with more colors is a "better" box of crayons - really? I would love to see an actual linguist take on that argument), veers into really strange territory to defend 'head coverings' (unsurprisingly, as an Anabaptist/Mennonite), and gets dangerously close to libel/slander in his caricature of Luther (which is backed by some shaky quotes from secondary sources, if you take the time to study the footnotes).
This is tricky, because I am actually deeply empathetic to Bercot's concerns, but I'm equally-deeply-frustrated by his lack of attention to scholarship. He consistently makes vast, sweeping gestures without care to any historical context (for example, arguing the roots of feminism are in things like theological gymnastics in John 4), cherry-picks quotes, and just makes everything sound so simple, to a fault (I'm sure he would say - "but it IS simple! Just follow Jesus!").
There are other people making these arguments with much more nuance (actual historians like N.T. Wright, for example) and Bercot needs to take some cues from them.
This is tricky, because I am actually deeply empathetic to Bercot's concerns, but I'm equally-deeply-frustrated by his lack of attention to scholarship. He consistently makes vast, sweeping gestures without care to any historical context (for example, arguing the roots of feminism are in things like theological gymnastics in John 4), cherry-picks quotes, and just makes everything sound so simple, to a fault (I'm sure he would say - "but it IS simple! Just follow Jesus!").
There are other people making these arguments with much more nuance (actual historians like N.T. Wright, for example) and Bercot needs to take some cues from them.
September 20, 2025
Solid book, great message. - one star just because it’s a little repetitive.
Talks about how Christianity has gonna from being based on a love-faith relationship with Jesus to a religion that is based on doctrine. That it’s become more important to be doctrinally correct than to bear fruit. Jesus makes disciples out of unschooled, ordinary people. Not academics or intellectually qualified people.
Goes through where this shift originated and other interested things like how study Bibles & commentaries started by people like Martin Luther who wanted to push their interpretation of scripture onto the people.
Talks about how Christianity has gonna from being based on a love-faith relationship with Jesus to a religion that is based on doctrine. That it’s become more important to be doctrinally correct than to bear fruit. Jesus makes disciples out of unschooled, ordinary people. Not academics or intellectually qualified people.
Goes through where this shift originated and other interested things like how study Bibles & commentaries started by people like Martin Luther who wanted to push their interpretation of scripture onto the people.
April 5, 2013
Easy to read! His basic viewpoint is that Theologians have squashed Kingdom Christians by making Christianity more about Doctrine than Fruit. In its basic premise I agree, but Mr Bercot himself gives HIS Theology while telling us that Theologians are dangerous. He is doing the very thing that he says is dangerous. Great book to bring balance to todays Theologians especially Arrogant Arm - Chair Theologians...............
December 20, 2021
Part diatribe and part sporadic historical survey. Bercot’s premise is that original Christianity was simple, but that Christians began to focus on “doctrianity” and theology in place of “kingdom living.” He starts with the examples of Pharisees, shows how Jesus corrects them and the early church went in a new direction, then contends that later Christians reverted to pharisaic ways.
There is a lot to commend. Bercot has a remarkably clear-sighted view of Augustine and Calvin. He seems to have a special derision for Luther. He calls attention to the murderous impulses of all sides during the reformation (which fits his anabaptist leanings). I was especially thankful to read his passion for focusing on Jesus and his teachings in place of Paul (who is usually read through modern lenses).
There is also a lot to criticize. I find the fundamental argument to hinge on a false dilemma. Is theology wrong, or are doctrinally focused people blanketly lost? Why would we think that understanding the Bible (or Greek or commentaries) would somehow mean we can’t produce spiritual fruit? Bercot scattershoots in his critiques; commentaries are bad, Greek study is bad (because of the old agape chestnut), study bibles are bad. The idea of discernment doesn’t come up for him; the world is black and white and all these things are wrongful additions. He spends an inordinate amount of time on the covering issue, trying to score points off the scholarly confusion about the background of 1 Cor 11, which is notoriously difficult as a text. Or about proving the vital? truth that ancient Jewish men DID talk to women (contrary to all the LIARS who say otherwise). As heavy as some of the issues he’s discussing are, I’m not sure these would be my proof texts.
Having said all that, it’s clear that the book is intended to shock and provoke those who are in the evangelical majority to reconsider the underpinnings of their faith. This I applaud. I too long to restore not only the forms of the first Christians, but their fruits. And I too can see how theology can impede the simple truth of Jesus.
There is a lot to commend. Bercot has a remarkably clear-sighted view of Augustine and Calvin. He seems to have a special derision for Luther. He calls attention to the murderous impulses of all sides during the reformation (which fits his anabaptist leanings). I was especially thankful to read his passion for focusing on Jesus and his teachings in place of Paul (who is usually read through modern lenses).
There is also a lot to criticize. I find the fundamental argument to hinge on a false dilemma. Is theology wrong, or are doctrinally focused people blanketly lost? Why would we think that understanding the Bible (or Greek or commentaries) would somehow mean we can’t produce spiritual fruit? Bercot scattershoots in his critiques; commentaries are bad, Greek study is bad (because of the old agape chestnut), study bibles are bad. The idea of discernment doesn’t come up for him; the world is black and white and all these things are wrongful additions. He spends an inordinate amount of time on the covering issue, trying to score points off the scholarly confusion about the background of 1 Cor 11, which is notoriously difficult as a text. Or about proving the vital? truth that ancient Jewish men DID talk to women (contrary to all the LIARS who say otherwise). As heavy as some of the issues he’s discussing are, I’m not sure these would be my proof texts.
Having said all that, it’s clear that the book is intended to shock and provoke those who are in the evangelical majority to reconsider the underpinnings of their faith. This I applaud. I too long to restore not only the forms of the first Christians, but their fruits. And I too can see how theology can impede the simple truth of Jesus.
February 18, 2019
Bercot spends about half the book building a case against theologians, specifically retelling the biblical accounts of Pharisees, Saducees, and the scribes of Jesus' day. This was quite tedious, repetitive, and really nothing insightful. The remainder of the book are rantings against specific scholars and theologians throughout history whose doctrines Bercot doesn't agree with. Doctrine and theology are bad. We only need to produce good fruit as Jesus taught, not good theology and doctrine. And, how does Bercot come to this conclusion? By developing his own theology. This book was a disappointment, not one of Bercot's best. Not recommended.
June 21, 2019
3.5/5
I feel very mixed about this book. While I appreciate and agree with the premise of it, I think the author fell into the trap he was trying to avoid. I agree that Christians must bear fruit for the kingdom, but they should not call anyone a theological "bully" just because he or she does not agree with their theological views.
I feel very mixed about this book. While I appreciate and agree with the premise of it, I think the author fell into the trap he was trying to avoid. I agree that Christians must bear fruit for the kingdom, but they should not call anyone a theological "bully" just because he or she does not agree with their theological views.
May 28, 2021
Mixed Feelings
I really wasn't sure what to think about Will the Theologians Please Sit Down. I'm sure David Bercot did much research for his book. I guess I'm left challenging my beliefs again and how I view Bible commentaries and study Bibles.
I really wasn't sure what to think about Will the Theologians Please Sit Down. I'm sure David Bercot did much research for his book. I guess I'm left challenging my beliefs again and how I view Bible commentaries and study Bibles.
April 4, 2025
I liked this book pretty well, but there were times I felt like it was slightly harder to follow David's flow of thought than in his last book, "Will the Real Heretics Please Stand Up." Nevertheless, it was very informative; and, once again, gives me plenty to ponder over. This book focused on Christian History, particularly the time of the Reformation. The interesting thing, though, about this book is that we get to see Reformation History from an Anabaptist prospective; as apposed to catholic or protestant. I found this book interesting because not much is ever discussed or known in protestant circles about these elusive Anabaptists(Mennonites and Amish). I enjoyed seeing History from this angle. I felt like it gave me a more birds eye view when combined with my knowledge of the protestant and catholic perspectives. I've heard it said that history is written by the victors. That's true because they are, usually, the only survivors; or at least they make up the majority. However, this book gives the underdogs a voice. I have always been curious about Mennonite/Amish culture, and where they fit in history. Unfortunately, I learned some things in this book I didn't like. They were heavily persecuted by protestants and catholics alike, apparently, with people like Martin Luther and John Calvin leading the pack. I was disgusted by the lifestyles and quotes of both these men we have put on such a pedestal. I think I'm beginning to understand why Jesus said, "They hated me first, they will also hate you." Also, Paul said,
"Anyone who will live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted."
Many people profess Christ, but few are willing to actually live for him at all costs. It hurts my heart to know how many people have lost their lives for their faith in Jesus while, possible, godless men get praised as heroes of the faith. I guess we should all be careful who we look up to and emulate. We need to be better fruit inspectors and get back to producing fruit ourselves. The main idea of this book is maintaining an obedient, love-faith relationship with Jesus as our true faith and worship. Faith without works is dead. We know that from James 2:26, but in verse 24 it also says we are justified by our works and NOT BY FAITH ONLY. Most people avoid verse 24 because it messes up Martin Luther's quote of being saved by faith alone. But, at the end of the day who is right, Martin Luther or God? In an attempt to get away from Catholicism's obsession with man-made doctrine/ works for salvation,(going on pilgrimages, viewing relics, paying indulgences, going to Mass)protestants have taken a pendulum swing in another wrong direction in assuming that doing the works Jesus commanded are useless, self righteous, and play no part in salvation. The true and happy medium is the love-faith relationship with Jesus that stems from faith and gains us eternal life.
"Repent for the kingdom of heaven is near."-Jesus.
"Anyone who will live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted."
Many people profess Christ, but few are willing to actually live for him at all costs. It hurts my heart to know how many people have lost their lives for their faith in Jesus while, possible, godless men get praised as heroes of the faith. I guess we should all be careful who we look up to and emulate. We need to be better fruit inspectors and get back to producing fruit ourselves. The main idea of this book is maintaining an obedient, love-faith relationship with Jesus as our true faith and worship. Faith without works is dead. We know that from James 2:26, but in verse 24 it also says we are justified by our works and NOT BY FAITH ONLY. Most people avoid verse 24 because it messes up Martin Luther's quote of being saved by faith alone. But, at the end of the day who is right, Martin Luther or God? In an attempt to get away from Catholicism's obsession with man-made doctrine/ works for salvation,(going on pilgrimages, viewing relics, paying indulgences, going to Mass)protestants have taken a pendulum swing in another wrong direction in assuming that doing the works Jesus commanded are useless, self righteous, and play no part in salvation. The true and happy medium is the love-faith relationship with Jesus that stems from faith and gains us eternal life.
"Repent for the kingdom of heaven is near."-Jesus.
April 30, 2020
I have mixed feelings about this book. I think Bercot's intended message was that the Gospel of Jesus is first actionable, not a stuffy set of abstract beliefs. However, and this is where my mixed feelings arise, the book could be badly misinterpreted, especially in the following two ways:
Potential misinterpretation #1)It's not important to know the context in which the New Testament was written. There are several places in the book where the reader could be led astray into thinking this. "Jesus' words meant the same thing in the beginning as they do now." The way that statement is worded, it could sound as if it's always easy to understand Jesus' words and that the best way is to interpret them as they would sound at face value to a modern Westerner. In some cases, that is the best way, but that should not minimise scholarship and the careful study of Greek as well as seeking to know all we can about the ancient Greco-Roman world, its metaphor, thought, and so on. As the Bible scholar John Walton once said, all interpretation starts with translation. There are some words in the New Testament that scholars have had to translate pretty much on a guess. On the other end of the spectrum is unanimous agreement on how a word should be translated. But the past is a different country and they do things differently--especially the past of two millenia ago.
Potential misinterpretation #2) The world of ideas and study is always divorced from action. What Bercot should probably have clarified is that everyone operates from some set of ideas about the world, God, scripture, and so on. Ideas and systems of thought are unavoidable. In some sense we are all theologians. Bercot should have fine-tuned his argument and asked the "overly-abstract theologians" to sit down or perhaps the "theologians with an unhelpful agenda" or something along those lines.
Oh, and one more thing: Martin Luther deserves a far more nuanced treatment. Just saying.
My advice: read the book--it's a quick read, accessible, and informative. Just bear in mind that the answer to bad theology is good theology, not the absence of theology.
Potential misinterpretation #1)It's not important to know the context in which the New Testament was written. There are several places in the book where the reader could be led astray into thinking this. "Jesus' words meant the same thing in the beginning as they do now." The way that statement is worded, it could sound as if it's always easy to understand Jesus' words and that the best way is to interpret them as they would sound at face value to a modern Westerner. In some cases, that is the best way, but that should not minimise scholarship and the careful study of Greek as well as seeking to know all we can about the ancient Greco-Roman world, its metaphor, thought, and so on. As the Bible scholar John Walton once said, all interpretation starts with translation. There are some words in the New Testament that scholars have had to translate pretty much on a guess. On the other end of the spectrum is unanimous agreement on how a word should be translated. But the past is a different country and they do things differently--especially the past of two millenia ago.
Potential misinterpretation #2) The world of ideas and study is always divorced from action. What Bercot should probably have clarified is that everyone operates from some set of ideas about the world, God, scripture, and so on. Ideas and systems of thought are unavoidable. In some sense we are all theologians. Bercot should have fine-tuned his argument and asked the "overly-abstract theologians" to sit down or perhaps the "theologians with an unhelpful agenda" or something along those lines.
Oh, and one more thing: Martin Luther deserves a far more nuanced treatment. Just saying.
My advice: read the book--it's a quick read, accessible, and informative. Just bear in mind that the answer to bad theology is good theology, not the absence of theology.
October 21, 2023
Very Enlightening
As a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, I recognize the truth in what Bercot is saying. I admire and appreciate his thorough and sincere approach and research. I fully expect that he tars me and my Church with the same brush as all the evangelicals but that would be a frame error.
Near the end of the book he poses a significant question that I believe every sincere Christian should ask themselves.
I did that and include my answer to the question from my notes.
They read as follows...
Suppose you were standing at the gates of heaven and Jesus asked you, “Why should I let you in?” What would your answer be?
My short answer to this profound question is, (after thoughtful prayer)
"I guess you shouldn't let me in.
All I can say in my defence is that in this life I searched for You and found You, and then tried in my own feeble way to live a useful and productive life, and I tried to share Your Gospel with others along the way.
I tried to help others along the path, though not nearly as often or as well as I could and should have.
But I guess that is why You came. To save miserable sinners like me.
And that is why I kneel before you today, and beg your forgiveness, and plead for admittance at this sacred door.
I recognize that You are the only one that can let me in."
A highly recommended book. Christians can be led out of the shadows of conventional Christianity, by learning from Bercot about original Christianity, and will recognize in my humble view, why there was a need for a restoration (not reformation).
The only thing lacking in Bercot's reasoning is that once you debunk the Catholics, the Rabbi's and the Imam's you also remove all semblance of authority, and this you must have.
That authority has been restored.
As a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, I recognize the truth in what Bercot is saying. I admire and appreciate his thorough and sincere approach and research. I fully expect that he tars me and my Church with the same brush as all the evangelicals but that would be a frame error.
Near the end of the book he poses a significant question that I believe every sincere Christian should ask themselves.
I did that and include my answer to the question from my notes.
They read as follows...
Suppose you were standing at the gates of heaven and Jesus asked you, “Why should I let you in?” What would your answer be?
My short answer to this profound question is, (after thoughtful prayer)
"I guess you shouldn't let me in.
All I can say in my defence is that in this life I searched for You and found You, and then tried in my own feeble way to live a useful and productive life, and I tried to share Your Gospel with others along the way.
I tried to help others along the path, though not nearly as often or as well as I could and should have.
But I guess that is why You came. To save miserable sinners like me.
And that is why I kneel before you today, and beg your forgiveness, and plead for admittance at this sacred door.
I recognize that You are the only one that can let me in."
A highly recommended book. Christians can be led out of the shadows of conventional Christianity, by learning from Bercot about original Christianity, and will recognize in my humble view, why there was a need for a restoration (not reformation).
The only thing lacking in Bercot's reasoning is that once you debunk the Catholics, the Rabbi's and the Imam's you also remove all semblance of authority, and this you must have.
That authority has been restored.
Read
January 28, 2025This book is David Bercot's rant against theologians, both past and present. It is a thought provoking book, as many of Bercot's books are, and is interesting even for many of the examples he gives. The style is straightforward and direct, leaving no room to guess what he is trying to say. He starts with the first theologians, the Pharisees and teachers of the laws, and how Jesus over-turned their system. After discussing the purity of early Christianity, he moves on to the first theologians after the apostles, using specific examples. This is an interesting progression historically, even looking into why the good motives of men led to doctrines and systems and eventually systems of control ("bullying") and a misuse of truth. He talks about the development of commentaries, and how many modern commentaries do not use primary sources and are therefore full of historical and doctrinal inaccuracies. He comes down hard on the Reformers, particularly Luther, for not only their doctrine but also the bad fruit that was produced in their lives. It was very interesting to read about Luther and even some of the things he did and supported.
July 22, 2023
Que los teólogos se sienten es un libro rápido de leer. El autor no es pretencioso. Va rápido al tema y eso se agradece. Pocas veces se habla de la influencia que han tenido los teólogos en el cristianismo que se lleva en el mundo y este libro me puso a pensar en ello. A veces se cree que se debe tener una teología correcta para llamarse uno cristiano, pero no es así. Lo que define a un cristiano es el fruto, no su teología. Personalmente, este libro me permite reflexionar en toda la influencia que puede tener ciertos autores que muchas veces no dejan ver a Cristo en la Biblia, sino que interponen sus ideas antes que a Dios.
January 15, 2018
There is a lot of thought-provoking truth in this book that has impacted how I view my role among other believers as well as how much more cautious I am of any man-made doctrine exceeding the 63-word statement of faith that the earliest believers held to.
Just a slight downside is that an instance or two, in his passion on the subject, I think David Bercot reaches a little far with generalizations to support a point. But in overlooking those few instances, I believe his arguments still stand well-supported.
Just a slight downside is that an instance or two, in his passion on the subject, I think David Bercot reaches a little far with generalizations to support a point. But in overlooking those few instances, I believe his arguments still stand well-supported.
February 11, 2025
Another amazing work by Bercot. I am definitely biased because I have truly enjoyed his work and he has proven to me to be a competent and genuine Believer who has very strong set of sound understandings -not doctrines, which is the whole point of this book. We are expected to produce Kingdom fruit. It's what we're called and commanded to do. It should and absolutely WILL be a driving passion that is unrelenting and persevering unto itself. I have a few choice favorites in authors; Bercot is probably top on my list. Read this book.
February 1, 2020
An Eye Opener!
We have become so preoccupied with getting our theology perfect (which we’ll never be able to accomplish on earth), that we have ignored what it truly means to be a Follower of Jesus. That is to love God with all of our heart, soul and mind and love others as ourselves. An obedient love relationship with Jesus is not optional. We must produce Kingdom fruit through the power that resides on the inside of us by God’s Holy Spirit.
We have become so preoccupied with getting our theology perfect (which we’ll never be able to accomplish on earth), that we have ignored what it truly means to be a Follower of Jesus. That is to love God with all of our heart, soul and mind and love others as ourselves. An obedient love relationship with Jesus is not optional. We must produce Kingdom fruit through the power that resides on the inside of us by God’s Holy Spirit.
February 20, 2020
The book refutes the scourge of; Augustine ,Calvin and that awful Luther. Dispensationalism another error (Not discussed in the book) explains away most of Christ's teaching by projecting them into the future. Yes but scholars know the original languages you say? Yes but If ,for example, you confront a muslim about the hateful things in the koran the reply is always 'But you can't read 7th century Arabic' ,sound familiar? Theologians need to sit down and shut up.
July 8, 2025
Apostasy
Christ taught that we should do good. The theologians came along and neglecting works said that we need believe the right thing. They proceeded to argue about what is the right belief, speculating about things that had not been revealed. Proceeding to do the opposite of what Christ taught even by killing people who believed differently than they did.
Christ taught that we should do good. The theologians came along and neglecting works said that we need believe the right thing. They proceeded to argue about what is the right belief, speculating about things that had not been revealed. Proceeding to do the opposite of what Christ taught even by killing people who believed differently than they did.
April 11, 2020
I learned alot from this book. I understand different between Follow Me ( Jesus' way or kingdom) and Study Me ( today church's way or doctrines).
5 stars because easy to read.
Buy this book or ebook for all Christians.
David Becot wrote good books too
5 stars because easy to read.
Buy this book or ebook for all Christians.
David Becot wrote good books too
January 29, 2017
Great book...David Bercot is a Historian who writes from an intellectually honest perspective. He doesn't say what people want to hear...just to sell books. There are some inconvenient truths in the history of Christianity and he is faithful in pointing them out.
Great quote - "In the aftermath of Nicea, Jesus' words, "follow me" were no longer the focus of the institutional church. It was now "study me". And that is the real problem. For "Doctrianity" requires no real relationship with Christ and no fruit. It requires only a change in our heads, not a change in our hearts. A Pharisee can embrace "Doctrianity". But he will never be able to embrace Christianity without a through change of the heart." p.90
Great quote - "In the aftermath of Nicea, Jesus' words, "follow me" were no longer the focus of the institutional church. It was now "study me". And that is the real problem. For "Doctrianity" requires no real relationship with Christ and no fruit. It requires only a change in our heads, not a change in our hearts. A Pharisee can embrace "Doctrianity". But he will never be able to embrace Christianity without a through change of the heart." p.90
October 24, 2023
Remarkable and uncompromising
One of the best books I have read for many years. It opened my eyes to see the value of the church fathers whom I had failed to consider as
the most important witness the the truth taught by Jesus and His apostles because they lived so near to the time of the early church.
Many other things are revealed in this book that will make you stop and think about your faith as never before.
One of the best books I have read for many years. It opened my eyes to see the value of the church fathers whom I had failed to consider as
the most important witness the the truth taught by Jesus and His apostles because they lived so near to the time of the early church.
Many other things are revealed in this book that will make you stop and think about your faith as never before.
August 26, 2014
Read the book twice. It's worth of my time to re-read it. It challenge me and to stick to what the Gospel really says without filtering or reinterpreting it. I come to realized many follow the doctrine of man. This book should be real and challenge every Christians to reconsider.
April 30, 2015
This is SO Good. You need to read it. For real. READ this book. It is eye-opening.
Short, sweet, and to the point.
Read it.
Short, sweet, and to the point.
Read it.
April 25, 2021
I think this book contains an essential corrective for much overemphasis on “theology” (propositional doctrinal statements) to the neglect of obedience to the Gospel of Christ.
Displaying 1 - 26 of 26 reviews