David W. Bercot is an attorney in Pennsylvania who attends Shippensburg Christian Fellowship, an Anabaptist church. His hobby is early church history, and he has written genuinely well-documented, challenging books on the subject. His first such book, Will the Real Heretics Please Stand Up, became a best seller and remains so after almost twenty years in publication. I have read the book and encouraged others to read it.

However, I think Mr. Bercot places too much emphasis on what he calls "early Christians." He defines "early Christians" as "the Christians who lived between 90 and 199 A.D." (Real Heretics. 5). Bercot's contention is that, since these disciples lived closest in time to the apostles, and at least those in the East spoke Greek as their native tongue, the language in which the New Testament was written, they are the best ones to interpret the New Testament for us. He even asserts, "There was nothing wrong with early Christianity. It didn't need fixing."

This sounds good on the surface and has some merit, but it can be and is over emphasized. You see, it is also true that, since inspiration ceased around the end of the first century (1 Corinthians 13:8-13), second century Christians had no different divine guidance than you and I have. Since God has providentially preserved His word for all (1 Peter 1:22-25), we are able, with the use of a good, essentially literal translation of the Bible into our native tongue, to understand the Scriptures just as well as second or third century Christians (Ephesians 3:1-7; 5:17). Finally, there was a great apostasy (falling away) beginning even in the generation of the apostles that continued through the second century and far beyond (Acts 20:29-30; 2 Thessalonians 2:3-10; 1 John 2:18). Bercot accuses forth century Christians of trying to "improve Christianity" (158). The changes were being made from the end of the first century on down. The apostles and the first century church revealed in the New Testament contitute our only standard (Philippians 3:17).

The study of second century Christians has value. They can help us on matters of opinion, such as when the book of Revelation was written. We rely on their testimony as to which books belong in the New Testament.

But they are not our standard of faith. Catholics claim to believe the Bible, but their standard is the interpretation of the Bible by "the Church" (Roman Catholic hierarchy). Presbyterians claim to follow the Bible, but their standard is the interpretation of the Bible found in The Westminster Confession of Faith. If our standard is the Bible as seen through the consensus of second century Christians, we have rejected the word of God as our only rule of faith and practice for the uninspired majority of third, fourth, and fifth generation Christians (cf. Romans 3:3-4).

I think I can show by a much greater historian than David W. Bercot that he has overlooked some practices that were also universally accepted during the second century. These examples are taken from History of the Christian Church, by Philip Schaff, volume 2, "Ante-Nicene Christianity, From the Death of John the Apostle to Constantine the Great, A.D. 100-325." Professor Philip Schaff is considered the founder of church history in America. His eight volume History of the Christian Church is perhaps the greatest study of the history of Christendom ever published. Volume two alone is 877 pages long. Here are proofs of some sinful changes to New Testament Christianity begun in the second century as quoted from Schaff.