Discussion Questions

In Romans 8:4–6, Bercot notes that translators must decide whether Paul is contrasting the flesh with the Holy Spirit or with the human spirit. How would each reading shape our understanding of what God intends to accomplish in believers? JumpstartAnother way to ask: In Romans 8:4–6, Bercot says translators must choose if Paul means the flesh is against the Holy Spirit or against the human spirit. How would each view change what we think God wants to do in believers?

Bercot connects Romans 7:18—“nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh”—with Luther’s interpretation that nothing good dwells in a human being. What difference does it make if Paul meant “in my flesh” as distinct from the human spirit rather than as a statement about the whole person? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Bercot connects Romans 7:18, where Paul says nothing good lives in his flesh, with Luther’s view that nothing good lives in a person. Why does it matter if Paul meant only the flesh, not the whole person?

The chapter argues that doctrines of the Reformation may turn on translation choices such as capitalizing “Spirit” or not. How should Christians respond when major doctrines depend partly on interpretive decisions that are not visible in the original Greek text? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Bercot says some Reformation teachings may depend on choices like writing “Spirit” with a capital letter or not. How should Christians respond when big teachings depend partly on translation choices not shown in the Greek text?

Bercot says the Greek New Testament had no capitalization, commas, or quotation marks, so translators must add interpretation even before readers open their English Bibles. How does this challenge the common claim that Christians rely on “the Bible alone”? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Bercot says the Greek New Testament had no capital letters, commas, or quotation marks. Translators must add some meaning before we read it in English. How does this challenge the idea that Christians use “the Bible alone”?

Bercot insists that he is not trying to undermine confidence in Scripture, but wants confidence to be “based on truth and sound reasoning, not on blindness.” What would a truthful and sound confidence in Scripture look like in light of the translation issues he raises? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Bercot says he is not trying to weaken trust in Scripture. He wants trust based on truth and good thinking, not blindness. What would that kind of trust in Scripture look like when we know about translation issues?

When discussing Romans 7:6, Bercot suggests that “newness of the Spirit” could mean the Holy Spirit or the spirit of the law as opposed to the literal letter. How might these two readings lead to different views of obedience, law, freedom, and Christian living? JumpstartAnother way to ask: In Romans 7:6, Bercot says “newness of the Spirit” could mean the Holy Spirit or the spirit of the law instead of the written letter. How could these two views change how we understand obedience, law, freedom, and Christian life?

Bercot asks whether we should rely on early Christian understandings or our own when translating passages that can be rendered more than one way. What assumptions about humility, wisdom, and God’s preservation of truth are involved in that choice? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Bercot asks if we should trust early Christian views or our own when a passage can be translated in more than one way. What does that choice show about humility, wisdom, and how God preserves truth?

The chapter points out that more than fifty English New Testament translations exist, yet none has attempted to translate the Greek according to early Christian understanding. What does this reveal about modern Christianity’s trust in contemporary scholarship compared with historic Christian testimony? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Bercot says there are more than fifty English New Testament translations, but none tries to translate the Greek using early Christian understanding. What does this show about modern Christianity’s trust in today’s scholars compared with early Christian witnesses?

Bercot argues that second-century Christians, many of whom spoke everyday Greek, may be better guides to the informal Greek of the New Testament than modern readers and translators. How should this affect the way we read Scripture, evaluate doctrine, and handle disagreements over difficult passages? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Bercot says second-century Christians, many of whom spoke common Greek, may understand New Testament Greek better than modern readers. How should this affect how we read Scripture, judge doctrine, and handle hard passages?

The chapter concludes that “out of sheer necessity, we all add tradition and translational interpretation to the bare letter of Scripture.” What traditions or interpretive assumptions have most shaped your own reading of the Bible, and how willing are you to test them against the historic Christian record? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Bercot concludes that we all bring tradition and translation choices to Scripture. What traditions or assumptions have shaped how you read the Bible, and are you willing to test them against early Christian history?