Discussion Questions

David Bercot argues that “whoever defines the words used in the Bible essentially defines what the Bible teaches,” comparing it to his law professor’s line, “let me define the terms and I’ll win every time”; where have you personally absorbed definitions of Bible words (especially “grace”) from church culture more than from Scripture-and-history evidence, and what would it cost you to reopen those definitions? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Where have you learned the meaning of Bible words (especially “grace”) more from church culture than from the Bible and early history? What would it cost you to rethink those meanings?

He challenges the idea that *charis* is a theological “super word” by pointing out how strange it would be for pagan Greeks to have a word meaning “the merciful kindness by which God… turns them to Christ… strengthens… kindles virtues”; what do you think this reveals about how easily Christians can smuggle later theology into word meanings, and what safeguards (if any) should govern how we define terms like grace, faith, works, and justification? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If pagan Greeks used the word *charis*, what does that tell us about how Christians can read later theology into a word? What rules should we use when defining words like grace, faith, works, and justification?

In his Septuagint survey, Bercot says *charis* most often means favor/goodwill from the powerful to the weaker, and he highlights examples like Jacob trying to “find grace” with Esau through gifts; how does that example reshape (or not reshape) the way you think about “finding grace,” especially if the person is actively seeking or responding rather than passively receiving? JumpstartAnother way to ask: In the Septuagint, *charis* often means favor from someone stronger to someone weaker, like Jacob seeking Esau’s favor with gifts. How does that change (or not change) what “finding grace” means if someone is actively seeking it?

Bercot emphasizes that in the Septuagint he “didn’t find a single instance” where *charis* clearly means “unmerited favor,” using Ruth and Boaz and Proverbs (“He gives grace to the humble”) to show favor connected to humility, faithfulness, and conduct; what does that imply about God’s character and intentions—particularly whether God’s favor is arbitrary, relational, conditional, or responsive? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If *charis* in the Septuagint isn’t clearly “unmerited favor,” and is often linked to humility and faithfulness, what does that say about how God gives favor? Is it random, relational, conditional, or a response to how we live?

He claims early Christians understood “the grace of repentance” (Clement of Rome) as God granting mankind the *opportunity* to repent, not a “blank check”; in your experience, how has modern preaching treated repentance (as a doorway, a one-time moment, an ongoing posture, or an optional add-on), and what would change in discipleship if “repentance itself” is framed as God’s favor? JumpstartAnother way to ask: How has preaching in your life talked about repentance—one-time event, ongoing lifestyle, doorway to faith, or optional extra? What would change if repentance itself is seen as God’s gift and favor?

In the judge-and-criminal illustration, the judge cancels the sentence only if the criminal “completely repent[s]… hate[s]” his crimes and is “determined to never again return,” and Bercot says that’s how early Christians viewed grace; what parts of that illustration feel like good news to you, and what parts feel threatening or offensive—and why? JumpstartAnother way to ask: In the judge story, mercy comes only if the criminal truly repents and turns away from the crime. What feels like good news in that picture, and what feels scary or offensive to you—and why?

Bercot quotes Hebrews about “insult[ing] the Spirit of grace” and says there is a point where God says, “Enough… There is no more repentance for you,” while also admitting, “I don’t know what constitutes sinning willfully… and I don’t want to find out”; how do you reconcile God’s long-suffering with these warnings, and what practices help you take such passages seriously without sliding into despair or denial? JumpstartAnother way to ask: How do you hold together God’s patience with the Bible’s warnings about reaching a point of “no more repentance”? What helps you take those warnings seriously without falling into panic or ignoring them?

He contrasts his “early Christian” model with “today’s Christianity,” where the judge promises to serve *future* sentences too and guarantees “regardless of what you do in the future”; where have you encountered this “guarantee” logic in evangelical assumptions about assurance and freedom, and what do you think it does to a believer’s fear of God, holiness, and willingness to forgive others? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Where have you heard the idea that salvation is guaranteed no matter what someone does later? What do you think that does to a Christian’s fear of God, pursuit of holiness, and willingness to forgive others?

Using Matthew 18 (the unmerciful servant), Bercot argues that even “the initial cancellation of our debt is a conditional one” and can be reinstated if we refuse to forgive; what does this suggest about how God treats forgiveness as relational rather than mechanical, and how should that impact specific strained relationships in your life (including situations where forgiveness feels emotionally impossible)? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If God can take back forgiveness when we refuse to forgive others (like in Matthew 18), what does that say about forgiveness being relational, not automatic? How should that affect a hard relationship in your life, especially when forgiveness feels impossible?

Bercot claims Martin Luther’s definitions created the idea that if we do anything, “then it’s not grace,” and he accuses translators of “fudging” by rendering *charis* as “thanks” or “deeds” to protect that system; what do you think is at stake spiritually if translation choices and inherited theological definitions shape our reading more than the text itself, and how should a serious Christian community respond when cherished doctrinal language might be built on misleading word-definitions? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What’s at stake if Bible translations and inherited definitions shape what we think more than the text itself? How should a church respond if favorite doctrinal phrases might be built on wrong word meanings?