Skip to content

Add your phone number?

Optional. Nothing is sent unless you choose it.
The Historic Faith
Sign in

Jumpstarter 10 of 10

Ideas to help restart your discussion
Salvation: Mechanical or Relational?  /  Grace: The Most Misunderstood Word in the Bible  /  Discussion Questions
All Questions
Question 10
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?
Another 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?

Direct Answer Bercot argues what’s at stake is nothing less than truth and “eternity,” because wrong definitions can remake Christianity into something else and mislead “millions.” A serious community should test inherited language against Scripture’s usage and early historical evidence, refusing proof-texting and demanding honest translation and context.

Support from Transcript:

  • He warns: “Whoever defines the words… defines what the Bible teaches… it’s that simple and it’s that scary,” and if definitions aren’t true “you lose eternity.”
  • He says Luther gave “made-up definitions… no relationship whatsoever with what those words meant in Paul’s day,” turning Romans into “the epistle that Luther wrote.”
  • He attributes the “if we do anything… it’s not grace” claim to Luther and calls it “absolutely false,” noting *charis* can mean “a reward.”
  • He accuses translators of hiding contrary meanings: rendering *charis* as “thanks” (Romans 7:25) and *ergon* as “deeds” in Romans 2 is called “fudging” and “spiritually dishonest.”
  • He models a response: check all occurrences (Septuagint, NT, early Christians) and avoid “proof texting” that ignores context.
Discussion Follow-ups What safeguards would help a church resist inherited “systems” that force the text to fit? How can a group study Scripture with enough humility to revise cherished vocabulary without becoming cynical or rebellious?

Jumpstarter 10 of 10
Back Questions Done