Skip to content

Add your phone number?

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

Jumpstarter 4 of 10

Ideas to help restart your discussion
The Bible: Exploring Facts and Myths About the Word of God  /  The Apostle's Bible (Part 1)  /  Discussion Questions
All Questions
Question 4
In Romans 2:24 and 9:27, Bercot argues that the Masoretic readings change the meaning in major ways (blasphemed “among the Gentiles…on account of you”; a remnant “shall be saved” rather than merely “return”). How does this press on modern evangelical habits of building theology from the Hebrew-based Old Testament while using the New Testament as the “lens,” and what doctrines become fragile if the apostolic prooftexts are treated as loose paraphrases?
Another way to ask: If some Masoretic readings change the meaning in big ways (Rom 2:24; 9:27), how does that challenge the habit of building theology mainly from the Hebrew Old Testament? What key doctrines get shaky if we say the apostles were only paraphrasing loosely?

Direct Answer Bercot’s point presses evangelicals to admit that apostolic theology often rests on Septuagint wording, not the Masoretic base behind most English Old Testaments. If apostolic prooftexts are dismissed as “loose paraphrase,” then key New Testament arguments (about salvation, Gentile accountability, and messianic fulfillment) become easier to weaken.

Support from Transcript:

  • Romans 2:24: Paul says God’s name is blasphemed “among the Gentiles…through you,” but the Masoretic of Isa 52:5 says only, “My name is continually everyday blasphemed,” leaving out “Gentiles” and the cause.
  • Bercot says that omission yields a “significantly different meaning,” while the Septuagint includes, “On account of you, my name is continually blasphemed among the Gentiles.”
  • Romans 9:27: Paul quotes Isaiah about a remnant that “shall be saved,” but Masoretic says a remnant “will return,” which Bercot says is “nothing about salvation.”
  • He repeatedly emphasizes apostles quoted the Septuagint and assumed readers had it; otherwise, readers checking Scripture would be “thrown…for a loop.”
  • Bercot argues God would not inspire apostles to quote falsely, pushing against the idea that these are merely sloppy citations.
Discussion Follow-ups If the apostles’ doctrinal conclusions depend on specific wording, how comfortable should we be treating their citations as flexible or non-binding?

Jumpstarter 4 of 10
Back Questions Next