When the Twelve returned from purchasing food in the town of Sychar, in Samaria, they were “amazed” to find Jesus talking with a woman (John 4:27). Apparently, such a thing was culturally inappropriate. That, however, didn’t stop Jesus. More specifically, it didn’t stop His amazing grace, because He offered a “gift of God”—which He called “living water”—to a woman who had likely been divorced and remarried five times and who was currently living with her boyfriend (John 4:10). That’s grace. But was Jesus’ gracious gift “unconditional?” Could she receive His gift without changing her behavior? Was Jesus offering her a license to continue in fornication?

Which is worse, adultery or murder? Both were forbidden by the Ten Commandments (see Ex. 20:13-14). Both were punishable by death in the Mosaic Law (see Ex. 9:6; Lev. 20:10-12; 24:17; Num. 35:30; Deut. 22:22). Although both are grievous in God’s eyes, I think most people would agree that murder is more grievous.

We all deal with personal biases, so it should not surprise us that Bible-translation scholars do as well. When they hold themselves to the discipline of “word-for-word” translation, as in the NASB (New American Standard Bible) for example, there is less room for personal bias to sneak in. When they employ “phrase for phrase” translation, such as in the NLT (New Living Translation), there is more room for personal bias to sneak in. This is not to say that there aren’t advantages to “phrase for phrase” translation, advantages that can create better understanding in the minds of readers.

When I first saw the quote below on someone’s Facebook page, I thought it was a joke:

God doesn’t expect you to follow a single commandment from the Law, which included the 10 Commandments. His Spirit is now your guide. Don’t just trust Him for forgiveness, but for morality as well.

I followed the quote to its source. It was a hyper-grace “Bible teacher” whom I had seen quoted before on Facebook. I would have just ignored him, but I noticed he had 34,000 Facebook followers. Hundreds of them had “liked” or “loved” his claim that I first thought was a joke. More than 100 people had shared it with their Facebook friends.

Seek the welfare of the city where I have sent you into exile, and pray to the Lord on its behalf; for in its welfare you will have welfare (Jer. 29:7).

It is certainly understandable why many genuine Christians, in centuries past, have felt that holding political office was incompatible with following Christ. If a government, for example, prohibits Christians from holding public office, thus requiring them to renounce their faith in the Lord Jesus Christ in order to serve, it is obvious that God would not want any of His children to make that compromise.

It was reported a few years ago by the Associated Press that, near the town of Gavas, eastern Turkey, one sheep among a large flock walked to the edge of a cliff and jumped to its death. A second sheep quickly imitated the first, also leaping off the cliff to its death. Then a third sheep followed. Then a fourth. Then a fifth. The AP reported that “stunned Turkish shepherds, who had left the herd to graze while they had breakfast, watched as nearly 1,500 others followed, each leaping off the same cliff.” When it was all over, 450 sheep had died and 1,050 survived, but only because those sheep that jumped later were saved as the pile of sheep below got higher and the fall more cushioned.

Did you know that the spectrum of theological belief within all of Christendom can be viewed as a spectrum of belief about grace? That spectrum ranges from Universalism (everyone will be saved in the end) to Legalism (salvation is earned by rule-keeping), and everything in between. Most Christians fall somewhere in the middle of that spectrum. The teaching that follows is designed to help you identify precisely where you are at on that spectrum, as well as evaluate if you should move from where you are. If you are, for example, Calvinist/Reformed in your theological perspective, you may be surprised to learn how near you are on the “Spectrum of Grace” to Universalism.

My wife and I recently watched Bonhoeffer: Pastor. Spy. Assassin., a movie that I would recommend. An alternate title could have been, Dietrich Bonhoeffer Changes His Theology about Nonresistance.

Along those lines, I’ve got some food for thought for those who believe that the early church universally held to an Anabaptist view of nonresistance—the idea Christians should never physically do anything to defend themselves or others (the latter of which many of us consider to be a transgression of the commandment to love our neighbors as ourselves).

One of the most liberating events of my Christian life was the moment I decided I was going to read the Bible honestly, believing everything as it is written, without trying to find ways to force my theology into passages that, on the face, seemed to contradict my theology.

As you might imagine, my theology started changing. It was so liberating to finally be able to accept many passages that I previously rejected—albeit unconsciously—because I was sure, yet self-deceived, that I was a “Bible-believer.”

If some Evangelicals (“born-again” Christians) are ever given the option to vote one verse from the Bible, I suspect it would be James 2:24: “You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.”

At face value, James 2:24 flatly contradicts the cardinal evangelical doctrine of “salvation by faith alone.” And that is the primary reason Reformer Martin Luther referred to the book of James as “the epistle of straw.” His disdain set the tone for all Evangelicals who followed him.