The Message

  • Thread starter Thread starter jfallaw
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

jfallaw

Guest
In my old evangelical church, the pastor often reads from the Message paraphrase Bible. The Message in many ways distorts and changes the word of God; and Protestants- especially evangelicals- claim to feel very strongly about God’s word. Does anyone read this translation and reccomend it?
 
I have the New Testament only… Picked it up for 50 cents at a yard sale.
I don’t recommend it, I agree with you about the problems with it…
I’ll tell you, though, that after I had heart surgery, in 2004, it was fantastic. I was so weak & full of pain meds, & it was all I could do to sit up in a chair, to read…But that NT…I could read it! I could read & understand what I was reading.
I worked my way through it, and the better*** I*** got, the worse that the Message looked. But for that very limited time, it was the only Bible I could read, & I absolutely devoured it…(It was actually about the only thing I could read, period:( …You’d have to know me, to know how totally out of character that really was!!)
 
jfallaw said:
In my old evangelical church, the pastor often reads from the Message paraphrase Bible. The Message in many ways distorts and changes the word of God; and Protestants- especially evangelicals- claim to feel very strongly about God’s word. Does anyone read this translation and reccomend it?
Click to expand...
I can’t but I can say that In New Zealand we use the Jeruselem Bible at mass and Iprefer that it is so easy to understand… There is also the American standard and the Good news, all Catholic versians.
 
The Message is nice as long as you think of it as a very loose paraphrase. It is not a Bible, and no one should be using it for their exclusive study. It’s great to bring out a fresh look at Scripture, but don’t ever try to use it for serious study.
 
I think the further you get away from the original text, the more they focus on “the messages” and less they focus on “The Message”.
 
I’ve heard that a lot of people will read The Message because it reads just like any other book. Then, they stop reading it because it reads just like any other book. It certainly doesn’t give one the impression that you’re reading The Word of God, and it isn’t designed to. Check out Mr Peterson’s interpretation of John 6:47-55

“I’m telling you the most solemn and sober truth now: Whoever believes in me has real life, eternal life. I am the Bread of Life. Your ancestors ate the manna bread in the desert and died. But now here is Bread that truly comes down out of heaven. Anyone eating this Bread will not die, ever. I am the Bread—living Bread!—who came down out of heaven. Anyone who eats this Bread will live—and forever! The Bread that I present to the world so that it can eat and live is myself, this flesh-and-blood self.”

At this, the Jews started fighting among themselves: “How can this man serve up his flesh for a meal?”

But Jesus didn’t give an inch. "Only insofar as you eat and drink flesh and blood, the flesh and blood of the Son of Man, do you have life within you. The one who brings a hearty appetite to this eating and drinking has eternal life and will be fit and ready for the Final Day.

<<>>
 
I heard an evangelical commentator on the Christian rado station reviewing scripture translations not too long ago. He explained the different styles of translation: dynamic equivalence, paraphrase, word for word etc. He also critiqued the most common versions. He actually said the KJV should be retained by all English speakers for its historical and literary connotations, but that the Authorized Version (we call it RSV in America) is more accurate. He by the way recommended the RSV-CE because it is ecumenical, it contains the deutero-canonical books which, he says, serious bible scholars should have access to. He likes the NRSV and NIV, he dislikes the Good News, Today’s English Version, Message, Ragamuffin (? never heard of it) and Living Bible as loose paraphrases that will lose the meaning over time because they are too colloquial.
 
Puzzlwannie

You wrote:
He actually said the KJV should be retained by all English speakers for its historical and literary connotations, but that the Authorized Version (we call it RSV in America) is more accurate.

I do not think I agree.

I considered that the AV and the KJV were the same and the RSV was different.

[In BibleWorks 7 it is reported that:

KJV, KJA, KJG - Authorized Version (KJV) - 1769 Blayney Edition of the 1611 King James Version of the English Bible … the British 1769 Blayney Edition of the KJV Authorized Version as printed by Cambridge University Press, claimed to be the most accurate standard.

RSV - Revised Standard Version of the Bible. Copyright © 1952 [2nd edition, 1971] by the Division of Christian Education of the National Council of Churches of Christ in the United States of America.]
 
Personally, I prefer the older versions of scripture because I believe they are more accurate and follow the original texts more faithfully and therefore retain the original meaning.

I really don’t see any value in paraphrases such as the Message. If anything, I think they can potentially be harmful because they could mislead those not well grounded because in some instances the meaning of passages are changed, all in the name of being easy to read or being more modern.

I primarily use the Douay-Rheims Bible but also use the King James on occasion.

Thomas

And the light shineth in darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.He came unto his own, and his own received him not.But as many as received him, he gave them power to be made the sons of God
 
NoelFitz said:
Puzzlwannie

You wrote:
He actually said the KJV should be retained by all English speakers for its historical and literary connotations, but that the Authorized Version (we call it RSV in America) is more accurate.

I do not think I agree.

I considered that the AV and the KJV were the same and the RSV was different.

[In BibleWorks 7 it is reported that:

KJV, KJA, KJG - Authorized Version (KJV) - 1769 Blayney Edition of the 1611 King James Version of the English Bible … the British 1769 Blayney Edition of the KJV Authorized Version as printed by Cambridge University Press, claimed to be the most accurate standard.

RSV - Revised Standard Version of the Bible. Copyright © 1952 [2nd edition, 1971] by the Division of Christian Education of the National Council of Churches of Christ in the United States of America.]
Click to expand...
puzzleannie,

I’m afraid NoelFitz has this right. The KJV and the Authorized Version are the same; the RSV is not to be confused with either.

What really floors me is the fact that an evangelical (Protestant) not only has kind words about the RSV (which they disliked so much they had to bring into existence their beloved NIV), but even prefers the RSV Catholic Edition to it! Is this guy for real? He must have Catholic leanings!
 
I have the Message Bible. I bought it for £6.50, but I not particularly fond of the translation. I find it useful to quote scripture for people who aren’t very good readers, or English isn’t their first language.
 
Manfred

You wrote:

I’m afraid NoelFitz has this right.

Why are you afraid I am right? It is a very rare occurrence.
 
littleone said:
I can’t but I can say that In New Zealand we use the Jeruselem Bible at mass and Iprefer that it is so easy to understand… There is also the American standard and the Good news, all Catholic versians.
Click to expand...
I’ve never read the JB- I would like to get one. I’ve also never read the RSV. I use the NAB as a study/standard Bible.
 
RachelB said:
The Message is nice as long as you think of it as a very loose paraphrase. It is not a Bible, and no one should be using it for their exclusive study. It’s great to bring out a fresh look at Scripture, but don’t ever try to use it for serious study.
Click to expand...
My girlfriend reads it as a primary Bible, so I gave her a Women’s Devotional Bible for study. I think she is starting to read that one more. It’s NIV-- she is unfortunately Protestant, but she really doesn’t know much about religion outside of the fact that she has been going to her church her whole life. I plan to introduve her to the Apocryphal books soon, and hopefully ease her into an understanding of the Catholic faith someday. Her church (my old one, which I still go to on Thursdays with her) is pretty strongly anti-Catholic evangelical.
 
Pixie_Dust said:
I’ve heard that a lot of people will read The Message because it reads just like any other book. Then, they stop reading it because it reads just like any other book. It certainly doesn’t give one the impression that you’re reading The Word of God, and it isn’t designed to. Check out Mr Peterson’s interpretation of John 6:47-55

“I’m telling you the most solemn and sober truth now: Whoever believes in me has real life, eternal life. I am the Bread of Life. Your ancestors ate the manna bread in the desert and died. But now here is Bread that truly comes down out of heaven. Anyone eating this Bread will not die, ever. I am the Bread—living Bread!—who came down out of heaven. Anyone who eats this Bread will live—and forever! The Bread that I present to the world so that it can eat and live is myself, this flesh-and-blood self.”

At this, the Jews started fighting among themselves: “How can this man serve up his flesh for a meal?”

But Jesus didn’t give an inch. "Only insofar as you eat and drink flesh and blood, the flesh and blood of the Son of Man, do you have life within you. The one who brings a hearty appetite to this eating and drinking has eternal life and will be fit and ready for the Final Day.

<<>>
Click to expand...
Are you sure that’s not Shakespeare?:rolleyes: Blah!
 
Thomas58 said:
Personally, I prefer the older versions of scripture because I believe they are more accurate and follow the original texts more faithfully and therefore retain the original meaning.

I really don’t see any value in paraphrases such as the Message. If anything, I think they can potentially be harmful because they could mislead those not well grounded because in some instances the meaning of passages are changed, all in the name of being easy to read or being more modern.

I primarily use the Douay-Rheims Bible but also use the King James on occasion.

Thomas

And the light shineth in darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.He came unto his own, and his own received him not.But as many as received him, he gave them power to be made the sons of God
Click to expand...
I don’t know what version it is- I cant find it in or on the Bible- but I have one that belonged to my grandfather, from the fifties. It has a pic of Pope Pius XII in it, and weird names, like Josue instead of Joshua. It’s pretty cool, it has old medieval like drawings in it.
 
Manfred said:
puzzleannie,

I’m afraid NoelFitz has this right. The KJV and the Authorized Version are the same; the RSV is not to be confused with either.

What really floors me is the fact that an evangelical (Protestant) not only has kind words about the RSV (which they disliked so much they had to bring into existence their beloved NIV), but even prefers the RSV Catholic Edition to it! Is this guy for real? He must have Catholic leanings!
Click to expand...
I must admit I enjoy the NIV. winces
 
jfallaw said:
My girlfriend reads it as a primary Bible, so I gave her a Women’s Devotional Bible for study. I think she is starting to read that one more. It’s NIV-- she is unfortunately Protestant, but she really doesn’t know much about religion outside of the fact that she has been going to her church her whole life. I plan to introduve her to the Apocryphal books soon, and hopefully ease her into an understanding of the Catholic faith someday. Her church (my old one, which I still go to on Thursdays with her) is pretty strongly anti-Catholic evangelical.
Click to expand...
The New Catholic Answer Bible would make a great gift for her. 😉
 
Pixie_Dust said:
I have a friend who calls the NIV the :“Gerber Bible.”
Click to expand...
Actually, New Living Translation is even more simplified. I have that (was given it by the church I attend) and a KJV pocket New Testament. I’m not really fond of the NLT, and sometimes the KJV can be really hard to read.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top