Bible Study Incest

[Razeontherock]

the message bible is a paraphrase not a accurate translation

Hmmm, since this has come up so much, let's spell out what a paraphrase is in this context. Many many words in one language have literally NO equivalent in another, and that is very much the case between the original languages of Scripture and English; particularly so with Hebrew.

So any and all word-for-word translations will lack in those areas; there's simply no way around that. What a paraphrase does is starts with an understanding of a concept, and puts that into different words. That IS translating! So saying something is a paraphrase has absolutely nothing to do with it being a good version of the Bible, or not.

No Bible will impart to us the full understanding of Scripture, and even people conversant in the original language had questions.

The particular version under attack here, MSG, was authored by a Pastor of many years, Eugene Peterson. He discovered that the majority of his working time was spent relaying what Scripture said in a way that people understood. Eventually he decided to spend that time writing it down, coupled with his experience of what got the point across to his parishioners.

People feel the need to crucify him for that?!? It seems to me we should fear to speak a word against such an effort.

That said, MSG is TERRIBLE with the Gospels! When approached by a publisher to create a version of them, Eugene said no, it won't work. Navpress, the publisher "pressed" him into trying one, (I forget which he did first) Eugene hated it but Navpress said they loved it, wanted the rest, and made him an offer he apparently couldn't refuse.

He does a great job with Paul, although I think Navpress injected the phrase "the message" where we're used to seeing "the Gospel." I find it tacky, but it doesn't change the rendering. (For that matter I would bet that less than half our membership even knows what the word "gospel" means in it's original usage, and how it's connected to why we use that word today)

Proverbs takes on new life in his version. Psalms can be great. Some people greatly enjoy the Prophets.

The point here is every version has it's weakness es and strengths, and the best version is always whichever one you will read. (And names other than Eugene Peterson have little bearing on the controversial merits of MSG)

 

[Christ_empowered]

ok. socio-hisotrical perspective time. every society has incest rules. its not all about potential genetic defects, either. if you'll notice, even in societies where 99.xyz% of people could not marry close relatives, royalty and nobles did on a regular basis, to maintain power and control. status is an issue, too.

with Christianity, you see gradual development of incest prohibitions, based on God's revelations to mankind. interestingly enough, the Judeo-Christian incest rules are still with us, in the form of state-level incest laws re: marriage. a few states allow 1st cousins to marry. most do not. marriages that violate the rules can be annulled by the state, and there's the potential for criminal prosecution.

try not to be grossed out or disgusted by this kind of thing, especially in the OT. A lot of The Bible is just...a story about God's work, with a lot of -very- flawed people taking center stage. Its sort of like really, really good literature.

 

[ezra]

People feel the need to crucify him for that?!? It seems to me we should fear to speak a word against such an effort.

just hold on there not so quick i only stated the obvious at no time have i or did say a word against peters who is the author . so umm if you kindly can dont address me with this issue . i really could careless who use the message the amplified or any other version Bible . i use my own paraphrase when preaching. when i do i state this is MY paraphrase ..NOT scripture..and that is my point ..i do hope i clarified this for you

 

[JohnDB]

Hmmm, since this has come up so much, let's spell out what a paraphrase is in this context. Many many words in one language have literally NO equivalent in another, and that is very much the case between the original languages of Scripture and English; particularly so with Hebrew.

So any and all word-for-word translations will lack in those areas; there's simply no way around that. What a paraphrase does is starts with an understanding of a concept, and puts that into different words. That IS translating! So saying something is a paraphrase has absolutely nothing to do with it being a good version of the Bible, or not.

No Bible will impart to us the full understanding of Scripture, and even people conversant in the original language had questions.

The particular version under attack here, MSG, was authored by a Pastor of many years, Eugene Peterson. He discovered that the majority of his working time was spent relaying what Scripture said in a way that people understood. Eventually he decided to spend that time writing it down, coupled with his experience of what got the point across to his parishioners.

People feel the need to crucify him for that?!? It seems to me we should fear to speak a word against such an effort.

That said, MSG is TERRIBLE with the Gospels! When approached by a publisher to create a version of them, Eugene said no, it won't work. Navpress, the publisher "pressed" him into trying one, (I forget which he did first) Eugene hated it but Navpress said they loved it, wanted the rest, and made him an offer he apparently couldn't refuse.

He does a great job with Paul, although I think Navpress injected the phrase "the message" where we're used to seeing "the Gospel." I find it tacky, but it doesn't change the rendering. (For that matter I would bet that less than half our membership even knows what the word "gospel" means in it's original usage, and how it's connected to why we use that word today)

Proverbs takes on new life in his version. Psalms can be great. Some people greatly enjoy the Prophets.

The point here is every version has it's weakness es and strengths, and the best version is always whichever one you will read. (And names other than Eugene Peterson have little bearing on the controversial merits of MSG)

There's more than one reason that the original english translators of the scriptures were "outlaws".
Of all the languages for the scriptures to be translated into... English is the worst. Tyndale and Wycliffe were hated for righteous reasons. (Not saying that they were really wrong)
Many parts of speech simply don't exist in the English language that existed in Hebrew, Aramaic, Koine Greek, and Early Latin.

Genesis 1:1 in Hebrew isn't exactly a complete sentence...nor was it meant to be. But it has been forced to be one since "I don't know when". Because of the use of the Hebrew verb "bara" there is an expectation of a material that the Earth and Heavens were made from. If you place an imaginary "out of..." at the end of the sentence then the more accurate understanding of what that first sentence truly means is realized. Hebrew is more an idiomatic and metaphoric language than any other that I've studied. Word for word translation is impossible...no one has actually done one despite what the NASB claims. They have translated out most of the idioms and metaphoric language.

Another instance is John 1:12 NIV.
It's written all in past tense in English...as if we here some 1900+ years later have no chance after everything is over. But because the "Perfect Aortist" tense used actually means all three tenses of past, present, and future at the same time we actually do have hope.

So...no matter what you might like to read...not a one of them can be accurate... especially since often more than one meaning at a time can be ascribed to the original language used.

 

[HeIsRisen2018]

Well I just finished reading the book of Ruth, and if I'm understanding it right, the reason that Boaz married Ruth is because his unnamed relative decided to choose his inheritance over marriage. I didn't wind up crying over it, but that's rather sad indeed.

 

[JohnDB]

Well I just finished reading the book of Ruth, and if I'm understanding it right, the reason that Boaz married Ruth is because his unnamed relative decided to choose his inheritance over marriage. I didn't wind up crying over it, but that's rather sad indeed.

Legacy was everything to an Israelites.

Boaz and Ruth were the grandparents of King David....a huge legacy.

And the unnamed relative wanted the land but didn't want the wife. But one comes with the other. Can't separate the two. So he passed on them both.

Big mistake.

 

[JohnDB]

And there is a song that everyone loves... kinda old now.

 

[Razeontherock]

Well I just finished reading the book of Ruth, and if I'm understanding it right, the reason that Boaz married Ruth is because his unnamed relative decided to choose his inheritance over marriage. I didn't wind up crying over it, but that's rather sad indeed.

There's a LOT going on in that story!! Hopefully you can already guess that it's main point is Jesus, and our relationship to Him? Now I'll see who opens that up ...

 

[HeIsRisen2018]

There's a LOT going on in that story!! Hopefully you can already guess that it's main point is Jesus, and our relationship to Him? Now I'll see who opens that up ...

How can that be it's main point? Jesus wasn't even born yet. Unless it's symbolic in some way, shape, or form.

 

[Christ_empowered]

hi. The Book of Ruth is seen by some people as a story of redemption, which kind of (to a point...) shows a bit of Christ and The Good News...in the OT.

Its probably my favorite book in the OT. Actually, next to The Gospels, it is one of my top picks in Scripture, personally.

 

[HeIsRisen2018]

hi. The Book of Ruth is seen by some people as a story of redemption, which kind of (to a point...) shows a bit of Christ and The Good News...in the OT.

Its probably my favorite book in the OT. Actually, next to The Gospels, it is one of my top picks in Scripture, personally.

I'm sorry but I really don't get it. All I see it as is somebody who loves their money more than___ whoa wait a minute! Does it have to do with the fact that it's symbolic about how a lot of us (intentionally or unintentionally) value other things and hold them more important to us than Jesus?

 

[HeIsRisen2018]

And there is a song that everyone loves... kinda old now.

Good song, sorry I couldn't listen to it before, I was in a middle of a dance break from my Just Dance Wii game lol. Those games are a lot of fun but they're also a lot of exercise and I need to take a break every now and then. *clears throat* Anyway, getting back to the topic, it's very interesting what all I have learned already for reading my Bible, or rather actually wanting and getting excited about reading my Bible ever since my brother gave me my Message Bible for Christmas. To me, it was one of the best Christmas presents (if not the best) I have ever received because it finally got me turned on the gospel and I think that's what matters most here. Tomorrow night I start reading the book of Samuel and I'm very curious what I'm going to be learning about next. Ah well, off to play Tomb Raider now for a little while but I still might be popping in and out of here.

 

[JohnDB]

I'm sorry but I really don't get it. All I see it as is somebody who loves their money more than___ whoa wait a minute! Does it have to do with the fact that it's symbolic about how a lot of us (intentionally or unintentionally) value other things and hold them more important to us than Jesus?

How about how Ruth and Naomi we're as good as dead. They were literally starving to death unless someone got married. The guy who was supposed to "redeem" them didn't want them and considered them too expensive to redeem.
The two were hopeless.

In steps Boaz.

And he redeemed the ladies...and got a legacy far beyond his wildest dreams. Because Boaz was kinda an "old guy" and didn't think that he would get a pretty and attractive wife...much less one that a Biblical directive would encourage.

But Jesus is our "kinsman Redeemer".

We are in debt because of our sin...
We also are dead because of our sins.

Jesus redeemed us.

 

[HeIsRisen2018]

How about how Ruth and Naomi we're as good as dead. They were literally starving to death unless someone got married. The guy who was supposed to "redeem" them didn't want them and considered them too expensive to redeem.
The two were hopeless.

In steps Boaz.

And he redeemed the ladies...and got a legacy far beyond his wildest dreams. Because Boaz was kinda an "old guy" and didn't think that he would get a pretty and attractive wife...much less one that a Biblical directive would encourage.

But Jesus is our "kinsman Redeemer".

We are in debt because of our sin...
We also are dead because of our sins.

Jesus redeemed us.

Amen. That's a very good observation too.

 

[ezra]

How can that be it's main point? Jesus wasn't even born yet. Unless it's symbolic in some way, shape, or form.

if you was to read on they was helping bring the Christ seed in step by step a good commentary would give back ground history --- Rahab the Harlot helped bring the christ seed in

 

[Razeontherock]

How can that be it's main point? Jesus wasn't even born yet. Unless it's symbolic in some way, shape, or form.

I thought you said you already learned there's just something about that Name? Lol

How many OT stories have you been told are all about Jesus? Passover, I know. Was Jesus born then? Isaac; that was 300+ years earlier.

There are perhaps some things in the OT that don't speak of Jesus at all, maybe.
Any and all unanswered questions in the OT - Jesus is the answer! That much I've learned. Plus t the NT tells us Christ is both the Wisdom and the Power of God, so that covers a lot of the OT as well.

 

[Razeontherock]

hi. The Book of Ruth is seen by some people as a story of redemption, which kind of (to a point...) shows a bit of Christ and The Good News...in the OT.

Its probably my favorite book in the OT. Actually, next to The Gospels, it is one of my top picks in Scripture, personally.

Redemption! Yes, Christ our Redeemer. Our kinsman Redeemer, at that.

 

[Razeontherock]

How about how Ruth and Naomi we're as good as dead. They were literally starving to death unless someone got married. The guy who was supposed to "redeem" them didn't want them and considered them too expensive to redeem.
The two were hopeless.

In steps Boaz.

And he redeemed the ladies...and got a legacy far beyond his wildest dreams. Because Boaz was kinda an "old guy" and didn't think that he would get a pretty and attractive wife...much less one that a Biblical directive would encourage.

But Jesus is our "kinsman Redeemer".

We are in debt because of our sin...
We also are dead because of our sins.

Jesus redeemed us.

Noice!

 

[ezra]

strong meat belongs to those of age.. some stay on milk

 

[Razeontherock]

strong meat belongs to those of age.. some stay on milk

Yup, but we all had to get the milk in there first, at some point. That's how we grow ...