What's new
By:
Filters
Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

The Message

thethinkingrebel

thethinkingrebel

Member
I have made a blog post about The Message. One of the most controversial bible translations/paraphrases in recent history:

http://aplacetospoutmyanger.blogspot.co.uk/2012/04/was-i-wrong-about-message.html

Basically I wanted to see what other christians here think about it. I find the various bible translation debates fascinating, so if this discussion extenda beyond simply the MSG so be it.

I spent a good year completely opposed to this version, but I'm now reading it, its not perfect but it most certainly isnt as bad as I thought.


What do you guys think? No holds barred..lets discuss bible translation!
 
I have never seen any issue with "The Message". If it gets people to Christ than that is the problem? I don't actually know of any opposition to it, nor the arguments they make, but I'll see where this goes. It does seem to me that the opposition would be mostly in the same vein as the KJV only idea, so right from there I have to see it as an error.
 
Isa 55:11 So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.
 
Jee Reba, you are good at pulling these scriptures out of the air and BAM they are relevant. Teach me your ways!
 
Pard said:
I have never seen any issue with "The Message". If it gets people to Christ than that is the problem? I don't actually know of any opposition to it, nor the arguments they make, but I'll see where this goes. It does seem to me that the opposition would be mostly in the same vein as the KJV only idea, so right from there I have to see it as an error.
Click to expand...

Its out there on the internet. It is indeed the KJVO crowd, they think that its occultic and New Agey.

I have to admit, I am looking forward to seeing more opinions myself. I dont know if we have a big and vocal KJVO crowd here like there are on similar forums, but brethren opinions on this fascinate me.
 
reba said:
Isa 55:11 So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.
Click to expand...

Many argue that this isn't God's words but are Eugene Peterson's own words. similar to a dynamic equivalence principle but x1000. They would say that the thoughts of the author are being written rather than a translation of the original manuscripts. Thats essentially the belief of the anti-message folk, otherwise, God inspired Peterson to write blasphemy "Micah 3:5-7" and turn God into Master-God, and to write "As above, so below" in the Lord's prayer.

Now as I said, I am not against The Message, simply representing both sides to foster debate.
 
The KJVO crowd isn't large here, mostly because they tend to come and then get told to go away since ALL they do is KJVO stuff. :eeeekkk

I was told that my preferred translation, NASB95, was satanic, to which I laughed.

Anyways, so long as it leads to Christ, and isn't inherently sinful in of itself, I see nothing wrong with new and alternative means of salvation. Yesterday a local church in some town near me rented out a gas station and gave everyone a free tank of gas. They used it as a means to distribute the Word and that is all that matter, but today people scolded them for "whoring" out Christianity.

I've seen "The Message" used to minister to those who just cannot wrap their head around the more difficult language in modern translation. Many people don't have more than a 5th grade reading level, and they need a translation that can be read without requiring much more than that. At the same time, it is difficult to craft a translation at that level without paraphrasing. "The Message" does a pretty decent job at that. Don't use it for study, but for teaching and daily reading I see nothing wrong.
 
:eeeekkk Thy master, thine Holy One of Isreal speakest in thine middle englisheth. thou dost well to learn it or perish!
 
reba said:
Isa 55:11 So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.
Click to expand...

reba:

This is an excellent and searching verse.
 
Pard said:
The KJVO crowd isn't large here, mostly because they tend to come and then get told to go away since ALL they do is KJVO stuff. :eeeekkk

I was told that my preferred translation, NASB95, was satanic, to which I laughed.

Anyways, so long as it leads to Christ, and isn't inherently sinful in of itself, I see nothing wrong with new and alternative means of salvation. Yesterday a local church in some town near me rented out a gas station and gave everyone a free tank of gas. They used it as a means to distribute the Word and that is all that matter, but today people scolded them for "whoring" out Christianity.

I've seen "The Message" used to minister to those who just cannot wrap their head around the more difficult language in modern translation. Many people don't have more than a 5th grade reading level, and they need a translation that can be read without requiring much more than that. At the same time, it is difficult to craft a translation at that level without paraphrasing. "The Message" does a pretty decent job at that. Don't use it for study, but for teaching and daily reading I see nothing wrong.
Click to expand...

wonderful wonderful post. It makes an excellent point about judgmentalism. I don't know who criticized the church, whether its in the press, general public or other christians, but my answer to that would be they paid for it . Lol, if they used it to preach the gospel, so be it! What is wrong with people? What do they think the gospel is? If they hate it so much, let them raise their own money and rent their own gas station!


Yes, the message is fantastic for preaching to the less educated. Those who say that the KJV is good for all ages were probably raised on it, but in that sense give them the wycliffe bible and see what they say.

Now, my preferred manuscript base is the majority text, my least favourite is the critical text, which is what the NASB is based on, I wouldnt condemn one manuscript base, all are profitable for study. I have even decided to start memorizing the ESV (as opposed to my actual favourite translation which is the NKJV) as it is not only modern but traditional, its a good mixture or formal yet readable! But I bet the reading age would be closer to the KJV than the message.

There are alot of Satanic deceptions in the world, and I say it again, if anyone is dumb enough to read a paraphrase bible without a formal translation at their side to check verses against just in case..well they need their heads checking. But the so called corruptions are so few and far between. But it even says in the introduction ITS NOT THE BIBLE. Its a paraphrase (interpretation) of it!
 
Oh I know latin! Ish...

What I am in favor of, and maybe I am biased towards it as it is being put out by my church (AG), is the FIRE Bible. It is the Bible (I believe NIV) with lots of commentary. The commentary is in two parts. Part is as you would expect, and the other part just reiterates the scripture in an even easier to understand way. It is of course slanted towards the pentecostal view, but being one that doesn't phase me.

Another good thing I've seen are the side-by-side translations. I have not yet seen one this way but it'd be nice to see a "The Message"/NLT or one of the other scripture-lite translations. That would be a HUGE boon to ministering to those who have problems reading because "The Message" is a great tool for them and NLT is a very nice balance between manuscript accuracy and easy to read.

And yeah, I've got other translations I go to, I am not the largest fan of the critical texts, in fact I'd rather not deal with it, except that I really love the NASB95's accuracy using modern language. Never liked ESV, but I never gave it that great of a shot. Not a KJV fan either, but because of WHO it was translated for. I've always fallen back on Young's Literal Translation because that is what my grandfather used. My other favorite version is the Geneva, if only because of the history behind it!
 
Pard said:
Oh I know latin! Ish...

What I am in favor of, and maybe I am biased towards it as it is being put out by my church (AG), is the FIRE Bible. It is the Bible (I believe NIV) with lots of commentary. The commentary is in two parts. Part is as you would expect, and the other part just reiterates the scripture in an even easier to understand way. It is of course slanted towards the pentecostal view, but being one that doesn't phase me.
Click to expand...
Never heard of this bible but sounds interesting! I would love some commentary when I'm reading, if only to see a dash of opinion about what I'm reading (such as Moses Egypt etc)

Another good thing I've seen are the side-by-side translations. I have not yet seen one this way but it'd be nice to see a "The Message"/NLT or one of the other scripture-lite translations. That would be a HUGE boon to ministering to those who have problems reading because "The Message" is a great tool for them and NLT is a very nice balance between manuscript accuracy and easy to read.
Click to expand...
Now I am not a fan of the NLT, but maybe an easy read formal translation like HCSB would be a better choice, I would like to see them stacked side by side. I do believe that there are parallel bibles with the Message and other translations. It is needed in my opinion.

And yeah, I've got other translations I go to, I am not the largest fan of the critical texts, in fact I'd rather not deal with it, except that I really love the NASB95's accuracy using modern language. Never liked ESV, but I never gave it that great of a shot. Not a KJV fan either, but because of WHO it was translated for. I've always fallen back on Young's Literal Translation because that is what my grandfather used. My other favorite version is the Geneva, if only because of the history behind it!
Click to expand...

Its not that I have any malice towards it, its simply that the translations leave out verses, the HCSB retains those verse in brackets, which is a heck of a lot better than chucking them down to the footnotes next to"other mss add:"
I agree with you that the NASB is excellent, when I started to properly read the bible I started with the NASB, I loved it. But yeah there are more literal translations, but your grandad had a youngs bible? in hard copy?!!! wow!! I actually prefer Rotherhams to Youngs, but in any case that is amazing, your grandfather was a very brave man! To go from the KJV to Geneva (i also prefer Geneva due to the opposition and persecution of the reformers, its much more real..) is a hard enough step, but KJV to Youngs! I attempted to go from modern translations to the EBR (Rotherhams emphasised bible) Now Im sure that Rotherhams is less intelligible than the YLT but..wow.


As you can see, I am stunned. But total respect to any person who puts accuracy above readability, it goes against the grain. I was once like that, but gave up, and compensate by my plethora of translations.

Also respect for the Geneva, hast thou a copy of the 1599 Tolle Lege reprint?
 
The one with the photocopied pages? No. I don't even own a hard copy, just a digital one. I'm weary of purchasing one because I cannot find them in a store and I want to inspect it before I buy it. I've heard some really bad stories about people who bought the Geneva reprints. I'd love one, but have yet to get one.

I don't know, probably because it was what was read to me, but I tend to get Young's just fine. Wish I could get my hands on his bible, but my grandmother hasn't the faintest idea of where it got off to. Hopefully in good hands somewhere being used! Beats the heck out of my bookcase or some dusty box.
 
Pard said:
The one with the photocopied pages? No. I don't even own a hard copy, just a digital one. I'm weary of purchasing one because I cannot find them in a store and I want to inspect it before I buy it. I've heard some really bad stories about people who bought the Geneva reprints. I'd love one, but have yet to get one.

I don't know, probably because it was what was read to me, but I tend to get Young's just fine. Wish I could get my hands on his bible, but my grandmother hasn't the faintest idea of where it got off to. Hopefully in good hands somewhere being used! Beats the heck out of my bookcase or some dusty box.
Click to expand...

No, thats the hendrickson one (I have both) the tolle lege one has updated wording, its kind of like the KJV It has ye and thou but old spellings are up to date.

http://www.amazon.com/1599-Geneva-Bible/dp/0975484613/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&qid=1334082022&sr=8-5

Its great, sadly bonded leather.

The Hendrickson is fantastic, its never going to be perfect but it beats paying £1000 to get an original off ebay (although I am tempted that if I ever get that much money I would end up buying one).

Its a shame you dont have that old YLT, but you could get a reprint off amazon. I have so many bibles! Greens interlinear, EBR, 3/4 HCSB, NJB, JB, 2 Genevas, 5 KJV, 3 NKJVs, 4 ESVs, of the course the Message Remix and so so many more in my bedroom/library. So I dont agree that a bible is better in someone elses hands ;)

np49y9.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top