"The Message"

[stephen]

Eugene Peterson explains why he paraphrased the Scriptures and came up with
"The Message."

"I wanted to convey by means of American syntax and diction that everything
in the Bible is livable, that the most important question is not 'What does
it say?' but 'What does it mean and how can I live it?' I wanted to gather a
company of people together who read personally, not impersonally, who
learned to read the Bible in order to live their true selves, not just get
information that they could use to raise their standard of living. I wanted
to counter the consumer attitude that uses the Bible as a way to gather
religious data by which we can be our own gods. I wanted to recover that
original tone, that prophetic and Gospel 'voice' that stabs us awake to a
beauty and hope that connects us with our real lives."

(Eugene Peterson's book, "Eat This Book: A Conversation in the Art of
Spiritual Reading" (Eerdmans, 2006).

[TBC: Peterson fails to realize that the Bible is "acultural," which means
that the Lord inspired the writers to produce a book which would speak to
every culture. To "convey by means of American syntax and diction," Peterson
has at best limited the meaning of the Bible, and at worst, greatly obscured
it.]

 

[Faithful Son]

I have gone onto Biblegateway after hearing about the Message on a Christian audio seminar. I sense God in every word of the message, I am 22 years old and have never heard of this Bible before, although it has been published for more than 10 years, albeit the Old and New Testament seperately. I see no reason why I should not believe that God could have used Eugene Peterson to write that Bible. Who are we to judge? Who are we to say the Word of God is wrong? Most text in the message Bible can easily be cross referenced with another version on Biblegateway, and I would suggest to anyone, take your favorite piece of scripture, read it again, then read it in the Message, the clarity and understandibility of the scripture shines through in new light.

I say praise God for using Eugene Peterson, I wanted to buy myself a copy of the Message, but I live in South Africa, and I want a hardcopy student version, which I can't find for the correct price, I'll search though, it's bound to be there.

The student version of the Message is called the Message Remixed, I have read some of it on Amazon, and by the looks of it, it's only physical asthetics that are different, the text remains the same.

I say all of this in my humble opinion, anyone may have theirs.

Much love
teraside

 

[stephen]

Hi teraside

from teraside I see no reason why I should not believe that God could have used Eugene Peterson to write that Bible. Who are we to judge? Who are we to say the Word of God is wrong? Most text in the message Bible can easily be cross referenced with another version on Biblegateway, and I would suggest to anyone, take your favorite piece of scripture, read it again, then read it in the Message, the clarity and understandibility of the scripture shines through in new light.

I too have used the 'Message'. The 'Message' falls into the category of a 'paraphrase' of the scriptures, of which there are a number of types.

I recall 'JB Philips' translation, which was all the rage at one time (40 years ago!!) yet possible the only bit I remember from it today is "don't let the world squeeze you into its mould", a paraphrase of the first verse of Romans ch 1.

Then there was the 'Living Bible' which tried to present a readable paraphrase with an appeal to young people. Today it is hardly used or even referenced although there are some nice phases in it. Then recently we have had a"Young People's Bible" which some use.

The trouble with these paraphrase versions is that they are not "translations" and therefore they lack the scrutiny of scholarship. They are a version written by one man, and therefore contain a personal bias which may even reflect a doctrinal stance. The 'Message' is a good example of this. It is a paraphrase of the scriptures written by 'one' man

For example if you read the preface to the NIV bible, there you find a whole army of people, scholars, who were involved in scrutinising the original Hebrew and Greek text together. This would also apply to the Good News bible, and each of these translations (not paraphrase) has a particular emphasis which makes them distinct.

So we have to go back to the Kings James Bible, The Jerusalem Bible, the Standard American Bible to get what is better described as a scholastic TRANSLATION of the original Greek and Hebrew text.

This leads me to the key point.

The Paraphrase versions have a place in making the bible readable, especially to the non-Christian, but for the Christian they have to be read alongside one of the authenticated TRANSLATIONS. Therefore we cannot build doctrine on paraphrase versions because for special effect, they can add what is not there, or take away from what is there.

I find myself constantly reminding our home group about this, and trying to get them to use the Revised King James or American Standard as their fundamental text.
From time to time I read the Old King James version pointing out its poetic beauty and precision. Trouble is language is a constantly evolving thing, and the meaning of words change or are robbed of their original meaning (for example the word Gay).

So there is a place for both the Paraphrase and the Authenticated Translations but the latter must always over-ride the former.

God Bless You

 

[Faithful Son]

Thanks for clarifying Stephen, I agree with you in one sense, but I tend to disagree in another, let me explain:

I understand what the word paraphrased means and I have a NIV Bible, so I am familiar with the preface. I see the scenario like this:

With the NIV you have a collective effort of more than 30 scholars at the least working on a direct translation, I say it again, a direct translation. So let me use this example. Let's take my home language in South Africa, if I were to translate I love you, from Afrikaans, direclty to English, it would sound something like this. I is love you, which doesn't make sense does it? But it makes sense in my language, so in essence all Bible versions are paraphrased, they had to find some form of language and grammar to express the message. I see no difference in the NIV as oposed to the Message.

I feel strong about a certain thing that you may be able to shed more light on. I believe that God wrote the Bible, the Bible says so itself. I believe in specifics, that Jesus, the Word wrote the Bible. By using people, He wrote the Bible. I find the same in the Message, Jesus helped Eugene Peterson write the Message, there is room for improvement and revision, but the overall Message, excuse the pun, that it conveys is a Message of truth, total obedience to God and a way of showing people of today what the Bible is really about.

God bless you too Stephen,

much love
teraside