Open Your Eyes to the REAL “Message”
- Posted by: Todd
- Posted on: Tue, April 01, 2008
- Viewed 79
- (16) comments so far
What The Message does refer to Jesus 77 times is the title “Master Jesus.” This is a New Age term.
Your thoughts?
Todd
Did you know… The King James Bible refers to Jesus as "Lord Jesus" about 115 times. The New King James Bible uses this term about the same amount of times and the New American Standard about 100 times. How many times does Eugene Peterson's The Message use the phrase "Lord Jesus"? None! Not once. Never! (Check it out at (http://www.biblegateway.com)
Comments
if you want a Globally Recognized Avatar (the images next to your profile) get them here. Once you sign up, they will displayed on any website that supports them.
Rob Grayson on Tue, April 01, 2008
I think this is being rather picky. If you wanted to find fault with the Message translation (which I don’t), I’m sure there must be more convincing arguments than this.
Whether “Master Jesus” is a New Age term I have no idea. I suspect the reasoning behind the choice to use this rather than “Lord” is that “Lord” is a rather antiquated word with feudal connotations which the Biblical text is not intended to convey.
kent on Tue, April 01, 2008
Wait til you see “The Message - the Movie”. That will really turn tyour hair gray.
kent on Tue, April 01, 2008
Oh I am sorry I just checked out your picture, your hair is already gray. Sorry - my bad.
Derek on Tue, April 01, 2008
Master Jesus…Master Yoda…. I smell a New Age connection!
Eugene Peterson DEFINITELY pees sitting down!
Derek
Beach Guy on Tue, April 01, 2008
Check today’s date!
deaubry on Tue, April 01, 2008
april first , uh huh yeah
Rev Scottie on Tue, April 01, 2008
I meditate using The Message daily. http://www.mondaymorninginsight.com/images/smileys/smile.gif
CS on Tue, April 01, 2008
The message is not a translation; it is a paraphrase. And a very bad one at that. It reduces the glory of God and mangles His Word.
There’s a great article at http://www.crossroad.to/Bible_studies/Message.html that explains this pretty well.
—
CS
Leonard on Tue, April 01, 2008
shoot, I thought you said massage and I was getting ready
JJ on Tue, April 01, 2008
Did you know the King James Bible uses the world Yeshua! How can you even talk about a person without using there proper name!
Your post about this translation is very small minded and regardless of what anyone thinks a book can not “reduce the glory of God”
Peter Hamm on Wed, April 02, 2008
I think the Message is an excellent paraphrase/commentary on scripture. If you asked Eugene Peterson, he might tell you it’s not intended for serious Bible study. He didn’t even want verse numbers.
This is why I won’t use it as a source for quoting, and to be honest, I totally stopped using it when the NLT came out.
But I think we have more important things to get all bent out of shape about in this world.
CS on Wed, April 02, 2008
JJ:
You’re right. A book cannot reduce the glory of God; that would be impossible. But the contents of the book and the way in which God is described can be in such a fashion to where it does not make God sound as glorious as He is.
For example, the beginning of the Lord’s Prayer normally says, “Our Father, who art in Heaven, hallowed be Thy name.” This shows a great deal of reverence and uplifts the presence of God. God’s name is holy, sacred, and set apart.
Compare that to The Message, which says, “Our Father in heaven, Reveal who you are.” What happened to the presence of His power and how awesome even His name is? There isn’t even any sort of equivalency here. It’s not “small-minded” to ask for proper hermeneutics and doctrine to be used in churches.
Peter:
“This is why I won’t use it as a source for quoting, and to be honest, I totally stopped using it when the NLT came out.”
The problem with The Message is that it is being taught as Scripture in many churches and books, and not as a paraphrase. So when a pastor uses it and says, “Thus sayeth the Lord,” it is an error at best, heresy at the worst, depending on what was cited.
—
CS
Peter Hamm on Wed, April 02, 2008
CS
You wrote [The problem with The Message is that it is being taught as Scripture in many churches and books, and not as a paraphrase. So when a pastor uses it and says, “Thus sayeth the Lord,” it is an error at best, heresy at the worst, depending on what was cited.] You are criticizing the USAGE of it, though, not the intent. It was NOT intended to be a Bible for study. It was and is a paraphrase that shouldn’t be used for the purposes you describe. But that is an error in judgement by the one using it.
CS on Wed, April 02, 2008
Peter:
“You are criticizing the USAGE of it, though, not the intent. It was NOT intended to be a Bible for study. It was and is a paraphrase that shouldn’t be used for the purposes you describe. But that is an error in judgement by the one using it.”
There is some truth here about utility and tools. Misusing a book like this is kind of like saying, “A hammer is a tool for putting nails through wood. Using it to knock someone on the head is the incorrect usage of it, because it was not intended to be a weapon against people.”
Unfortunately, though, on Peterson’s own website, under his bio, it says, “A prolific author, he is probably most well known for The Message, his translation of the Bible in the language of today. “ He doesn’t call it a paraphrase, he calls it a, “translation,” and says that it is, “the Bible.” Both of those words denote something in it that is, in your words, “a Bible fit for study.”
Original purpose or intent aside, the new usage of it appears to clearly be to make it something for study and preaching. The “hammer” is now fit for beating people on the noggin’ here.
—
CS
Leonard Lee on Wed, April 02, 2008
I love the message and I love the NIV and I love the NASB and a bunch of other translations and paraphrases.
Page 1 of 2 pages 1 2 >
Post a Comment