George Somsel: BrianWhalen: BrianWhalen: Since Logos seems to allow 2 installs/license, I am very much looking at this as a way to have mobile Bibleage. Quickly look up verses, use my preferred translation instead of listening to the Eugene Peterson paraphrase when it appears... Now, now, that's not nice. Peterson is actually pretty good. You simply don't like it because it doesn't sound very biblical. I'll just say it shouldn't be preached from without great caution and leave it at that, we should start a new thread if you want to discuss further.
BrianWhalen: BrianWhalen: Since Logos seems to allow 2 installs/license, I am very much looking at this as a way to have mobile Bibleage. Quickly look up verses, use my preferred translation instead of listening to the Eugene Peterson paraphrase when it appears... Now, now, that's not nice. Peterson is actually pretty good. You simply don't like it because it doesn't sound very biblical.
BrianWhalen: Since Logos seems to allow 2 installs/license, I am very much looking at this as a way to have mobile Bibleage. Quickly look up verses, use my preferred translation instead of listening to the Eugene Peterson paraphrase when it appears...
Since Logos seems to allow 2 installs/license, I am very much looking at this as a way to have mobile Bibleage. Quickly look up verses, use my preferred translation instead of listening to the Eugene Peterson paraphrase when it appears...
Now, now, that's not nice. Peterson is actually pretty good. You simply don't like it because it doesn't sound very biblical.
I'll just say it shouldn't be preached from without great caution and leave it at that, we should start a new thread if you want to discuss further.
Have you ever had the opportunity to hear someone read from it and then say "Now that's what the Bible should say...""
Where whims and fancies sit in the seat of judgment, a man’s opinion is only so much wind, therefore take no more notice of it than of the wind whistling through a keyhole. ~ CHS
I have not had the experience you mention, for personal reading, in addition to a more literal translation, I have no problem with it. For evangelizing to a friend, probably good there too, as long as you are careful to not skew truth. However, the penalty for adding to or taking away from God's word is severe, I want no part of that.
I view paraphrases as a whole as good additions, especially for people who have a mental barrier about that ole King James or something like that. I just don't believe they should be THE resource. If you use one in preaching, you take that risk.
Brian Whalen
http://www.mcnazarene.com
BrianWhalen: I have not had the experience you mention, for personal reading, in addition to a more literal translation, I have no problem with it. For evangelizing to a friend, probably good there too, as long as you are careful to not skew truth. However, the penalty for adding to or taking away from God's word is severe, I want no part of that. I view paraphrases as a whole as good additions, especially for people who have a mental barrier about that ole King James or something like that. I just don't believe they should be THE resource. If you use one in preaching, you take that risk.
In reality the only problem that I have with it is how people take it. In the traditional paraphrase, the translator is trying to convey the ideas in the passage using modern idioms, language, and "phraseology". But in Peterson's work, it reads as a long sermon on the whole Bible, and even more so that in prior paraphrases you get the authors opinion on how the Scripture should not only read, but on how it should be taken.
I fear that most members of the Body can not recognize the distinction..
I really do enjoy some of Peterson's other work, for example The Contemplative Pastor was a very good read, encouraging pastors to focus on souls and important things as opposed to miscellaneous stuff. Right now, I'm an NASB/ESV guy 95% of the time. I have a difficult time with serious study of a thought for thought translation, as opposed to word for word. So, for me, fine for reading, not for preaching or serious study. I do own other paraphrases, the first one I bought was Rob Lacey's Word on the Street. This too is defintely not a literal translation, but an interesting read nonetheless.
It is a commentary, published as a Bible... It would be like my United Methodist friends taking John Wesle's commentary on the Bible and using it to evangelize or as a devotional.. interesting, but not the Scripture.
The Message is NOT a Bible Translation-Part 1
my 2cents
Joe Miller: It is a commentary, published as a Bible... It would be like my United Methodist friends taking John Wesle's commentary on the Bible and using it to evangelize or as a devotional.. interesting, but not the Scripture. The Message is NOT a Bible Translation-Part 1 my 2cents
More like ⅛ ¢.
georgegfsomsel
יְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן
Great post Joe my thoughts exactly.
Ted
If the Message was good enough for the Apostle Paul, why it would not be good enough for me? (Kind of KJV joke.) It reminds me many years ago on the one of my first trips to the USA one man trying to convince me that only KJV is the real translation, chosen by God. He offered me even some book writen on that subject. I asked him what shel I do with all our people in Czech, when nobody understand KJV. What are we to do? He had no answer. It was obvious he had never thought outside of the USA box. I found it really funny.
Bohuslav
Bohuslav Wojnar: It reminds me many years ago on the one of my first trips to the USA one man trying to convince me that only KJV is the real translation, chosen by God. He offered me even some book writen on that subject.
It reminds me many years ago on the one of my first trips to the USA one man trying to convince me that only KJV is the real translation, chosen by God. He offered me even some book writen on that subject.
If nothing can be trusted but the KJV what does that say about his book?
Years ago I got into a long online discussion with a new age preterist. I would point things out to him like quotes from people like Polycarp or Irenæus that fully supported (confirmed?) the traditional view and his answer was always the same. It's not scripture so it can't be trusted. I found his arguments disorganized and irrational. His solution for that? Go read this book, written and published by some guy who has a preterist web site. Whatever this book is it must be scripture because apparently that dude can be trusted.
Yours in Christ
John
Joe,
It is a commentary indeed and a bad one at that (since it often fails to convey the meaning and the nuances of the text)
For me the message epitomizes everything that is wrong with human centered preaching and teaching. I must conform my thoughts and understanding to Him, not the other way around.
English is my second language, as such I have no sympathy for those that are too lazy to read a translation, even one using dynamic equivalency like the NIV and the NET in their own language.(as opposed to relying on the watered down commentary found in the message)
I have too much respect for the Bible to replace it with my own commentary
So what if some do not want to put in the effort to read and understand a legitimate translation?
This is more likely a symptom of a deeper spiritual problem that will not be solved by merely updating the language
Just like you do not cure alcoholism but prescribing more alcohol, you do not solve the “dumbing down” of Christianity (which is a reflection of what is happening in the larger society) by prescribing a dumbed down commentary masquerading as a translation
The least common denominator is not the way to go
That is why to the message I say away you go J
Alain
Alain Maashe: Joe, It is a commentary indeed and a bad one at that (since it often fails to convey the meaning and the nuances of the text) For me the message epitomizes everything that is wrong with human centered preaching and teaching. I must conform my thoughts and understanding to Him, not the other way around. English is my second language, as such I have no sympathy for those that are too lazy to read a translation, even one using dynamic equivalency like the NIV and the NET in their own language.(as opposed to relying on the watered down commentary found in the message) I have too much respect for the Bible to replace it with my own commentary So what if some do not want to put in the effort to read and understand a legitimate translation? This is more likely a symptom of a deeper spiritual problem that will not be solved by merely updating the language Just like you do not cure alcoholism but prescribing more alcohol, you do not solve the “dumbing down” of Christianity (which is a reflection of what is happening in the larger society) by prescribing a dumbed down commentary masquerading as a translation The least common denominator is not the way to go That is why to the message I say away you go J Alain
Well said Alain, are you some college Prof/scholar or something? You seem to know what your are talking about and capture my thoughts well. You write well and your post make more sense to me and i shall be looking out for more of them. Do have a website?
Ted Hans: Well said Alain, are you some college Prof/scholar or something? You seem to know what your are talking about and capture my thoughts well. You write well and your post make more sense to me and i shall be looking out for more of them. Do have a website? Ted
No, he teaches at Liberty.
Bohuslav Wojnar: ...It was obvious he had never thought outside of the USA box. I found it really funny.
...It was obvious he had never thought outside of the USA box. I found it really funny.
I though that all worldwide theological thought must conform to US standards. There can't be anyone out there but us, can there?
Ted,
I do not have a website I am just a lowly seminary student at DTS preparing for his comprehensive exams.
I am told by those who cut me a paycheck that I am some sort of professor in their online program but I do not necessarily believe them
Scholar? Not me! That was my goal when I started seminary, now, the only thing I know for certain is the inadequacy of my knowledge and skills and the vanity of the whole pursuit even though I try to excel at what I do (the Lord has been busy working on me in that respect, this is not false modesty)
There is indeed one thing George and I can readily agree on, Alain is no scholar
George Somsel: No, he teaches at Liberty.
Thanks George - i have found his views on the high view of scripture to be similar to mine.
Alain Maashe: Ted, I do not have a website I am just a lowly seminary student at DTS preparing for his comprehensive exams. I am told by those who cut me a paycheck that I am some sort of professor in their online program but I do not necessarily believe them Scholar? Not me! That was my goal when I started seminary, now, the only thing I know for certain is the inadequacy of my knowledge and skills and the vanity of the whole pursuit even though I try to excel at what I do (the Lord has been busy working on me in that respect, this is not false modesty) There is indeed one thing George and I can readily agree on, Alain is no scholar Alain
Thanks Alain for responding i have appreciated your post and look forward to more. I was beginning to think i was the only one who shared such a view.
Ted Hans: Joe Miller: It is a commentary, published as a Bible... It would be like my United Methodist friends taking John Wesle's commentary on the Bible and using it to evangelize or as a devotional.. interesting, but not the Scripture. The Message is NOT a Bible Translation-Part 1 my 2cents Great post Joe my thoughts exactly. Ted
Ted, George, etc... glad you dug the post.
I also agree that as a commentary, it is very poor. If you look at the verse by verse comparison in my post, you will notice that Peterson inserts much of his own theology and distorts many biblical concepts.
Alain Maashe: I do not have a website I am just a lowly seminary student at DTS preparing for his comprehensive exams.
http://www.morethancake.org/designs
Joe Miller: Alain Maashe: I do not have a website I am just a lowly seminary student at DTS preparing for his comprehensive exams.Paul made tents, and I make websites. As a bi-vocational church planter, I can take care of that for you if you want a website designed http://www.morethancake.org/designs
Regards
Joe Miller: Ted Hans: Joe Miller: It is a commentary, published as a Bible... It would be like my United Methodist friends taking John Wesle's commentary on the Bible and using it to evangelize or as a devotional.. interesting, but not the Scripture. The Message is NOT a Bible Translation-Part 1 my 2cents Great post Joe my thoughts exactly. Ted Ted, George, etc... glad you dug the post. I also agree that as a commentary, it is very poor. If you look at the verse by verse comparison in my post, you will notice that Peterson inserts much of his own theology and distorts many biblical concepts.
I don't know how much original languages training you have had, but, with the little that I have looked at Peterson, he appears to be reasonably accurate even if he is a bit unconventional. Of course, being unconventional is the whole idea behind his translation. As Wayne Leman, who was a SIL translator and who runs a Bible Translation list, says, we must avoid "biblish" if we are to be understood by the average Joe or Jo. I haven't delved into it enough to comment on any theological perspective it has, but I didn't note anything in what I read. Some live by 6,000 translations, but I prefer to go to the original and therefore don't get too excited by what a particular translation might have.