| Sunday, January 01, 2006 |
| Contemporary Language |
On a whim, this past week I picked up a copy of The Message //Remix by Eugene H. Peterson. It is advertised to be "the Bible in contemporary language." By buying it on impulse, I broke a personal rule. You see, I do not take lightly the purchase of Bible versions, commentaries and other theological works. I've definitely picked up some crummy history books or fictional international thrillers, but I don't mess around with things that will -- well, you know? -- echo in eternity.
At church today almost everyone commented on it: "A new Bible? Oh, I see. You got the ghetto translation" or "You didn't get that did you?" However, after the purchase I researched and found that many well-known people and organizations have endorsed The Message including Billy Graham, Charles Stanley and Focus on the Family. Even BK has one! But, what about Joe Napalm? What does Joe think about it? (Shouldn't you ask yourself that every morning when you roll out of bed?)
I do have some initial reservations. During my evaluation of The Message, not only did I find praise, but I also found problems. One of the best reviews of Eugene Peterson's paraphrase that I was able to find is at Bible-Researcher.com*. Click on the hyperlink and you will find a fair and in-depth review, and examples of "unlikely renderings, lengthy insertions and omissions, and other problems" that afflict The Message. There are definite translation problems (hence the term "paraphrase?"); and it's obvious that we shouldn't use it in place of a proper translation. However, I do agree with the website's remarks that The Message is "a piece of stimulating devotional literature." Mark Lee, of the music group Third Day, said "The Message Bible has had an enormous impact on my Bible studies. Since I've been using [it], I have spent more time reading the Bible than ever before." And you can read reviews and posts on websites like Amazon.com that testify to the same affect. But The Message //Remix is not the Word of God and should not replace a more literal translation of the original Hebrew and Greek.
I will put the book on the shelf with my other commentaries and reference it occasionally to help keep the youth's attention in Sunday school. But it will definitely not be my sole Bible source. For a more literal translation, I'll continue to use the ESV, NIV and NASB (and in that order for now).
* Bookmark www.bible-researcher.com and research the history of -- and compare -- different versions of the Bible. Especially check out "Was the Bible Written in 'Street Language'?" It may be a point of discussion later. |
posted by Joe Napalm @ 4:23 PM   |
|
|
|
|
|
