When was message bible written

Whitacre, Trinity School of Ministry. Manage consent. Close Privacy Overview This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these cookies, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website.

We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may have an effect on your browsing experience. Necessary Necessary. Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly.

This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information. Non Necessary non-necessary.

Peterson's purpose in this is to present something new and provocative at every turn, something vivid and unusual, in order to stir up the dull minds of people who have become bored with their familiar Bibles. His method is comparable to that of a preacher in the pulpit, who dwells on one thing for a while and then rushes over another, alternatingly serious and jocular, doing whatever he can to maintain the attention of his audience. The version incorporates a number of interesting but peculiar interpretations that can only be described as homiletic:.

Matthew You are the salt of the earth; but if the salt loses its flavor, how shall it be seasoned? It is then good for nothing but to be thrown out and trampled underfoot by men. Let me tell you why you are here. You're here to be salt-seasoning that brings out the God-flavors of this earth. If you lose your saltiness, how will people taste godliness? You've lost your usefulness and will end up in the garbage.

John Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. Unless a person submits to this original creation—the 'wind hovering over the water' creation, the invisible moving the visible, a baptism into a new life—it's not possible to enter God's kingdom. Such 'homiletic' elements of the version are sprinkled here and there on a translation which is for the most part extremely colloquial. Long and formal-sounding sentences in the original are often simply replaced with punchy phrases: "The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you" is replaced with a jovial "Enjoy the best of Jesus!

Often the version portrays things in a more colorful way than the original, and it sometimes takes on a cartoonish quality. For example, in James instead of "resist the Devil and he will flee from you" we have "Yell a loud no to the Devil and watch him scamper.

In Acts according to The Message the disciples were not only "amazed" when they saw Peter, they "went wild," which suggests an amusing scene of commotion that is not indicated in the original text. At least they didn't go bananas! Many renderings inject the same kind of breezy slang that provoked Alexander Tytler to ask, "What must we think of the translator, who makes the solemn and sententious Tacitus express himself in the low cant of the streets, or in the dialect of the waiters of a tavern?

A psychologizing tendency is evident in several places. In Luke Simeon prophesies that Christ will be "spoken against" or opposed, and that by this opposition "the thoughts of many hearts will be revealed.

Yet the Bible's own "psychology"—as reflected in its use of the word psyche soul —is muted in the version. For example, in Acts instead of "strengthening the souls of the disciples" Peterson gives a bodily metaphor: "putting muscle and sinew in the lives of the disciples.

Instead of "Now is my soul troubled" we read "Right now I am storm-tossed. In Psalm where it says "Create in me a clean heart, O God, and renew a right spirit ruach within me" Peterson gives a very fanciful rendering—"God, make a fresh start in me, shape a Genesis week from the chaos of my life.

Sometimes Peterson obscures the main point of a passage by distracting attention from it with a homiletic flourish, as in Romans Here the apostle Paul is dealing with the question of why the Church has so few Jews in it, and so he quotes Isaiah's prophecy concerning the relatively small remnant that will remain after God has dealt with them in judgment. Romans And Isaiah cries out concerning Israel, Though the number of the sons of Israel be as the sand of the sea, only a remnant of them will be saved.

For the Lord will carry out his sentence upon the earth fully and without delay. Isaiah maintained this same emphasis: If each grain of sand on the seashore were numbered and the sum labeled "Chosen of God," they'de be numbers still, not names; salvation comes by personal selection.

God doesn't count us; he calls us by name. Arithmetic is not his focus. The reason for the citation is clear in the literal translation, but in Peterson's paraphrase it is strangely opaque.

He fastens on the word "number" and he produces a little meditation on the contrast between numbering and naming by importing the concept "he calls us by name" into the passage.

In the process of making his interesting homiletic point he neglects the main point of the passage. This sort of thing often happens in the pulpit, where it is quite forgiveable to expound "the right doctrine from the wrong text"—but it is another matter when homiletic excursions supplant the text itself. There is a tendency in the version to transpose things into a modern context. In Matthew Christ's question, "Are not two sparrows sold for a penny" becomes "What's the price of a pet canary?

Some loose change, right? An item from the experience of the modern American consumer is substituted for the "two sparrows" of the text. The reader who mistakes this cavalier treatment of the text for a reliable translation is in danger of being misled at many points.

This danger is well illustrated by the following paragraph from a review of The Message which recently appeared on a religious homosexual website:. What about the passages against homosexuals, you might ask? Well, although we found his translation of Romans a bit off, 1 Corinthians and 1 Timothy have been liberated from their heterosexual bias and are translated in ways that are much more inclusive and truer to their original intent.

The text of 1 Corinthians reads as follows: "Don't you realize that this is not the way to live? Unjust people who don't care about God will not be joining his kingdom. Those who use and abuse each other, use and abuse sex, use and abuse the earth and everything in it, don't qualify as citizens in God's kingdom" The text of 1 Timothy reads as follows: "It's obvious, isn't it, that the law code isn't primarily for people who live responsibly, but for the irresponsible, who defy all authority, riding roughshod over God, life, sex, truth, whatever!

But these passages really do condemn homosexuality, as may be seen in any reasonably accurate translation:. Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

Don't you realize that this is not the way to live? Those who use and abuse each other, use and abuse sex, use and abuse the earth and everything in it, don't qualify as citizens in God's kingdom.

It's obvious, isn't it, that the law code isn't primarily for people who live responsibly, but for the irresponsible, who defy all authority, riding roughshod over God, life, sex, truth, whatever! It would be unfair to suggest that Peterson has omitted the references to homosexuals because he disagreed with the indictment against them — he omitted many other things in these verses also. Are these omissions due simply to an attempt to make the passages more concise?

It seems that something more is afoot, because in the midst of his severe abridgement of 1 Corinthians he adds, "use and abuse the earth and everything in it," which corresponds to nothing in the Greek text. Apparently Peterson has interpreted the passage as a merely conventional list of sins, in which the sins mentioned are of no particular importance, and so he passes over them, and he takes the liberty of inserting a new "sin" earth abuse 5 which he imagines is more relevant to the reader.

The treatment of 1 Peter is interesting. This passage is rather offensive to modern ears when translated accurately, but Peterson's paraphrase solves the problem:.

And you are her children, if you do good and do not fear anything that is frightening. The same goes for you wives: Be good wives to your husbands, responsive to their needs. There are husbands who, indifferent as they are to any words about God, will be captivated by your life of holy beauty.

What matters is not your outer appearance — the styling of your hair, the jewelry you wear, the cut of your clothes — but your inner disposition. Cultivate inner beauty, the gentle, gracious kind that God delights in. The holy women of old were beautiful before God that way, and were good, loyal wives to their husbands.

Sarah, for instance, taking care of Abraham, would address him as, "my dear husband. The same goes for you husbands: Be good husbands to your wives. Honor them, delight in them. As women they lack some of your advantages. But in the new life of God's grace, you're equals. Treat your wives, then, as equals so your prayers don't run aground.

We notice how Peterson's instruction to wives here differs somewhat from Peter's instructions. Peterson strips away any suggestion that the women are to subject themselves to their husbands, although obviously this is the main point of the passage, as written by Peter.

Not everyone, however, approves. Kenneth Taylor, who did The Living Bible , got death threats. With the paraphrase finally completed, Peterson says The Message is unlike any of his other books and articles.

Become a Student. Related Articles. Response Magazine Alumnus, author, and pastor Eugene Peterson '54 changed my world.