"The Message" revisited

Linda, the "crossroads" site isn't too bad, but ANYTHING from TERRY WATKINS sends up an immediate red flag. He's one of the most UNLEARNED KJVO writers active today, despite his doctorate. I wouldn't believe a weather report from him if I were standing outside near his home. If you read more of his trash, you'll know what I mean.

However, I agree "The Message" isn't much of a "Bible". To me, it's only better than no Bible at all.

 

I am curious if anyone has actually read the new series on the seekgod site about the message? it's the most comprehensive study I have seen thus far on it. articles #6 and #7 are particularly "revealing".

anyone have a comment or thought?

here's a list of the articles:

The New Age of Christianity

http://www.seekgod.ca/topicnewage.htm

The New Age of Christianity Introduction

http://www.seekgod.ca/newageintro.htm


1) The Message Eugene Peterson's Opinion of The Bible

http://www.seekgod.ca/messageoverview.htm


2) The Message and Dr. Eugene Peterson

http://www.seekgod.ca/drpeterson.htm


3) Eugene Peterson & His Ecumenical Connections

http://www.seekgod.ca/petersonecumen.htm


4) The Message & NavPress Promotions

http://www.seekgod.ca/themessagepromo.htm


5) The Message Doctrine & Foundations of the Faith

http://www.seekgod.ca/themsgdoctrine.htm


6) The Message Doctrine & Gnostic or New Age Terms and Concepts

http://www.seekgod.ca/msgdoctrine2.htm


7) The Message Doctrine & Gnostic or New Age Terms and Concepts Cont.

http://www.seekgod.ca/msgdoctrine3.htm


8) The Message, Who Endorses & Promotes Eugene Peterson's Opinion of the Bible

http://www.seekgod.ca/themsgendorsements.htm

 

I agree with Marcia. It is disturbing to me at least, that they are promoting the message as a legitimate translation. At best it is a poor paraphrase, but I think Marcia's description of a commentary is more accurate. And BTW---I think it is a poor commentary that changes the meaning of Scripture, and does not just update language. Can God use it? Of course He can, He can do all things. Would I recommend anyone use it? No. There are plenty of legitimate translations out there in todays language to recommend to those who desire to read God' Word.

Bro Tony

 

I did look at that site briefly. I don't have time to read much of it now and I'm not sure all the Gnostic/New Age parallels to The Message are valid, but this does bother me:

The Message has Jn 1.4, 5 rendered this way:

To say that Jesus was a "Life" that "came into existence" sounds like he's a created being.

Also, in Jn 1.17, The Message calls the Law "the basics," as in "We got the basics from Moses."

 

Boanerges,

ya done gone and done it, Bro. Ya just had to mentioned leaven?

lol

 

as to the above mentioned John 1:4-5, didnt Jesus' body come into existence? Isnt this speaking of him coming into the world?

Perhaps I have it wrong, but thats what it seems to me. If so, Petersen isnt that far off.

 

KJV
John 1:4-5 In him was life; and the life was the light of men. And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.

The Message
What came into existence was Life,
and the Life was Light to live by.
The Life-Light blazed out of the darkness;
the darkness couldn't put it out.

The message paints a picture here that Life just came into existance in Christ, as if Christ had no life before. The Bible does not say that. Also, the word comprehended means 'understood', not 'could not put it out'.

 

What earthly life did Christ have before then? Is that not a plausible interpretation?

 

not plausible, Desiderio,

The Bible says In Him was life, not He came into existance. There is a big difference.

 

Is (was) Jesus' earthly body a created thing?

Yes or NO

 

Did the Son always have life?

Yes or No

 

The problem is this, Desiderio,

You are looking at the passage in the natural. Try looking at it from a spiritual viewpoint and you will see that that Life always was. He was there before the world began.

Paul wrote in his first letter to the church at Corinth that the natural man cannot receive the things of the Spirit of God.

That is why we have so many views on verses and passages. Many try to rationalize the scripture with their natural mind rather than to let the Lord open up the scripture to them as He did on that road to Emmaeus.

In the natural body, one could say Jesus was a created being, but in the Spirit, He always was existing. He lived before His 33 earthly years.

 

This is true and thus we have the miracle of the Incarnation. God becoming flesh and dwelling among us. The eternal Christ taking on flesh and becoming the man Jesus. Jesus is the name of the incarnate Christ. Thus we have Jesus the Christ. Fully human and fully God. He is the eternal God who has always existed, but the body He walked in as a man was prepared for Him.

Aint God great!!!!!!

Bro Tony

 

is this that part of the game where you once again refuse to answer a simple question?

Perhaps a real discussion could take place if you werent so afraid that your paranoia might not be correct.

Answer the very simple question like an honest man, or just be a man and admit you dont want real discussion.

 

Was Jesus a created thing? No...

He was begotten of the Father, not created.