Is it a good idea to read books like The Message

[Joulre2abba]

8 hours ago, shiloh357 said:

Paraphrases are the worst thing to use.   Paraphrases are just one person putting the Bible into his own words and with that you are getting that man's personal theology, not a translation or "version."   Paraphrases are the worst thing to happen to the Christian book industry.   

The KJV is not antiquated or outdated and can be perfectly understood 99% of the time.  There are things called dictionaries that can help out with few obscure 17th century words. 

In fact the KJV often reflects the nuances of Greek and Hebrew better, in some cases than the modern translations. 

But modern translation would, far and away, be better than the Message.  It  is a mess.

Your opinions are an exaggeration. If the Living Paraphrase was communicating it's personal theology then it wouldn't communicate the gospel but rather be more like the book of Mormon which is truly that of a man's personal theology. 

Regardless if the King James can be understood (with some margin of difficulty) it is still antiquated with it's thees and thous, and especially durst.

The average person reading the Bible should not have to reach for a dictionary in order to know what is being said, since it is supposed to be easy enough for the simple to understand.

The King James is no better at "reflecting the Greek of Hebrew" since it and the modern translations all use basic english. The Living Paraphrase is even capable of "reflecting the Greek and Hebrew nuances".

For someone like yourself who so dislikes anything but the KJV it's understandable that you don't like the Living Paraphrase, or The Message. But they still appeal to many.

[Guest shiloh357]

9 hours ago, Joulre2abba said:

Your opinions are an exaggeration. If the Living Paraphrase was communicating it's personal theology then it wouldn't communicate the gospel but rather be more like the book of Mormon which is truly that of a man's personal theology. 

No, that is not true.  It is not an exaggeration at all.  Paraphrases are not translations, they are simply taking one man's reading of the Bible and putting it in his own words.  Translations are done by teams of men from various denominations and theological backgrounds who are also expert linguists and who can review each other's work. 

Quote

Regardless if the King James can be understood (with some margin of difficulty) it is still antiquated with it's thees and thous, and especially durst.

No, it is not antiquated. Words like "ye" thee, thou and thine  are actually reflective of nuances in Greek that don't show up in modern English.  And it's not hard to understand if you want to understand it.  

Quote

The average person reading the Bible should not have to reach for a dictionary in order to know what is being said, since it is supposed to be easy enough for the simple to understand.

So when modern versions like the NIV use words like "terebinth," "carnelian," "concupiscence," "pinions," "porphyry,"  "overweening," "poultice." "Praetorium, " "revening," "sachet,"   that the average reader will automatically know what all of those words mean?   The NIV has as some pretty difficult words and those are just a sampling of them that appear in that modern text. 

Quote

The King James is no better at "reflecting the Greek of Hebrew" since it and the modern translations all use basic english. The Living Paraphrase is even capable of "reflecting the Greek and Hebrew nuances".

Actually it is far better at reflecting Greek and Hebrew nuances than modern translations.  
 

Quote

 

For someone like yourself who so dislikes anything but the KJV it's understandable that you don't like the Living Paraphrase, or The Message. But they still appeal to many.

 

It doesn't matter who it appeals to.   Paraphrases are the worst "bibles" to read due to their subjective nature.

[OneLight]

I use to go to a certain church in my area.  It went from using the ESV to The Message.  I confronted the lead pastor at that time and he said it is OK to use the message.  I left the church.  Not long afterward, the church split and the pastor was replaced.  The Message is not Gods word and divides the body.  Stay away from it.

[Joulre2abba]

5 hours ago, shiloh357 said:

No, that is not true.  It is not an exaggeration at all.  Paraphrases are not translations, they are simply taking one man's reading of the Bible and putting it in his own words.  Translations are done by teams of men from various denominations and theological backgrounds who are also expert linguists and who can review each other's work. 

No, it is not antiquated. Words like "ye" thee, thou and thine  are actually reflective of nuances in Greek that don't show up in modern English.  And it's not hard to understand if you want to understand it.  

So when modern versions like the NIV use words like "terebinth," "carnelian," "concupiscence," "pinions," "porphyry,"  "overweening," "poultice." "Praetorium, " "revening," "sachet,"   that the average reader will automatically know what all of those words mean?   The NIV has as some pretty difficult words and those are just a sampling of them that appear in that modern text. 

Actually it is far better at reflecting Greek and Hebrew nuances than modern translations.  You don't know what you're talking about.
 

It doesn't matter who it appeals to.   Paraphrases are the worst "bibles" to read due to their subjective nature.

God bless you.

[TheMatrixHasU71]

On 3/26/2018 at 11:36 AM, GerdaHannah said:

Hi 

I have been a believer for almost fifteen years now, but often find that reading the Bible in its tough language (being honest, not disrespectful)  tends to become slightly boring (side effect of my limited human mind, no way God's fault). I do not want this to turn me away from God.

Is it a good idea to read simpler Bibles like The Message which is available for free on Bible gateway? Its the same content, just easier to read.

 

What do you guys think? 

Thanks and Blessings, 

GerdaHannah

No, avoid the Message bible as it uses a lot of phrases that are occultic in nature. 

 

For example, in the Lord's Prayer, Eugene Peterson's paraphrase of Thy Will be done on earth (etc) says As above, so below. A common phrase in witchcraft

 

https://churchwatchcentral.com/2015/04/13/the-pagan-bible-the-message-bible-exposed/

[TheMatrixHasU71]

On 3/27/2018 at 5:18 AM, shiloh357 said:

No, it is not antiquated. Words like "ye" thee, thou and thine  are actually reflective of nuances in Greek that don't show up in modern English.  And it's not hard to understand if you want to understand it.  

A lot of people have a problem with the KJV merely because they cant get past all the thee's, 'thine's thou's and 'ye's.....people in the 1600s didnt talk like that either. Btu the translators recognised that there were times when a strict separation of the singular 'you' and the plural 'you' was necessary. Something which modern English doesnt do but Middle English does.