The Narrow Path Ministries

Just wondering what you guys thought about the Message Bible.
Do you feel it is a good thing to help people who do not normally read the Bible, get started reading the Bible?
Do you think it gives more mature believers a new found freshness of God's Word.
Or
Do you think it should not be used at all?

In my opinion, this version filled a much needed gap in the world of published Bibles.

(read that again carefully before misunderstanding my meaning)

I think that if you compare the difference between this version and say, the NKJV, you'll see that it's not a very good version (even as far as paraphrases go). Here's Psalm 1:1.

Here's the New King James Version

1 Blessed is the man Who walks not in the counsel of the ungodly, Nor stands in the path of sinners, Nor sits in the seat of the scornful...

Here's the Message:

1How well God must like you— you don't hang out at Sin Saloon, you don't slink along Dead-End Road, you don't go to Smart-Mouth College.

Yes, it is exactly the same verse. How this brother got his interpretation, (notice I didn't say translation) is beyond me. It certainly doesn't sound like any modern "lingo" that I'm aware of, and just makes it harder to understand. The whole point of the verse is lost.

If you find the KJV, NKJV, or NASB hard to understand, I would recommend the English Standard Version. I think it is a good middle of the road between word for word and paraphrase.

...I wonder where "Sin Saloon" is?

Do you think it should not be used at all?

No. Not if you want to know what the bible says.

God bless,

Steve wrote:In my opinion, this version filled a much needed gap in the world of published Bibles.

(read that again carefully before misunderstanding my meaning)

A bit cryptic, but I think I've got it. You're saying that the gap should actually have been left un-filled?

Ely wrote:

Steve wrote:In my opinion, this version filled a much needed gap in the world of published Bibles.

(read that again carefully before misunderstanding my meaning)

A bit cryptic, but I think I've got it. You're saying that the gap should actually have been left un-filled?

I had to read it a few times myself! Glad I wan't the only one.

Yes, the gap was what was much needed--not that which filled it.

it seems that the Message tries to guess what the Bible would have sounded like if it were written by modern authors, as opposed to a couple of thousand years ago. i guess whether is succeeds on this count is a matter of opinion.

i think the question of whether this should have been attempted is a good one. i guess if some people are so turned off by the traditional versions or are too intellectually lazy to try to understand them, then the Message may be better than nothing. notice that i said "may" be. i read it sometimes, because it occasionally does make me chuckle. Jesus calls his disciples "runt believers" in matt. 16. i got a kick out of that.

Derek wrote:

...I wonder where "Sin Saloon" is?

i think i know-- it's about 5 miles from my house.

TK

i guess if some people are so turned off by the traditional versions or are too intellectually lazy to try to understand them, then the Message may be better than nothing.

I think there's already an easier translation(depending on your understanding of the word translation) to read...the New Living Translation. I'm reading it with my 7 year old and she has little trouble understanding it.

I don't like "The Message". I found a few passages that are written in an interesting way. I also found so many troubling passages, that literally nauseated me, that I gave up on the "translation" years ago.

I'm going to think about something else now....I'm starting to get that nauseous feeling again!

Steve

i read it sometimes, because it occasionally does make me chuckle.

My wife and I gave The Message NT to Brody for his birthday. It was funny.

I agree with Steve. The Message is an abomination. Some examples:

I Corinthians 6:9-11, words descriptive of specific sins such as adultery, sodomy, etc. are omitted and "use and abuse the earth" are added!

1 Corinthians 6:18-20, "sexual immorality" is omitted, instead we find "sex that avoids commitment and intimacy".

Romans 1:26-27, the strange wording here leaves a loophole for homosexual acts as long as they are loving and not just lust.

Several more passages could be cited, but you get the drift.