by snowbird 10 Replies latest watchtower bible
The poster, Pirata, asked me this question on 4-20-11:
snowbird, what translation is that from? I'm starting to see the value in using paraphrased editions for to help get clarity of meaning.
I agree, and in my opinion, a good example of getting clarity of meaning can be found here:
Matthew 26:25 Then Judas, already turned traitor, said, "It isn't me, is it, Rabbi?"
Jesus said, "Don't play games with me, Judas." The Message Bible
Truly, truly.
http://bible.cc/matthew/26-25.htm
Syl
I like the message bible, BUT at times the translation is a bit to "interpretitive" for me and I don't always agree with that interpretation.
I think that it is a great idea to have a bible in our everyday lingo to help one understand the "heart" of the verses and such, but the problem with that is that the editor is putting in HIS interpretation of what its being meant, not JUST what is being said.
Mr. Peterson does play fast and loose at times, yet I appreciate his efforts in making the Message come alive.
The beloved King James, on which I cut my teeth, remains my favorite.
Syl
I like how the New Jerusalem Bible was written and I like the way the NRSV has footnotes to different versions of verse that appear in other bibles and are presnt in other ancient manuscripts.
While I don't think a paraphrase edition should be one's primary source, I look at it as a kind of "concise commentary".
Having used a (mostly) literal translation (NWT) all my life, and only having ever known the modern day JW interpretation of scriptures, reading a paraphrased exposes me new ideas in a quick manner.
I've heard good things about the New Jerusalem Bible, also the New American Standard Bible.
I like having the freedom to check out many different translations, unlike when I was with the prying, nosy JW's.
Syl
NWT is not literal, just wooden and sectarian. KJV has the archaic English problem (and uses inferior manuscript family, but try NKJV). ESV and NASB are good formal equivalent translations with NIV (revised 2011) being a good dynamic equivalent version. The Message is a paraphrase by one man, a refreshing version, but not great as a study Bible. www.biblegateway.com allows one to compare many versions. New Jerusalem has Catholic bias and RSV has some liberal influence. I would stick with ESV, NASB, and NIV personally. Holman Christian Standard Bible is also refreshing, but not as popular.
I love the Message Bible.
I showed it to my son and he wanted one, too, so I bought him one.
He loves it, too.
The Message Bible is my favorite.
Why? Because it IS understandable, emotionally satisfying and equable.
I like the message bible, BUT at times the translation is a bit to "interpretitive" for me and I don't always agree with that interpretation.
There is no VALID interpretation of scripture because it has been layered, redacted, repeated from memory, overlaid with corrections and molded, shaped and straitjacketed by every possible POV.
So, the very point to be made is that there is only a scent in the air, a flavor, an after-image which remains. THE MESSAGE BIBLE does a wonderful job of conveying such.
Any of us could take an interlinear and write a version of the Bible, "Message" style. That's pretty much what Crazy Freddie did with the NWT, except the "message" in that one is: "resistance is futile, you will be asimilated."
That said, the popular Message Bible that's around nowadays is quite the interesting read, IMO.
