Jul
15
The Problem(s) with The Message
Since I am working on other stuff, I have another guest commentary from a Facebook friend for you this week. Brendan Paul Burnett teaches High School History, Geography, and “Christian Principles and Relationships” at a Christian school in Australia, while he works on his THIRD and FOURTH Master’s degrees — MTeach(Sec) and MDiv. He had noticed that The Message was quite popular with the members of the charismatic church he has been attending. (He comes from an evangelical Anglican background.) As he explained to me,
“I have seen more and more use of the MSG Bible in this context, which can often be quite expressive, emotional and exuberant. It has worried me that the congregation is at risk of sacrificing accuracy for inspiration [see note]. I think there needs to be more Biblical literacy. (This is NOT to negate all the magnificent things the church has done and is doing. I am just particular at this point.) Anyway, that is the true context for what sparked this thought.”
[Note: By “inspiration” he means “[b]eing inspired, emotionally and personally, by the words and sense, rather than the exact meaning, accurately read.”]
Here’s the FB post in which Brendan expressed his concerns….
—
“I don’t recommend ‘The Message’ Bible (MSG).
I don’t think the MSG is evil. I don’t think it’s a sin to read it.
I think it may be worthwhile for inspiring devotions, or prayer. Perhaps it is suitable for creating word art.
But in terms of significant teaching and learning, I wouldn’t recommend it at all.
Here are a few simple reasons why:
(1) The MSG is not a translation; it is a paraphrase. It was written by one man working mostly from English. It is:
(a) worked on individually by one person who is, admittedly, educated but is not a professional scholar;
(b) paraphrased primarily from the English.
In contrast, English translations that are taken to be authoritative and are used in Bible Colleges around the world (e.g. ESV, NIV, NASB, NRSV, NKJV or even KJV) are:
(a) worked on collaboratively by teams of hundreds of professional scholars;
(b) translated directly using the five original languages;
(c) filled with learning material, including study notes.
Therefore, we should expect these kinds of authoritative translations to give us more accurate information about what is actually written in Scripture than the MSG.
(2) Mostly due to point (1), the MSG has significant additions and omissions in the text, which are such that anyone reading the MSG would be unable to identify and articulate specific biblical teachings using the MSG, including teachings about God, sin, the Trinity and salvation, to name a few.
For example, in 1 Corinthians 6:9, a variety of immoral sexual activities are usually explicitly identified in Bible translations. But what about in the MSG?
ESV: “Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality…”
NIV: “Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men…”
NASB: “Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals…”
NRSV: “Do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived! Fornicators, idolaters, adulterers, male prostitutes, sodomites…”
MSG: “Don’t you realize that this is not the way to live? Unjust people who don’t care about God will not be joining in his kingdom. Those who use and abuse each other, use and abuse sex…”
Notice how the MSG omits specific sexual acts that are explicitly identified in English translations as unacceptable. Rather, the clarity of Scripture is lost in garbled and simplistic generalities that really do nothing at all to help us understand what the Bible actually means here.
(3) Due to points (1) and (2), in addition to the example given, the clarity of Scripture is simply lost when using the MSG.
This isn’t just about “being academic.” It’s about clarity of teaching and learning in order to help people (a) in knowing God’s purpose for their lives, and (b) helping them to walk in that purpose, using the most powerful weapon the Spirit of God has given us, namely, his holy, errorless, divinely spoken and revealed WORD, the Bible (see 2 Timothy 3:16-17).”
—
Readers may remember me writing a little in the past about Bible translations and matters of textual criticism. Mostly, it has been focused on KJV, ESV, NASB — i.e., “essentially literal” translations. I haven’t addressed “dynamic equivalence”, let alone paraphrases, and I don’t own a copy of the MSG. But, I have read books (and FB discussions) by people who are knowledgeable on the relevant issues, and they pretty much agree with the points and concerns Brendan raises above. From what (admittedly few) passages I have read from the MSG, I would have to echo his concerns, as well.
In short, to avoid misunderstanding Scripture, start by avoiding paraphrases like The Message. Or, at the very least, supplement it with something like the NASB, ESV, (H)CSB, or even the NIV.
