Item: 1 copy of The Message, by Eugene Peterson
So I bought this earlier in the year, intending to read through the New Testament in another translation, because, you know, such things can be helpful in reacquainting you with things you've heard a hundred times already. But I don't know what I'm going to do with it now, because, frankly, I hate it.
The Message is "a contemporary rendering of the Bible from the original languages." I note that they're careful not to call it a translation. There are no notes on method or process in it, as there should be with any good translation, so it's unclear what the scholarly weight behind the work is. The idea, of course, is not that it have scholarly weight, but that we common people, who may have a hard time understanding the language of texts written thousands of years ago, will appreciate the Bible better if it's put into everyday modern language.
The one I have is just the New Testament plus Psalms and Proverbs, but I believe there is a version that includes the Old Testament also. I learned right away that the renderings of the gospels were intolerable, and that I had better go to Paul's letters instead. I'd actually heard passages from Philippians quoted from The Message before, and they were what interested me in reading it in the first place.
The card I'm using for a placeholder is sitting at 2 Corinthians 8, and has been since probably March or April. Every time I try to read further, I get angry. Why?
It sounds bad. It sounds stupid. Examples:
(Note that there are no verse numbers in The Message, so it's hard to figure out what corresponds to what - the below are guesses)
And then I was reading in 1 Corinthians 15, building up to the verse that I know as "If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are to be pitied more than all men," (NIV), but found this: "If all we get out of Christ is a little inspiration for a few short years, we're a pretty sorry lot."
Okay, so I'm having the opposite reaction to what was intended: I respect what's being said less because of the language it's written in, which seems, actually, to respect me less. My ideal, I confess, is the King James Bible, from 1611. The King James version sounded old even then, and it was intended that way. But it was also intended to be read aloud, which explains why there are so many gorgeous passages in the KJV.
The verse I always think of in connection with this is the part in 1 Corinthians 2 about Paul not seeking to convince them with superior or eloquent words; in other words, the truth, not the language, is the paramount concern. If all you've got is something that sounds good, you've got nothing. But still, I have a hard time believing that when God is speaking, it ever sounds stupid.
My question is perhaps best put to the people who like The Message. Because people do. There are people I know whom the King James Version leaves cold, who lose interest the minute they hear "thou" and are unable to relate to anything that comes after it. Lots of people love The Message. Heck, even Bono quotes from it. I respect that people have different style preferences, but I've never heard anybody explain this particular preference. Instead, it's supposed to be self-evident that less formal is better. So, why?
I'm not enjoying saying any of this, by the way. I mean, I just basically said that I hated the Bible.
I don't hate the Bible. I've heard people I respect read from The Message and somehow it sounds better when they read it than when I do. There are good insights in it, but for every 1 of those there seem to me about 9 insights that are silly or shallow. I know, in fact, that my perceptions of how the verses are supposed to go aren't necessarily the right ones. If I accept the fact that this does really well for the audience it's intended for, but that I'm not part of that audience, why do I have to knock it? The irony is, I went looking for what this version promised. I wanted to read the New Testament as something fresh and new, to think of these things in a way I hadn't before. Somehow, though, the cliches of our time failed to deliver anything in the way of freshness.
The Message is "a contemporary rendering of the Bible from the original languages." I note that they're careful not to call it a translation. There are no notes on method or process in it, as there should be with any good translation, so it's unclear what the scholarly weight behind the work is. The idea, of course, is not that it have scholarly weight, but that we common people, who may have a hard time understanding the language of texts written thousands of years ago, will appreciate the Bible better if it's put into everyday modern language.
The one I have is just the New Testament plus Psalms and Proverbs, but I believe there is a version that includes the Old Testament also. I learned right away that the renderings of the gospels were intolerable, and that I had better go to Paul's letters instead. I'd actually heard passages from Philippians quoted from The Message before, and they were what interested me in reading it in the first place.
The card I'm using for a placeholder is sitting at 2 Corinthians 8, and has been since probably March or April. Every time I try to read further, I get angry. Why?
It sounds bad. It sounds stupid. Examples:
(Note that there are no verse numbers in The Message, so it's hard to figure out what corresponds to what - the below are guesses)
- Romans 8:3: - God went for the jugular when he sent his own Son.
- Romans 11:33 - Have you ever come on anything quite like this extravagant generosity of God, this deep, deep wisdom? It's way over our heads. We'll never figure it out.
- Romans 13:9 "You can't go wrong when you love others."
And then I was reading in 1 Corinthians 15, building up to the verse that I know as "If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are to be pitied more than all men," (NIV), but found this: "If all we get out of Christ is a little inspiration for a few short years, we're a pretty sorry lot."
Okay, so I'm having the opposite reaction to what was intended: I respect what's being said less because of the language it's written in, which seems, actually, to respect me less. My ideal, I confess, is the King James Bible, from 1611. The King James version sounded old even then, and it was intended that way. But it was also intended to be read aloud, which explains why there are so many gorgeous passages in the KJV.
The verse I always think of in connection with this is the part in 1 Corinthians 2 about Paul not seeking to convince them with superior or eloquent words; in other words, the truth, not the language, is the paramount concern. If all you've got is something that sounds good, you've got nothing. But still, I have a hard time believing that when God is speaking, it ever sounds stupid.
My question is perhaps best put to the people who like The Message. Because people do. There are people I know whom the King James Version leaves cold, who lose interest the minute they hear "thou" and are unable to relate to anything that comes after it. Lots of people love The Message. Heck, even Bono quotes from it. I respect that people have different style preferences, but I've never heard anybody explain this particular preference. Instead, it's supposed to be self-evident that less formal is better. So, why?
I'm not enjoying saying any of this, by the way. I mean, I just basically said that I hated the Bible.
I don't hate the Bible. I've heard people I respect read from The Message and somehow it sounds better when they read it than when I do. There are good insights in it, but for every 1 of those there seem to me about 9 insights that are silly or shallow. I know, in fact, that my perceptions of how the verses are supposed to go aren't necessarily the right ones. If I accept the fact that this does really well for the audience it's intended for, but that I'm not part of that audience, why do I have to knock it? The irony is, I went looking for what this version promised. I wanted to read the New Testament as something fresh and new, to think of these things in a way I hadn't before. Somehow, though, the cliches of our time failed to deliver anything in the way of freshness.
posted by Karen at 6:52 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home