The Message "Bible" Heresy
|
Who is "Dr." Eugene Peterson? You may be surprised by what follows.......................
|
The Message:
Eugene Peterson's Opinion of The Bible
1 Corinthians 2:12 -13
12
Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of
God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.
13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth,
but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.
Overview
In the various related articles
about The Message, analysis and information will be presented showing
various theological bias implanted within The Message as well as
verse and doctrine comparison to other versions. Research will be presented
regarding the various promotions by NavPress, the publisher of The Message,
using the words: Bible, Bible version, complete Bible, translation, paraphrase,
complete Old and New Testament, accurate and so on. The research will present
endorsements for The Message also used by the publisher as a means of
authenticating this book as accurate, and will include biographical information
on those many well known, and perhaps not so well known individuals.
Research has revealed that many people have assumed that Eugene Peterson has
a doctorate in languages, which in many minds, would qualify his translating a
Bible. However, several correspondences with NavPress proves that Eugene
Peterson has no doctorate, with the definitive statement, "He doesn't have
a PhD but he has 3 honorary doctorates from Seattle Pacific University, Messiah
and Northwestern."
Further documentation shows that
while having a BA in Philosophy at Seattle Pacific University, there was no
language study mentioned in relation to that degree. Language study in Greek
and Hebrew, with no clarification of what time was spent on either or
qualification of time spent learning Koine Greek versus classical Greek, was
limited to the two years spent at New York Theological Seminary. Originally
called Biblical Seminary, this is where Eugene Peterson first attended to
obtain a STB or bachelors in sacred theology, which focus, again, was not
specifically languages. That was followed by a one year stint at Johns Hopkins
where an MA in Semitic Languages was obtained, which means Koine Greek was not
part of that course. His return to New York Theological Seminary to teach
"biblical languages and English Bible" was for a brief period, from
1959-1960.
The honorary doctorates Eugene
Peterson has received are discussed as well as the teaching positions he has
held, including, for example, the ecumenical Regent University, his return to the
ecumenical New York Theological Seminary, the ecumenical St. Mary's Seminary,
the first Catholic seminary in the U.S. It is owned and operated by the
Sulpician Fathers, who are diocesan priests dedicated to the continued
formation of priests for the Catholic church. These teaching positions are
discussed in relation to his time spent at each and the theological positions
of the various universities or seminaries.
Research uncovered Eugene Peterson's Pentecostal background and his ordination in the
United Presbyterian Church, the relations that denomination has with the
National Council of Churches, the World Council of Churches and the ecumenical
movement in general. It should be noted that his Pentecostal bias concerning
tongues and "private prayer language" is implanted into The
Message.
In depth information looked at a separate article concerning the ecumenical New York Theological
Seminary, it's association with the National Council of Churches, World Council
of Churches, the late Norman Vincent Peale's Marble Church, Riverside Church,
the Rockefellers, The Cathedral of St. John the Divine, the Temple of
Understanding and so on.
Eugene Peterson has ties to The Chrysostom Society, its members and
various associations, Renovare and the concept of Christian Mystics, the
contemplative prayer movement, and also the ecumenical theHighCalling.org which
posts his devotionals. The National Council of Churches, World Council of
Churches, etc., published the NRSV which is the source for Richard Foster's The
Renovaré Spiritual Formation Bible. Eugene Peterson played a significant
role as editor for that New Testament as well as a contributor to various
articles within it.
|
Why
is The Message (Bible) not safe ?
By
Justin Peters, Th.D. (Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary)
|
One insightful reviewer wrote this:
This is one man's personal interpretation
of the Bible. It is misleading to people. One of my students submitted an essay
quoting Matthew 11:28-30 out of this translation, which includes: "28-30
“Are you tired? Worn out? Burned out on religion? Come to me. Get away with me
and you’ll recover your life. I’ll show you how to take a real rest. Walk with
me and work with me—watch how I do it. Learn the unforced rhythms of grace. I
won’t lay anything heavy or ill-fitting on you. Keep company with me and you’ll
learn to live freely and lightly.” Really?
Here is the English Standard
Version: Matthew 11:28-30 (ESV)
"28 Come to me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you
rest. 29 Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me, for I am gentle and lowly in
heart, and you will find rest for your souls. 30 For my yoke is easy, and my
burden is light.”
Burned out on religion? Unforced rhythms of grace? Really? -John L. Weitzlon
|
Another reviewer wrote:
CAUTION:
"The Message," thru Political Correctness and twisted scripture,
SERIOUSLY distorts the intended biblical truth in at least 20 known passages.
Please do not be deceived, but do your own research on "The Message",
if not convinced. Three examples:
** Adds words that qualify homosexuality, providing a loophole for committed
homosexuals who "love" each other. Deletes "God gave them
over...":
Romans 1:26-27: "Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts.
Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same
way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with
lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received
in themselves the due penalty for their perversion."
The Message: "Worse followed. Refusing to know God, they soon didn't know
how to be human either - women didn't know how to be women, men didn't know how
to be men. Sexually confused, they abused and defiled one another, women with
women, men with men - all lust, no love." [This strange wording leaves a
loophole for homosexuality to be permitted if it was an expression of love, not
lust - which many gay couples claim today. In other words, lust becomes the
sin, not the choice of a same-sex partner.]
** Deletes "sexual immorality." Adds -- "avoids commitment and
intimacy:"
1 Corinthians 6:18-20: "Flee from sexual immorality. All other sins a man
commits are outside his body, but he who sins sexually sins against his own
body."
The Message: "There's more to sex than mere skin on skin. Sex is as much a
spiritual mystery as a physical fact. As written in Scripture, 'The two become
one.' Since we want to become spiritually one with the Master, we must not
pursue the kind of sex that avoids commitment and intimacy, leaving us more
lonely than ever - the kind of sex that can never 'become one.' [One could
conclude that "commitment and intimacy" or "becoming one",
not marriage, sets the boundaries for acceptable sex.]
** Deletes words like adulterers and homosexual, which identify specific sins
and Adds a politically correct reference to environmentalism.
1 Corinthians 6:9-11: "Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit
the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor
idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders
[sodomites] nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor
swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And that is what some of you were.
But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified..."
The Message: "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, use and
abuse the earth and everything in it don't qualify as citizens in God's
kingdom....."
___________________
Please do not be deceived by "watered-down", politically correct,
twisted scripture. Your life and eternity is at stake here. If you need an easy
to understand version of the real truths in the Bible, please acquire a
reliable translation such as the: NIV Study Bible, NASB Study Bible (1995
Copyright).
|
And then...Jonathan Lane wrote this:
People
praise this book because its "easy to read" and because they can
understand it better then a real Bible. This is hogwash people. Would you buy a
dumb down version of The Lord of the Rings because you couldn't understand it
how Tolkien wrote it? Would you water down Hamlet to make it easier to read?
NO! This is NOT a Bible, it is one mans, yes, ONE MANS interpretation of what
HE thinks the Bible means. Putting the words of God into "plain, everyday
language" by changing his words in the end changes the ideas and meanings
themselves, thus making this book irrelevant to any serious Christian. Sure,
you can read this book for entertainment purposes and such, but for goodness
sake do NOT use it for Bible study, for church, and for converting others. This
is nothing more then a watered down, dummyfied version of the Bible that I for
one refuse to ever use again.
|
Why Eugene Peterson
is Wrong on Rob Bell and "Love Wins" (Among Other Things)
-Rev. Daniel Randle,
Cleveland Road Baptist Church, Athens, GA.
While reading up on the recent
controversy over Rob Bell's new book, “Love Winds: A Book about Heaven, Hell,
and the Fate of Every Person Who Ever Lived,” I came across several in the
larger "evangelical" community who are actively defending Rob Bell
against his critics (and even against himself). One of the largest names in
that group is Eugene Peterson, author of the most popular paraphrase of the
Bible, “The Message.” Peterson is
currently Professor Emeritus of Spiritual Theology at Regent College in
Vancouver, BC. He is also an accomplished author, with some of his books
winning awards and becoming best sellers.
Peterson's defense of Rob Bell started even before there was a controversy.
Peterson supplied Bell's publisher, HarperOne, with the following
endorsement blurb for Love Wins:
It isn’t easy to develop a
biblical imagination that takes in the comprehensive and eternal work of Christ
. . . Rob Bell goes a long way in helping us acquire just such an
imagination--without a trace of soft sentimentality and without compromising an
inch of evangelical conviction.
Recently Peterson spoke to Timothy
Dalymple of Patheos about his endorsement and the controversy that has erupted
over the book. When asked why Peterson endorsed the book, he said:
Rob Bell and anyone else who
is baptized is my brother or my sister. We have different ways of looking at
things, but we are all a part of the kingdom of God. And I don’t think that
brothers and sisters in the kingdom of God should fight. I think that’s bad
family manners.
I don’t agree with everything Rob Bell says. But I think they’re worth saying.
I think he puts a voice into the whole evangelical world which, if people will
listen to it, will put you on your guard against judging people too quickly,
making rapid dogmatic judgments on people. I don’t like it when people use hell
and the wrath of God as weaponry against one another.
I knew that people would jump on me for writing the endorsement. I wrote the
endorsement because I would like people to listen to him. He may not be right.
But he’s doing something worth doing. There’s so much polarization in the
evangelical church that it’s a true scandal. We’ve got to learn how to talk to
each other and listen to each other in a civil way.
There is much in Peterson's statement with which we could disagree. In fact, I
would disagree with almost all of it. But I think it reflects a fundamental
misunderstanding of how we as believers are taught to confront error in the
Bible. Before I get there, Peterson was asked the follow-up question, "Do
evangelicals need to reexamine our doctrines of hell and damnation?" and
he replied:
Yes, I guess I do think they
ought to reexamine. They ought to be a good bit more biblical, not taking
things out of context.
But the people who are against Rob Bell are not going to reexamine anything.
They have a litmus test for who is a Christian and who is not. But that’s not
what it means to live in community.
Luther said that we should read the entire Bible in terms of what drives toward
Christ. Everything has to be interpreted through Christ. Well, if you do that,
you’re going to end up with this religion of grace and forgiveness. The only
people Jesus threatens are the Pharisees. But everybody else gets pretty generous
treatment. There’s very little Christ, very little Jesus, in these people who
are fighting Rob Bell.
Again, Peterson sounds like a man who both doesn't understand the significance
of the Doctrine of Hell and hasn't read the parts of the Bible where false
doctrine is confronted and condemned. And interestingly he includes in his
defense against arguments in the Church a quote by Martin Luther, a man who saw
no small amount of criticism levied against him for his overly sharp tongue.
Let's take a minute here, though, and examine what Peterson actually says about
Bell and about the criticism directed towards him. First, he starts out by
saying, "Rob Bell and anyone else who is baptized is my brother or my
sister." Now, I am going to give Peterson the benefit of the doubt here
and assume that he is referring to the "baptism of the Holy Spirit"
(i.e., regeneration through the gift of the Holy Spirit). I shudder to think
that Peterson would believe that the act of baptism either saves or confirms
that one is truly a born-again believer of Jesus Christ.
But then he builds on that statement and claims that he doesn't "think
that brothers and sisters in the kingdom of God should fight", that doing
so is to practice "bad family manners." I hate to tell Peterson this,
but Jesus argued with His disciples. Paul argued with Peter. The Apostles
argued with one another at the Council of Jerusalem. Members of the Kingdom
argue. And often times it is quite beneficial. In Church History, debate has
not always been kind, but very often it has been healthy. To claim that we
shouldn't argue over doctrine because it's "bad family manners" is
Biblically and historically ignorant.
Peterson adds further down, "I don’t like it when people use hell and the
wrath of God as weaponry against one another." I agree wholeheartedly with
Peterson here, but is this really what is happening? Are people using the
issues over the Doctrine of Hell as weapons against Bell? Of course not! In the
ironic words of Billy Joel, "we didn't start the fire". The Doctrine
of Hell has invoked heated arguments in the Church for centuries. And Bell
threw himself into the line of fire by writing a book which advocates for a
position against the one universally agreed upon by the Church for 2000 years.
"Hell and the wrath of God" isn't a weapon being wielded against
Bell, but rather are the objects of the firestorm that Bell ignited by writing
a book on these subjects.
Now, from there I believe Peterson's words better represent a man who hasn't
read the Bible, not one who wrote a bestselling paraphrase of the Bible and who
taught classes on the Word of God and spirituality for decades. Two statements
Peterson makes lead me to this criticism. First, he says, "...the people
who are against Rob Bell are not going to reexamine anything. They have a
litmus test for who is a Christian and who is not. But that’s not what it means
to live in community." Then he says, "The only people Jesus threatens
are the Pharisees. But everybody else gets pretty generous treatment. There’s
very little Christ, very little Jesus, in these people who are fighting Rob
Bell."
Has Peterson read Galatians lately? How about 1 John? Maybe he needs to reread
the Gospels, particularly John 8. And heaven forbid he stumbles upon 1
Corinthians 5 or Matthew 18, where confrontation is not only spoken of, but
encouraged by both Paul and Jesus, respectively.
Both Paul and John advocate for litmus tests for Christians. Jesus, Himself,
does the same thing. Living in community means precisely that we confront one
another for not only sin, but false doctrine as well. Paul tells the
Corinthians to cast people out of the community for sin and in Galatians he
pronounces curses on those who advocate for a different Gospel. And I'm
guessing that all of those he was speaking of were probably thought to have
been baptized by the Holy Spirit. The fruit of their actions and beliefs,
however, communicated otherwise.
Finally, Peterson saves his most damning words for the end. He claims that that
the "only people Jesus threatens are the Pharisees" and based on that
he concludes that "there's very little Jesus, in these people who are
fighting Rob Bell." Not only is Peterson making a huge assumption about
the spiritual lives of those "who are fighting Rob Bell" (notice how
Peterson personalizes it, instead of relegating it to theological debate), but
he is also completely wrong about Jesus.
In John 7:45, prior to the passage on the adulterous woman, we see that Jesus
is speaking to the Chief Priests and the Pharisees. After v.11 of Chapter 8,
Jesus picks up his conversation with the Jews (many have rightly concluded that
7:52-8:11 is out of place here in John and is not original to this Gospel, but
rather represents good oral tradition which eventually found a home here). But
in v.21, it appears that Jesus' conversation with the Pharisees is overheard by
other Jews and they begin to talk among themselves in v.22. Jesus answers these
Jews in v.23. Then further down in v.31, John identifies another group to whom
Jesus is speaking as "the Jews who had believed in Him." Peterson
identifies these in his Message as, "the Jews who had claimed to believe
in Him."
Jesus then begins to speak to these Jews and they don't seem to like what He's
saying. By the time the conversation is over, Jesus has told them that they are
not children of Abraham or children of God, but rather they are children of
their father, the devil. In v.47, Jesus says, "Whoever is of God hears the
words of God. The reason why you do not hear them is that you are not of
God." Now, I don't know about you, but it seems clear her that Peterson's
claim that "the only people Jesus threatens are the Pharisees" is not
only terribly incorrect, but a false basis for his further claim that
"there’s very little Christ, very little Jesus, in these people who are
fighting Rob Bell."
I've always respected Eugene Peterson, but in this case he's wrong. He's wrong
on Rob Bell, he's wrong on the significance of the Doctrine of Hell, he's wrong
on how to live in community, and more importantly, he's wrong on Jesus and on
what the Bible teaches about confronting those teaching false doctrine. I get
why Peterson doesn't like controversy in the Church and why he believes it is
"bad family manners". None of us find it comfortable to confront sin
or enjoyable to correct false teaching. But unfortunately, Peterson's attitude
doesn't line up with the Bible and consequently it is him and not Bell's
critics in whom one can find "very little Jesus."
|
"The Message from Hell" by Laurence M. Vance:
|
EXAMINING EUGENE
PETERSON’S UNHOLY MESSAGE BIBLE:
|
The Message is neither a translation nor is it a paraphrase taken
directly from the Greek and Hebrew.
The Message is a commentary written by one man.
The Message should never be the primary source for Scripture reading.
If you enjoy reading The Message,
that is fine. I am in no way suggesting Peterson’s book is not useful.
However, read The Message with the understanding that despite the
slick marketing it does not meet the standard for a reliable translation.
Pastors should not use The Message
in services as a substitute for reading the Scripture. In many cases, this
usage gives the impression that The Message is a viable “translation”
alternative.
|
More information may be found at their website: www.thebereancall.org
|
Eugene Peterson is reviewed on "Fighting for the Faith":
|
Southern Baptist Entity Head Admonishes Christians to
Read Pro-Gay Author Eugene Peterson
|
|
|