Romans 15:7-13
......! May the God of (green) hope fill you up with joy, fill you up with peace, so that your believing lives, filled with the life-giving energy of the Holy Spirit, will brim over with hope!
What is your thought or insight as why Peterson added the word green ?
The message isn't a translation, it's a paraphrase.
That being said, who knows why the word green was added, except the author? And what does it mean?
It's not a book I use or ever have, or intend to look at.
But its there.
papa,
I googled 'God of green' and what I found is disturbing. It appears to me it is a case of someone taking away and adding onto, something the scriptures prohibits. This same writer also eliminates key references to homosexuality. Since many have made "The Message" their Bible it should come as no surprise how it fed apostasy.
Why did the writer insert the word green? I do not know except it seems to me someone was listening to someone else other then the Holy Spirit.
Papa, what do you think?
He adds it because in literature green represents hope. (See the green light at the end of Daisy Buchanan's dock in the Great Gatsby and many many other books). I know, it still makes no sense why he would add it but I bet you that's why.
He adds it because in literature green represents hope. (See the green light at the end of Daisy Buchanan's dock in the Great Gatsby and many many other books). I know, it still makes no sense why he would add it but I bet you that's why. Martyr
I have no idea why Eugene H. Peterson uses the word "green" in the way he has done. His fields of academic competence are Philosophy, Theology and Semitic Languages. Clearly therefore he must have had a clear idea in his own mind why he chose to use that term. No doubt it would have been in keeping with the intention of the transliteration itself which was to make it accessible, in his mind at least.
""While I was teaching a class on Galatians, I began to realize that the adults in my class weren't feeling the vitality and directness that I sensed as I read and studied the New Testament in its original Greek. Writing straight from the original text, I began to attempt to bring into English the rhythms and idioms of the original language. I knew that the early readers of the New Testament were captured and engaged by these writings and I wanted my congregation to be impacted in the same way. I hoped to bring the New Testament to life for two different types of people: those who hadn't read the Bible because it seemed too distant and irrelevant and those who had read the Bible so much that it had become 'old hat.'"" Eugene H Peterson.
This quotation from Peterson demonstrates that he was capable of transliterating from Greek into English. Clearly the form of English which would then be used would itself be determined by the intention of the effort. In this case the effort was to "liven" up the original or existing English translations. The problem comes at which point transliteration and paraphrase cross paths. Paraphrasing does not of itself require any knowledge of Greek. It simply requires a sound understanding of any language text and then an overarching explanation given in the form of "new" words of parses and tenses (idioms) into the same language. So English KJV to The Message. It may include many "original" English texts, but the outcome is determined by the intention of the effort.
As for the actual meaning of the use of the word green. It is unjustified in a translatorial sense because their is no correlation between the original Greek or the word itself. It would appear to me that its usage is as you have stated. It is an intentional expression of hope. The wisdom of doing it of course is another matter.
http://www.olivetreeviews.org/wordpress/category/jan’s-articles/
The Message “Bible” Inserts Earth Reverence, God of “Green” Hope
http://solasisters.blogspot.com/2011/05/message-bible-inserts-earth-reverence.html
Homosexuality will be perfectly acceptable, even sacred. And nature, the earth itself, will be worshiped. We have already addressed Eugene Peterson’s removal of homosexuality and other sins in 1 Corinthians 6:9-11, but he also inserts the phrase “use and abuse the earth,” something the Lord did not place there at all.
---
This follows the new doctrines of the Kingdom (false emphasis) of Christians today that God will preserve the earth. He will not. He will destroy it with fire. Our place is in heaven from whence we look for a Saviour the Lord Jesus Christ.
Ginnyrose,
You voiced my thoughts on someone adding and taking away from Scripture.
What kind of godly fear does someone have who can do that?
Changing God's word to suit our own palates, will not diminish its fulfilment one iota.
'Heaven and earth will pass away, but My word will by no means pass away', Matthew 24:35.
Precisely my concern for the NIV2012. My observations are this translation is changing the meaning of God's word. The changes are ever subtle and not blatantly obvious. But let us remember a little leaven leavens the whole loaf.
Bearmaster.
I concur with armkelly:
As for the actual meaning of the use of the word green. It is unjustified in a translatorial sense because their is no correlation between the original Greek or the word itself. It would appear to me that its usage is as you have stated. It is an intentional expression of hope. The wisdom of doing it of course is another matter.
It is evident that the translator has exercised liberty in the use of the word 'green' for elpis (ἐλπίς is translated 53 times in the AV as hope and 1 time as faith). this, to me, is always dangerous and misleading. Bible words have histories. When words are translated other than they ought to be the reader loses the important links with other contexts that comprise God's full revelation of the meaning of the term.
I'm extremely wary of productions like The Message, but I think maybe I understand why he added "green" before "hope" here. Green is the scriptural colour of life. If something is alive, vital, it is green.
So he likely means here that this hope is alive. It is a "living hope," as Paul calls it in another place.
However, this thought is obviously his own addition; it is not there in the Greek.
In my search I have also found that green symbolizes hope but how many people know that? Scripture never explains this...
To say God is the God of green misses the point entirely. It is shifting God's interest in human beings to the creation of nature. Jesus died for humans, not the earth, land, sea and all therein. Methinks people are getting shafted when the focus is removed from the salvation of humans to the earth. God will take care of nature, it is people that need help and that is why God is the God of Hope. Our hope is in him, but it comes from Him as well - he feeds it! I love that!
armkelly,
///As for the actual meaning of the use of the word green. It is unjustified in a translatorial sense because their is no correlation between the original Greek or the word itself.///
I'm glad you made this statement, because if the word was to be considered justified, it would clearly stand above all other words. I always thought the word re-presented pastures, green pastures. He makes us lie down in green pastures. He makes us wanting for nothing, he fills our hearts with honey from his sweet, sweet word. I read this, or I heard this somewhere. I believe the word to mean peace. It's no wonder, that all things shall pass away, but his WORD, shall never pass away.
The duo thinks of creation care not as an onerous duty but a natural response to the goodness of God.
Interview by Andy Crouch
[ posted 6/17/2011 9:59AM ]
Creation care is a hot topic among Christians, but it is nothing new for longtime friends Eugene Peterson and Peter Harris. Peterson's recent memoir The Pastor (HarperOne) is saturated with environmental themes and metaphors, grounded in his annual visits to the family cabin in the highlands of Montana, where he now resides. In 1983, Peter and Miranda Harris and a few friends founded a Christian ecological study center in Portugal called A Rocha (Portuguese for "the rock"). It is now an international conservation organization that has recently expanded its work in the United States. Christianity Today editor at large Andy Crouch spoke with Peterson and Harris on the banks of the Frio River in Texas at a conference on faith and technology at Laity Lodge.
Eugene, how did you come to be so involved in conservation and environmental issues?
I grew up in a very sectarian world. There was no explicit care for creation. My parents were indifferent to it, and my church was indifferent. Hunting was the closest my family or my church ever came to being involved in the world around us. But after they killed their deer or their elk, they were done.
In some ways, that indifference was good for me and for our family, because our kids discovered environmental concerns as we hiked, fished, gardened, harvested, and canned fruits. It was more of a discovery and enjoyment. When I met Peter and saw him at work and listened to him, I realized this really was something significant and biblical.
Peter Harris: It's important to understand that A Rocha, as a movement, is driven by biblical theology. It's not a Christian attempt to "save the planet." It's a response to who God is. Therefore, the role of people like Eugene has been to help us lay that foundation.
Many people—and many Christians—would be happy just to say they are "saving the planet." How would you distinguish a biblically formed movement?
Harris: We may do many of the same things as do secular environmental organizations, but we do them for very different reasons. One question for any kind of activism is, how long are you going to be able to keep doing it? If you believe you're going to be able, by technology, by political force, by whatever means, to save the planet, you may well get exhausted and disillusioned and depressed. These are genuine problems within the environmental movement.
If, on the other hand, you do what you do because you believe it pleases the living God, who is the Creator and whose handiwork this is, your perspective is very different. I don't think there is any guarantee we will save the planet. I don't think the Bible gives us much reassurance about that. But I do believe it gives God tremendous pleasure when his people do what they were created to do, which is care for what he made.
There are some obvious biblical texts to which Christians tend to turn when they think about creation—Genesis 1 and 2, and maybe Romans 8:22. Are there any others?
Peterson: The book of Exodus and the Egyptian plagues. Those 10 plagues are all exorcisms of specific aspects of Pharaoh's control over the world. For eight months, the whole country of Egypt was turned into a theater of exorcism, item by item by item. Pharaoh was unable to do what he had done to creation, and the evil was exorcised by the command of God.
It's extraordinary, taking away the authority of the powers that be and demonstrating that to the whole nation, maybe most of all to the Hebrews, who themselves had been under Pharaoh's power. Here is a huge wrecking ball: smash, smash, smash, smash, and after eight months there's nothing left of Pharaoh's power.
http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2011/june/joyfulenvironment.html
Matthew 5:5
King James Version (KJV)
5 Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth.
Matthew 5:5
The Message (MSG)
5 “You’re blessed when you’re content with just who you are—no more, no less. That’s the moment you find yourselves proud owners of everything that can’t be bought.
I find this interpatation of matthew 5:5 in the message somewhat Unusual. What are your thoughts?
Job 7:7-10
“God, don’t forget that I’m only a puff of air! These eyes have had their last look at goodness. And your eyes have seen the last of me; even while you’re looking, there’ll be nothing left to look at. When a cloud evaporates, it’s gone for good; those who go to the grave never come back. They don’t return to visit their families; never again will friends drop in for coffee.
Luke 17:7-10
“Suppose one of you has a servant who comes in from plowing the field or tending the sheep. Would you take his coat, set the table, and say, ‘Sit down and eat’? Wouldn’t you be more likely to say, ‘Prepare dinner; change your clothes and wait table for me until I’ve finished my coffee; then go to the kitchen and have your supper’? Does the servant get special thanks for doing what’s expected of him? It’s the same with you. When you’ve done everything expected of you, be matter-of-fact and say, ‘The work is done. What we were told to do, we did.’”
The Romans passage in the MSG with the term "green hope" must be read in conjunction with the prior sentence in the MSG:
"And Isaiah’s word:
There’s the root of our ancestor Jesse,
breaking through the earth and growing tree tall,
Tall enough for everyone everywhere to see and take hope!"
Obviously "green hope" used in v. 13 is playing off the imagery of the tall tree mentioned in the prior verse.
I am not commenting on whether this is right or wrong, just noting where I believe the word "green" comes from in v 13.
Is this going to turn into a "bash the Message" thread?
If a person doesn't like the Message, they can bash every verse.
This could be a very long thread indeed!
///Obviously "green hope" used in v. 13 is playing off the imagery of the tall tree mentioned in the prior verse.///
indeed the usage of the word root (Rhiza) is metaphorically used through out the scripture as it is clear to understand.
But I am not finding any Greek that seems to be supporting the imagery of the tall tree mentioned in the prior verse.
So are you saying, that Peterson has not used the word green, as being symbolical to the word hope, as what many have implied.
But instead that he is somehow "playing off the imagery of the tall tree mentioned in the prior verse, that does not even seem to exist in the Greek."
If this is so, Than I find that to be alarming.
When I read it , the first question That came to my mind was, is Peterson an environmentalist, because such phases seem to indicate that indeed he might be,
I discovered that he indeed was, ( I am not against creation care) but we do not need to insert Our views of the such into the text, more than what is being implyed in the originals, paraphrase or not.
This is also alarming as what the artical Greg gave a link to said :
///Here is 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 from The Message:
“Don’t you realize that this is not the way to live? Unjust people who do not 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. A number of you know what I’m talking about, for not so long ago you were on that list. Since then, you’ve been cleaned up and given a fresh start by Jesus, our Master, our Messiah, and by our God present in us, the Spirit.” (Bold mine)
Did you catch that? Peterson’s version claims those who “use and abuse the earth” will not be saved!
Here is 1 Corinthians 6:9-11, from the 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, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God. Such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.”
You will not find this apparent form of earth-reverence in 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 in any reputable translation of the Bible. It simply is not there///
http://solasisters.blogspot.com/2011/05/message-bible-inserts-earth-reverence.html
If Peterson has In the message inserted environmental themes and metaphors, like how he openly admitts of doing in his recent memoir The Pastor.
Than that is good reason for disscussion.
and if not, but some of us are over reading his implications than that also is good reason for disscussion.
by TMK on 2013/6/6 4:25:51Is this going to turn into a "bash the Message" thread?
If a person doesn't like the Message, they can bash every verse.
This could be a very long thread indeed!
It's enough for me to know that THE MESSAGE is NOT the BIBLE, but I have put in the time to study it. And proudpapa may be doing a good service to those who are not aware of the contents of The Message.
Here are some more. (entire article found here - http://www.crossroad.to/Bible_studies/Message.html). Much easier to read than on SermonIndex because it is formatted.
The Message DELETES the reference to God's holy name, ADDS requests not voiced by Jesus, and changes the meaning of other verses. Follow the link and learn more about the phrase, "As above, so below." http://www.crossroad.to/articles2/2003/occult-rpg.htm#magic
Matthew 6:9-13 KJV
"Our Father in heaven,
Hallowed be Your name.
Your kingdom come.
Your will be done
On earth as it is in heaven.
Give us this day our daily bread.
And forgive us our debts,
As we forgive our debtors.
And do not lead us into temptation,
But deliver us from the evil one.
For Yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever.
The Message:
"Our Father in heaven,
Reveal who you are.
Set the world right;
Do what's best -
AS ABOVE, SO BELOW.
Keep us alive with three square meals.
Keep us forgiven with you
and forgiving others.
Keep us safe
from ourselves and the Devil.
You're in charge!
The Message distorts the relationship between God the Father and Jesus the Son:
John 10:30
"I and the Father are one."
John 14:28
"...The Father is greater than I."
The Message:
"I and the Father are one heart and mind."
The Message:
"The Father is the goal and purpose of my life."
* DELETES words like adulterers and homosexual which identify specific sins and ADDS a politically correct reference to environmentalism. 1 Cor 6:9-11.
Peterson's tendency to delete the supernatural and minimize the consequences of sin reminds me of Rom. 1:18 - "The wrath of God is being revealed...against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth..."
(Recall the environmental terminology in Eph. 2:1-3, "filled your lungs with polluted unbelief...")
* DELETES reference to obedience and to the grace of our Lord: Check out Romans 16:19-21.
* MINIMIZES occult dangers, DELETES consequences: 2 Thess 2:9
* DELETES "sexual immorality." ADDS "avoids commitment and intimacy:" (Any sinner can have commitment and intimacy).
Compare 1 Corinthians 6:18-20.
[One could conclude that "commitment and intimacy" or "becoming one", not marriage, set the boundaries for acceptable sex.]
* ADDS words that qualify homosexuality, providing a loophole for committed homosexuals who "love" each other. DELETES "God gave them over...":
Romans 1:26-27
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. And then they paid for it, oh, how they paid for it - emptied of God and love, Godless and loveless wretcheds."
[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. The consequences of disobedience, "due penalty" seems broader than "emptied of God and love..." Historically it includes sexually transmitted diseases as well as spiritual death. That politically incorrect possibility is deleted here.]
* DISTORTS truth with a contemporary bias:
Romans 3:19-20
The Message: "This makes it clear, doesn't it, that whatever is written in these Scriptures is not what God says about others but to us to whom these Scriptures were addressed in the first place! and it's clear enough, isn't it, that we're sinners, every one of us, in the same sinking boat with everyone else? Our involvement with God's revelation doesn't put us right with God. What it does is force us to face our complicity in everyone else's sin."
[This interpretation endorses today's false standard of tolerance: Don't expose or criticize another person; just deal with your own sin. It defies God's guidelines concerning counseling, correction, restoration and accountability - and supports today's tendency to condone sin. See Romans 1:32 - but not in The Message. It deletes this important point.]
* DELETES "spiritual" - spiritual readiness to receive God's resources for ministry. SUBSTITUTES "live creatively," usually a reference to human resources, not God's:
Gal 6:1-2
The Message: "Live creatively, friends. If someone falls into sin, forgivingly restore him, saving your critical comments for yourself. You might be needing forgiveness before the day's out."
* MISLEADING emphasis:
Romans 15:4-5
The Message: "Even if it was written in Scripture long ago, you can be sure it's written for us. God wants the combination of his steady, constant calling and warm, personal counsel in Scripture to come to characterize us, keeping us alert for whatever he will do next. May our dependably steady and warmly personal God develop maturity in you so that you get along with each other as well as Jesus gets along with us all. Then we'll be a choir... our very lives singing in harmony in a stunning anthem to the God..."
[No mention of endurance and hope - which implies triumph in the midst of suffering, as we remain confident that God will do all He has promised. In light of Peterson's tendency to minimize the disciplining side of God, his emphasis on a warm, feel-good God seems to distort God's revelation of Himself. Notice, "follow Christ Jesus" is replaced by a Jesus who "gets along with us."]
* REPLACES "reconciliation" (a spiritual work based on the cross) with "friend."
ADDS "drop their differences" (Could he be promoting a PC form of unity?):
2 Corinthians 5:20: "We are therefore Christ's ambassadors, as though God were making his appeal through us. We implore you on Christ's behalf: Be reconciled to God."\t
The Message: "We're Christ's representatives. God uses us to persuade men and women to drop their differences and enter into God's work of making things right between them. We're speaking for Christ himself now: Become friends with God; he's already a friend with you."
* ADDS a promise not found in the original Greek:
Romans 8:35-37: "Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall trouble or hardship or persecution or famine or nakedness or danger or sword?"\t
The Message: "Do you think anyone is going to be able to drive a wedge between us and Christ's love for us? There is no way! Not trouble, not hard times, not hatred, not hunger, not homelessness, not bullying threats, not backstabbing, NOT EVEN THE WORST SINS LISTED IN SCRIPTURE."
The entire article is a very worthy read if nothing less than to sharpen your own discernment.
This discussion is locked.
