Skip to main content

Killing the Passion-Primary Text, Serious Study?

Image
By
If you want to know what this series is about go to my first post here.

 I have been reflecting further on the claims made for The Passion Translation (TPT).

“The Passion Translation is an excellent translation you can use as your primary text to seriously study God’s Word ... the text has been interpreted from the original language, carrying its original meaning and giving you an accurate, reliable expression of God’s original message”

 You can find this claim here in the FAQs section under the question, 'Is the TPT considered a good translation for serious study?' You can find links to helpful and authoritative reviews in my first post in this series.

Stop and consider this for a moment. In an interview with Sid Roth, Brian Simmons tells how Jesus appeared to him, telling him he should write a new translation of the Bible. This is from about the 15:17 mark point in the interview.

Not only that, Jesus would reveal to him secrets of the Hebrew language and guide him in the work of translating. Simmons describes being filled with the spirit of revelation, and instantly receiving what he calls 'downloads.' He pictures the experience as being 'like having a a chip put inside of me to understand the Scriptures better.'

Which Would Jesus Read?


We all remember the WWJD wristbands, What Would Jesus Do? Imagine a table containing several different translations of the Bible. Perhaps the NIV, ESV, KJV, RSV, NASB, and The Passion Translation. Which do you think, in light of Brian Simmons' claims, would Jesus read? Which carries the endorsement of heaven? The one he commissioned and inspired of course - Brian's Bible.

I come from a Mormon background, a Mormon for fourteen years, a Christian now for 34 years. Joseph Smith claimed God commissioned him to translate the Book of Mormon from gold plates, delivered by an angel. He was also commissioned to translate the Bible. Mormons call it 'The Inspired Version.' Whose interpretation of the Bible do you think Mormons favour? I don't need to tell you, do I?

In my last post I wrote, 'as the New World Translation is biased towards Watchtower teaching, so TPT is heavily biased toward the teachings of the New Apostolic Reformation.' Here is a movement that now has its own 'Inspired Version,' commissioned and endorsed by Jesus himself.

Today's text for comparison is Ephesians 6:10/11:

Finally, be strong in the Lord and in his mighty power. Put on the full armor of God, so that you can take your stand against the devil's schemes. NIV

Finally, be strong in the Lord and in the strength of his might. Put on the whole armor of God, that you may be able to stand against the schemes of the devil. ESV

Finally, be strong in the Lord and in the strength of His might. Put on the whole armor of God, that you may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil.
NASB

'I have saved these most important truths for last: Be supernaturally infused with strength through your life union with the Lord Jesus. Stand victorious with the force of his explosive power flowing in and through you. Put on God's complete set of armor provided for us, so that you will be protected as you fight against the evil strategies of the accuser.' TPT

Where did all those extra words come from!!

Out of 'Finally,' (Λοιπόν - loipon 'henceforth') he gets, 'I have saved these most important truths for last...'

More important than, 'In him we have redemption through his blood'? 1:7

More important than his 'making known to us the mystery of his will...to unite all things in [Christ]'? 1:9/10

More important than,'By grace you have been saved, through faith'? 2:8

More important than, 'he himself is our peace'? 2:14

There is an awful lot of very important stuff in Paul's letter to Ephesus, such that it abuses the privilege if you get 'most important truths' out of 'finally' just because it comes at the end. Read Ephesians (in a reliable translation) and decide what text is 'most important.' It can't be done in a letter with so many eternal and life-giving truths. 

 Of course, it is 'most important' simply because he can make of these verses 'supernatural infusion', 'life union', 'explosive power', etc. This reflects the translator's personal views about the supernatural, signs and wonders. He is reading meaning into the text instead of taking his understanding from the text.

Finally, (and I just mean finally) there is an interesting resource commenting on Brian Simmon's 'translation' of 'The Passion [Anti] Translation', as the writer terms it, over at River of Life

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Obama's mother posthumously baptized into LDS Church - Salt Lake Tribune

By
In the wake of his remarkable success it seemed that the world and his wife wanted to claim President Obama as their own with even an Irish connection being dug up. Now the Mormons have got in on the act by posthumously baptising his mother. They have in the past upset the Jewish community, the Catholic Church and now the American President with this wacky and unbiblical practice but there is no indication that they will review it. And, of course, it is always someone else’s fault and they promise a thorough inquiry to uncover the real culprits. Maybe they should try looking in the mirror. President Barack Obama's mother, Stanley Ann Dunham, who died in 1995, was baptized posthumously into The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints last year during her son's campaign, according to Salt Lake City-based researcher Helen Radkey. The ritual, known as “baptism for the dead,” was done June 4 in the Provo temple, and another LDS temple rite, known as the “endowment,” was...
Post a Comment
Read more

Mormon Christians? Whats in a Name?

By
The Mormon Church, disturbed by the continuing identifying of polygamus sects in the news with the name Mormon, recently issued a press statement aimed at "clarifying" issues. It is interesting to note that if you substitute the name "Christian" where they use the name "Mormon" it makes a very good argument for us against the claims of the Mormon Church. The full press release is reproduced below in italics with each paragraph rewritten in ordinary text to present it from a Christian perspective. SALT LAKE CITY 10 July 2008 On 26 June, Newsroom published a package of information featuring profiles of ordinary Latter-day Saints in Texas. With no other intention but to define themselves, these members provided a tangible depiction of what their faith is all about. They serve as the best distinction between the lifestyles and values of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and a Texas-based polygamous group that has recently attracted media attent...
70 comments
Read more

Is atheism an intolerant belief?

By
The Big Questions , Sunday 2 August 2009, third question. A growing number of Britons say they are certain there is no God - but how do they know? Professor John Adams of the North Yorkshire Humanist Association begins by asking theists what evidence they have for their beliefs. Paul Woolley of Theos continues by pointing out Richard Dawkins description of faith as a 'virus', and the appalling track record of atheism in the 20th Century, as spearheaded by Pol Pot and Stalin. Chloe Clifford-Frith of the Humanist and Secular Students Society contends that Stalin did not do the things he did because he was an atheist, but because he was evil. Paul Woolley rejoins that atheists are trying to have it both ways when they claim that religion is the cause of evil, but refuse to acknowledge the ideological impetus of atheism when it comes to many evil acts. Mao and Stalin both replaced God with the State - a 'religious' manoeuvre. Rev Alistair Rycroft of St Michael Le Belfrey Ch...
18 comments
Read more