What did he do wrong?

[Étienne d'Angleterre]

So a crap translation then.

So why doesn't it just say we are to care and protect the natural world?

Blimey, it's as though you are making it up as you go along.

I take it you also know you have questions elsewhere that you have failed to answer?

[jeremyp]

I imagine the difference was something in the body language.

I imagine the difference was something in the lions stomach. Namely lunch, in the case of the whisperer and no lunch in the case of the Christian.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

...if anything? 

http://metro.co.uk/2016/03/12/church-prophet-runs-at-lions-to-prove-god-will-save-him-has-buttocks-mauled-5748022/

Lions have mellowed since the time they used to eat us.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

It isn't the first time someone has tried a crazy stunt with wild animals to prove god would protect them, if I remember rightly. God wasn't in the arena last time either!

This lion spends its time like an antitheist...........scratching arse.

[Jack Knave]

The Zulu's thought their witchdoctors could make them bullet proof, but....false belief based on fawlty thinking!!!

[Étienne d'Angleterre]

This lion spends its time like an antitheist...........scratching arse.

No the lion is much more like the atheist. 

Spends his time ripping the theist a " new one".

[Hope]

So a crap translation then.

It is widely acknowledged that the AV, for all its towering poetry and linguistic glory, is a pretty poor translation.  In fact people were saying that within a very short time of its original publishing.

[Hope]

So why doesn't it just say we are to care and protect the natural world?

Blimey, it's as though you are making it up as you go along.

I take it you also know you have questions elsewhere that you have failed to answer?

OK Stephen, when the AV was first published, Hebrew versions of the material were not regarded as valid sources, so the scholars worked from other material that the Church had declared accptable.  It was only later, and especially once Biblical criticism started, that scholars acknowledged that the whole range of sources needed to be used.  In fact, if you look at many of the more modern translations, this 2nd meaning is used far more often.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

No the lion is much more like the atheist. 

Spends his time ripping the theist a " new one".

You talk through yours.

[Étienne d'Angleterre]

OK Stephen, when the AV was first published, Hebrew versions of the material were not regarded as valid sources, so the scholars worked from other material that the Church had declared accptable.  It was only later, and especially once Biblical criticism started, that scholars acknowledged that the whole range of sources needed to be used.  In fact, if you look at many of the more modern translations, this 2nd meaning is used far more often.

Ok I have looked through quite a few versions now. Can only find either dominion or rule over used. Can you point me in the direction of one which says care and/or protect?

[Bubbles]

Ok I have looked through quite a few versions now. Can only find either dominion or rule over used. Can you point me in the direction of one which says care and/or protect?

There is a whole bundle of translations here

http://biblehub.com/genesis/1-26.htm

None of them translate it to mean " protect"

The word used is either, rule, be masters of, have dominion over or reign.

Nowhere does it say protect

I think this is purely a modern idea, based on our greater knowledge of the planet and that resources run out.

If it had genuinely meant protect, I think animals would have been regarded differently in the past.

I think the meaning has changed to now mean protect, have stewardship over.

Originally I don't think it meant that at all.


Animals in the past were looked on as something you used, not protected.

Even today we tend to think we have a right to use animals because we are better than they are, the bible has often been used to support this view.

However if the modern meaning has changed it to " protect" perhaps that's not a negative thing.

Far better we see ourselves as stewards IMO

[Hope]

There is a whole bundle of translations here

Take the Message, Rose.  Verses 26-8 of Genesis 1 are translated

God spoke: “Let us make human beings in our image, make them
        reflecting our nature
    So they can be responsible for the fish in the sea,
        the birds in the air, the cattle,
    And, yes, Earth itself,
        and every animal that moves on the face of Earth.”
    God created human beings;
        he created them godlike,
    Reflecting God’s nature.
        He created them male and female.
    God blessed them:
        “Prosper! Reproduce! Fill Earth! Take charge!
    Be responsible for fish in the sea and birds in the air,
        for every living thing that moves on the face of Earth.”

[Bubbles]

Take the Message, Rose.  Verses 26-8 of Genesis 1 are translated

None of the translations I quoted says that.

In fact if you scroll down to the commentary it says ....

( In this connection the profound thought of Maimonides, elaborated by Tayler Lewis (vial. Lunge, in loco), should not be overlooked, that tselem is the specific, as opposed to the architectural, form of a thing; that which inwardly makes a thing what it is, as opposed to that external configuration which it actually possesses. It corresponds to the rain, or kind, which determines species among animals. It is that which constitutes 'the genus homo. And let them have dominion. The relationship of man to the rest of creation is now defined to be one of rule and supremacy. The employment of the plural is the first indication that not simply an individual was about to be called into existence, but a race, comprising many individuals The range of man's authority is farther specified, and the sphere of his lordship traced by an enumeration in ascending order, from the lowest to the highest, of the subjects placed beneath his sway. His dominion should extend over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air (literally, the heavens), and over the cattle (the behemah), and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing (romeo) that creepeth upon the earth.
)

I'd much rather Christians today regarded themselves as stewards of the earth.

But I don't see any evidence the writers of the bible saw it that way originally.

I think the idea is a modern one.

[ippy]

Oddly enough, Len, the phrase ' ... given dominion over all creatures ... ' doesn't even remotely suggest that this gents' behaviour has anything to do with Biblical brainwashing - let alone being brainwashed by it (I believe that it is impossible to be brainwashed by an inanimate object).  As a result, I would have to suggest that the issue at hand is mental ill-health, rather than any Biblical influence.

For someone that's so particular about language, why are you using the word brainwashing where you are obviously  referring to indoctrination?

Brainwashing involves quite a bit of torture and after the brain is supposed to be washed of it's previous content there is supposed to be a period of re education.

The two words are not interchangeable, I'll give you it's common enough to see the misuse of this word.

Brainwashing was tried by the North Koreans during their war in the fifties it was found to be usless, as far as I know these Koreans were the only people that have tried to use brainwashing.
 
I'm sure you can find a lot more about actual brainwashing on line.

Ippy

[Étienne d'Angleterre]

Take the Message, Rose.  Verses 26-8 of Genesis 1 are translated

Sorry, which version of the Bible is this from?

[Sebastian Toe]

Sorry, which version of the Bible is this from?

The Message

Background here;
https://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Message-MSG-Bible/

[Sebastian Toe]

Take the Message, Rose.  Verses 26-8 of Genesis 1 are translated

Does that mean that the Message is the go-to version for an up to date and meaningful translation, above all others?

[Étienne d'Angleterre]

Does that mean that the Message is the go-to version for an up to date and meaningful translation, above all others?

So out of 22 versions discussed on this thread one doesn't use Domain or Rule. Wow. Clearly domain or rule are the odd ones out.

[Bubbles]

That message bible, apparently it's not a translation at all

The Message – Translation Method
The Message is not a translation, nor can it strictly be said to be a paraphrase of the original languages of the Bible. Peterson’s goal in creating The Message, in his own words, was 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’.” Pastor Peterson’s parishioners, by his own admission, “simply weren't connecting with the real meaning of the words and the relevance of the New Testament for their own lives.” However, this contradicts what Scripture reveals about the power of the Word of God, written by the Holy Spirit and made clear to those who are His: “For the word of God is living and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart” (Hebrews 4:12). Far from “losing its impact,” as NavPress describes traditional Bible versions, the Word of God becomes clearer and more impactful the more it is read and studied by those who seek its truth.

The Message – Pro’s and con’s
The original version of The Message was printed without the traditional numbered verses, making it read more like a novel. Many people found this refreshing at first, but also found it inconvenient for cross-referencing, comparison with other versions, and group Bible studies. As far as the negatives are concerned, there are numerous websites and articles devoted to the translation errors in The Message, too numerous to reiterate here. Suffice it to say that The Message has engendered more criticism for its lack of serious scholarship and outright bizarre renderings than just about any other Bible version to date. One common complaint from many who read The Message or hear it read aloud is “I didn’t recognize it as the Bible.” Other critics declare The Message to be not a paraphrase of what the Bible says, but more of a rendering of what Eugene Peterson would like it to say. In an interview with Christianity Today, Peterson described the beginning of the creative process that produced The Message: “I just kind of let go and became playful. And that was when the Sermon on the Mount started. I remember I was down in my basement study, and I did the Beatitudes in about ten minutes. And all of a sudden I realized this could work.” Aside from the impossibility of doing justice to the Sermon on the Mount in ten minutes, one wonders whether playfulness is the appropriate demeanor for those who attempt to “rightly divide the word of Truth” (2 Timothy 2:15). Awe and reverence for a holy God and His holy Word, yes. Playfulness? No.


http://www.gotquestions.org/The-Message-MSG.html

Here's some samples

John 1:1, 14 – “The Word was first, the Word present to God, God present to the Word. The Word was God, in readiness for God from day one. The Word became flesh and blood, and moved into the neighborhood. We saw the glory with our own eyes, the one-of-a-kind glory, like Father, like Son, Generous inside and out, true from start to finish.”

John 3:16 – “This is how much God loved the world: He gave his Son, his one and only Son. And this is why: so that no one need be destroyed; by believing in him, anyone can have a whole and lasting life.”

John 8:58 – “Believe me,” said Jesus, “I am who I am long before Abraham was anything.”

Ephesians 2:8–9 – “Saving is all his idea, and all his work. All we do is trust him enough to let him do it. It’s God’s gift from start to finish! We don’t play the major role. If we did, we’d probably go around bragging that we’d done the whole thing!”

Titus 2:13 – “This new life is starting right now, and is whetting our appetites for the glorious day when our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ, appears.”


Seriously?

The word became flesh and blood and moved into the neighbourhood?

LOL!

[Bubbles]

Authorised KJV

1 And seeing the multitudes, he went up into a mountain: and when he was set, his disciples came unto him:

2 And he opened his mouth, and taught them, saying,

 

3 Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.


 

4 Blessed are they that mourn: for they shall be comforted.


 

5 Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth.


 
6 Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness: for they shall be filled.
 

7 Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy.

8 Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God.


Then the message version

MATTHEW 5:1-8--TM
1 When Jesus saw his ministry drawing huge crowds, he climbed a hillside... This is what he said:

2 "You're blessed when you're at the end of your rope. With less of you there is more of God and his rule.

3 "You're blessed when you feel you've lost what is most dear to you. Only then can you be embraced by the One most dear to you.

4 "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.

5 "You're blessed when you've worked up a good appetite for God. He's food and drink in the best meal you'll ever eat.

6 "You're blessed when you care. At the moment of being 'care-full,' you find yourselves cared for.

7 "You're blessed when you get your inside world your mind and heart put right. Then you can see God in the outside world.

8 ? (where is it? verses 1 and 2 combined?)


So there you go, according to the message bible you are blessed when you reach the end of your rope 

http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Bible/the_message.htm

I've got to read this message bible, it looks a bit of a laugh 

[Bubbles]

Hope, you are winding us up, surely 

[Bubbles]

This is supposed to be the Lord's Prayer

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!

 

"Give us this day our daily bread", could also refer to wisdom and Gods spirit, not just food.
Like 'bread', as in ,"bread and wine".

Not just nosh and stuffing yourself, Lol

 

[Hope]

Does that mean that the Message is the go-to version for an up to date and meaningful translation, above all others?

No, there are several other modern translations - just pointing out that there are such translations.  In fact, when I do Bible study, I tend to use the NIV, the Greek-English Interlinear and or the Hebrew-English Interlinear, the Message, the ESV or the CEV, and then will occasionally pop into the RSV.  Working from a single translation for study is an extremely poor idea.

[Hope]

Hope, you are winding us up, surely 

The AV was originally created in order that English-speaking people should have a version in their vernacular.  The Message, rather like the Good News Bible from the 70s/80s, is an attempt to use modern language to express the concepts included in the original.

[Dicky Underpants]

I've got to read this message bible, it looks a bit of a laugh 

Looks about on a par with Joseph Smith's 'inspired' translation of the Bible (I mean the Bible and not the BOM). Both seem to be making it up as they go along. As for Hope citing this as a responsible (very apt word) translation - it rather puts his boasted linguistic credentials into perspective

P.S. "working up a good appetite for God" will no doubt stay with me as I defrost my pizza tonight