Bible Gateway pulls The Passion Translation

[public hermit]

Translator Brian Simmons—a former missionary linguist and pastor who now leads Passion and Fire Ministries—sees his work in Bible translation as part of a divine calling on his life to bring a word, the Word, to the nations. His translation has been endorsed by a range of apostolic charismatic Christians, including The Call’s Lou Engle, Bethel’s Bill Johnson, and Hillsong’s Bobbie Houston

Bible Gateway’s parent company, HarperCollins Christian Publishing, told CT, “We periodically review our content, making changes as necessary, to align with our business goals.” The company declined to offer further details about its reason for the decision. TPT remains available on YouVersion and Logos Bible Software.

Bible Gateway Removes The Passion Translation

Paraphrase passing itself off as a translation?

 

[timothyu]

Paraphrase passing itself off as a translation?

Cable news pundits do it all the time.

 

[Sketcher]

I've never heard of this translation. If he was a missionary, why is he translating the Bible into English again instead of another language that doesn't have good translations of the Bible?

 

[Original Happy Camper]

satan hs been cpunterfieting the WORD of GOD from the beggining.

 

[public hermit]

Here's an example:

"For example, on its own website, The Passion Translation quotes Luke 1:37. Here is that verse in several mainstream versions:

Luke 1:37 ESV: “For nothing will be impossible with God.”

Luke 1:37 NIV: “For no word from God will ever fail.”

Luke 1:37 NASB: “For nothing will be impossible with God.”

Luke 1:37 KJV: “For with God nothing shall be impossible.”

This same verse, in The Passion Translation, looks like this:

“No promise of God is empty of power, for with God there is no such thing as impossibility."

What is the Passion Translation of the Bible? | GotQuestions.org

It definitely reads like a paraphrase. If the idea is to get the meaning across, which is what Simmon's claims, that's not a bad job. Of course, that's just one verse. Is it worthy of being a translation? If Bible Gateway is about translations, that kind of rendering seems outside the criteria if being "true" to the text. Or, is it?

Maybe, the problem comes down to associations and theology. Who is Simmons associated with, and is the establishment of translators reacting to a theology they don't accept?

 

[Maria Billingsley]

Translator Brian Simmons—a former missionary linguist and pastor who now leads Passion and Fire Ministries—sees his work in Bible translation as part of a divine calling on his life to bring a word, the Word, to the nations. His translation has been endorsed by a range of apostolic charismatic Christians, including The Call’s Lou Engle, Bethel’s Bill Johnson, and Hillsong’s Bobbie Houston

Bible Gateway’s parent company, HarperCollins Christian Publishing, told CT, “We periodically review our content, making changes as necessary, to align with our business goals.” The company declined to offer further details about its reason for the decision. TPT remains available on YouVersion and Logos Bible Software.

Bible Gateway Removes The Passion Translation

Paraphrase passing itself off as a translation?

That's good news. No pun intended.

 

[public hermit]

That's good news. No pun intended.

Why is it good news?

 

[Halbhh]

Why is it good news?

While I've had to many times try to help someone with an odd notion of a verse based on the sometimes hard to understand KJV, by showing them a high quality modern translation like the ESV or NIV, I haven't yet encountered that translation you post about here, the one biblegateway removed. But I have tried to steer people away from the usually-just-fine-but-occasionally-disasterous NLT. Worse though, the NLT translators didn't seem to realize they should not revamp and adjust and bring in extras to the perfect, divine wording of John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God..

In the bible, the wordings aren't always just fine to reword however you like where you are still roughly a lot like the known meaning. Not all verses are however you want to word it optional....

Have a look at the other translations through the link there, if you like, and consider. Look at the Greek also. This isn't the only thing the NLT does wrong, but it's a painful and awful one. Anyway, I don't really want to look at the TPT or whatever, but hope more people will put aside their NLT and try the NIV.

What could help people understand that the meaning is sometimes actually deep and making it less deep means removing some of the meaning?

 

[public hermit]

While I've had to many times try to help someone with an odd notion of a verse based on the sometimes hard to understand KJV, by showing them a high quality modern translation like the ESV or NIV, I haven't yet encountered that one biblegateway removed. But I have tried to steer people away from the usually-just-fine-but-occasionally-disasterous NLT, where the translators didn't seem to realize they should not revamp and adjust and bring in extras to the perfect, divine wording of John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God..

In the bible, the wordings aren't always just fine to reword however you like where you are still roughly a lot like the known meaning. Not all verses are however you want to word it optional....

Have a look at the other translations through the link there, if you like, and consider. Look at the Greek also. This isn't the only thing the NLT does wrong, but it's a painful and awful one. Anyway, I don't really want to look at the TPT or whatever, but hope more people will put aside their NLT and try the NIV.

I'm up for ragging on the NLT too, if it has bad translations. Actually, I'm fine with not taking one translation as best, but finding the best one for each verse. That's what I do. I look at the Greek and settle on the translation that fits, or use my own.

What is curious are translations of meaning, because that's basically interpretation. I'm not a betting man, but if I were, I'd bet folks don't like Simmon's theology. Should it be on Bible Gateway? I don't care, I don't use it for personal consumption lol. But it's curious. Peterson's Message got flack, but why? Interpretation.

People don't like interpretations, they want scripture. And, then make their own interpretation lol.

 

[Halbhh]

I'm up for ragging on the NLT too, if it has bad translations. Actually, I'm fine with not taking one translation as best, but finding the best one for each verse. That's what I do. I look at the Greek and settle on the translation that fits, or use my own.

What is curious are translations of meaning, because that's basically interpretation. I'm not a betting man, but if I were, I'd bet folks don't like Simmon's theology. Should it be on Bible Gateway? I don't care, I don't use it for personal consumption lol. But it's curious. Peterson's Message got flack, but why? Interpretation.

People don't like interpretations, they want scripture. And, then make their own interpretation lol.

Yes, I often looked at a deeper passage in several translations, and sometimes the NIV (especially in the OT) is better and sometimes the ESV (usually in the NT).

I got what I wanted to say there finally above also at the end about the paraphrase and also the interpretives:

At times, in a passage, the meaning is actually deep and trying to making it less deep (easy to understand) means removing some of the meaning.

That's why paraphrase isn't always good.

That's what was needed to say.

 

[Maria Billingsley]

Why is it good news?

Brian Simons claims Jesus Christ of Nazareth breathed on him and gave him a new revelation for scripture and commissioned him to rewrite scripture. The result, is the Passion translation which is written in such a way that it compromises the natural intention of the text.

 

[public hermit]

Brian Simons claims Jesus Christ of Nazareth breathed on him and gave him a new revelation for scripture and commissioned him to rewrite scripture. The result, is the Passion translation which is written in such a way that it compromises the natural intention of the text.

Yeah, that's quite a claim. Thank you, I hadn't heard that.

 

[public hermit]

At times, in a passage, the meaning is actually deep and trying to making it less deep (easy to understand) means removing some of the meaning.

That's an interesting point. In trying to give the meaning, it's possible to limit, or even twist, the meaning.

 

[zippy2006]

Simmons gives a response to Wilson's critique here: The Passion “Translation” Debate: Brian Simmons Responds.

I don't know what source would be accepted as an authoritative guide in determining what counts as a translation and what counts as paraphrase. In his reply Simmons says that according to Webster's Dictionary's definition of "translation" his rendering counts as a translation. That strikes me as a remarkably weak argument given that this debate is occurring in a specialized field.

At the end of the day it appears that the scholarly Christian community found his rendering to be too loose, too far from a literal translation, and not adhering to scholarly standards. In a word, it was rejected by a form of peer review.

 

[timothyu]

Did not the Pope make/attempt a change to the wording of the Lord's Prayer a year or two ago based upon not translation but perceived meaning as perhaps this guy has done?

 

[Original Happy Camper]

Revelation 22:19
And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

 

[A_JAY]

From the scriptural references I have seen, it seems more like a commentary than a translation.

 

[Halbhh]

That's an interesting point. In trying to give the meaning, it's possible to limit, or even twist, the meaning.

I just saw this posted in another thread, and thought you'd like to see it.
What is the Passion Translation of the Bible? | GotQuestions.org

 

[public hermit]

I just saw this posted in another thread, and thought you'd like to see it.
What is the Passion Translation of the Bible? | GotQuestions.org

I think the point made there, that a translation by one person is suspect, has some merit. As individuals, we know we are prone to make errors. The accountability of peers in a group setting can help lessen the probability of error. Having a translation committee makes sense, and it's in the spirit of Acts 15 to make important decisions together; it's a precedent well-established throughout Christian history.

 

[Halbhh]

That's an interesting point. In trying to give the meaning, it's possible to limit, or even twist, the meaning.

Yes, that can happen of course, and is a main (or the main) problem, but not the only problem. A paraphrase or 'translation' (really a paraphrase sometimes) meant to make a verse more clear can do so by trying to convey what the verse says without aiming to reform it into a new meaning, and still entirely fail while saying true things, but not the thing, because the original wording is deep and mysterious, and cannot be simplified.

(It's a natural impulse to feel (or prefer to think that) everything can just be figured out today, and nothing is deeper than we already know...)