The descration of the Word of God

Haven't you heard? Man has improved upon the Word of God. No longer will we have to drudge through chapter after long-winded chapter of a 2 inch thick book to find God's truth. No longer will we have to be discouraged at the understanding of words and phrases that were popular in the 17th century. Can you imagine, having to read a book of eternal truths that doesn't contain a single picture? Doesn't God know that we are living in the the 21st century--the century of the Internet, the 24 hour news cycle, text messaging, video conferencing, the hybrid automobile, and video-on-demand? Why should we be forced to used an old, antiquated Bible in order to find out about God's plan for the world through His Son Jesus Christ?

Of course, I'm being facetious!

This new bible is called "Bible Illuminated: The Book New Testament". This book is a desecration of the Word of God. First of all it uses the Good News Translation of the bible--which isn't a translation at all! It is a paraphrase. The difference between the two is like night and day. A "translation" of the bible uses the oldest written manuscripts and scholarly research into the syntax and morphology of the languages in which the Bible was originally written. A "paraphrase" is not like that at all. A paraphrase is the author (or authors) opinion concerning what was written and what he (or they) Bible should say in today's language. Any serious Bible student should steer clear of paraphrases and use credible translations (KJV, NKJV, NIV, NRSV).

The second thing I have issue with are the photographs that are in the book. The choice to use pictures in a bible is not new (children's bibles use them all the time), but it is the nature, and the subject of these photographs that I find disturbing. I have attached a link to some of the pictures in the book:
http://www.npr.org/programs/morning/features/2008/dec/bible/index.html
Some of the pictures look very dark and Gothic. Some of them, I think, are just downright inappropriate. Take for instance the photograph of the faceless man in a hooded sweatshirt on the back cover. Or the woman tearing the head and neck off of a cooked goose. Or a picture of a protester who set himself on fire as the opening to the Book of Revelation. (The cover of their yet unreleased Old Testament has the faces of a man and a woman who are about to kiss each other) These pictures are bad enough...but they are not the worst of them. There are other pictures...of so-called "good people" that have helped to improve world peace or end world hunger. Included in this "bible" are photos of Bono, Muhammad Ali, Al Gore, Che Guevara, and Angelina Jolie of all people. What does it mean to have photos of these people in a bible? None of these people are confessed Christians! Do these pictures show that "good people" who do "good things" are on par with Jesus? Are we saying that these "good people" who have done"good things" can get into heaven? God forbid!

Lastly, this book has a more sinister message.

"The creators of the book ask you to support the United Nations and to donate money to it! I am referring to the portions that reference "Eight Ways to Change the World" which is a goal of the United Nations called the `Millennium Development Goals' which they hope will be realized by the year 2015. Readers are called to action by supporting initiatives of the United Nations and to donate money."

Did you just hear me?! The stated goal of the authors of this book is not to get people saved but to get people to donate to the United Nations!

Why does the American Christian Church always give way to consumerism and go the way Balaam? In our efforts to make the bible (and church) more "likeable, tolerable, or readable" to non-Christians, we continue compromise the message of the Gospel. So much so that the line between the sacred and the secular is being blurred...and will eventually be erased. Now we have PowerPoint slides, laser light shows, and rock bands on Sunday morning. Our churches now have slick marketing campaigns, surveys and polls about what to preach, and when a message is preached, there is no mention of Jesus. The Christian church should be up in arms over this--but they won't be. Some prominent pastor or evangelical leader will stand up and defend this work of junk as a "tool of evangelism" to win the lost. They'll say that we have to make Christianity relevant to the culture and that we should become all things to all men so that we may save some. But my question is, when will the church awaken from her slumber? Matt 24:24 "...insomuch that, if [it were] possible, they shall deceive the very elect."