A Better Translation

Why has no one made a better translation of the Bible?

I went to a mobile Bible Museum this summer.  While I found the exhibits interesting, I would have rather that it had not been a guided tour.

On the left side were exhibits from ancient times until about 1900 AD.  On the right side were exhibits from then until now.

When the young woman explained things on the left side, there was one historical error after another in her presentation.  I resisted the temptation to correct any of them due to the limited time of the tour  - especially since they were already behind schedule when they started our group.

However, her presentation on the right side was much better.  It was largely focused on how people smuggled Bibles in places like the former Soviet Union and new insights into the complexity of the Bible that had been discovered using modern technology.

One thing of great interest was exhibit that mapped out all the connections formed by references in one line in the Bible to other lines of the Bible.  Way more than 10,000 had been found by computer analysis.

This was far more than any other book that had been analyzed like War And Peace.  These references went both directions and included connections between books of the Bible that were written at the same time by people who were a thousand miles (1,600 km) from each other.

It would have been almost impossible for a single person to accomplish if they had written all the books of Bible themselves.  It was impossible for this to happen when the books were written by over forty authors on three different continents in three different languages over a period of eighteen hundred years.

This showed that the Bible had to have a single author of unimaginable intelligence that dictated the books to the author of each book in it.  It showed that the Book of Truth (The Bible) could have only been written by the Father of Truth (YHVH aka God aka THE LORD).

Another thing that caught my attention was the comparisons of the text of Dead Sea Scrolls to the text of various translations performed by various people using computers.  These analysis compared the meaning of the Hebrew words of the books of the Bible found in the Dead Sea Scroll with the meaning of the words of each translation at the time when the translation was made.

The King James was shown to be far more accurate than any other English translation.  It had only had about 0.05% mistranslated words.

Most of those errors were caused by errors in the Second Rabbinic Bible used for the Hebrew text in translating it.  This source text had inherited these errors from the Masoretic Text.  The Masoretic Text was the oldest known Hebrew text at the time when the King James Version was made and touted by the Rabbis as the most accurate.

However, the Masoretic Text does not agree with the Greek Septuagint translation in a number of places.  In every single place where the disagreement occurs between the two, the text of the Dead Sea Scrolls agrees with the Greek Septuagint. 

Some of these are of things like the height of Goliath which is six cubits in the Masoretic Text but is only four cubits in the Septuagint and the Dead Sea Scrolls.  Most concern identifying the Messiah of Israel like Psalms 22.

Most of the errors that people assert that are in the King James Version are actually errors caused by their lack of knowledge about the meaning of the words in it.  Anyone can skim over the surface and make ignorant statements about things that they did not bother to research.

For example, the word “nephew” in the King James Version when it was written meant “grandson” today (1 Timothy 5:4).  This is sometimes cited as a mistranslation of the Greek word “enkonos” in the King James Version but in reality it was accurate at the time of the translation.

There are other problems with King James Version.

For example, the genealogy of the Man of Truth (Yah'shau aka Yeshua HaMashiach aka Jesus) in the King James Version of the Gospel of Matthew has only thirteen generations listed between the carry away from Babylon until his birth even though the summary below it says that there are fourteen generations (Matthew 1:12-17).  This also does not match the number of generations from Zorobabel to his birth found in the King James Version of the Gospel of Luke (Luke 3:23-27).

He is a descendant of King David through Solomon in the King James Version of the Gospel of Matthew (Matthew 1:6-16).  However, he is a descendant of King David through Nathan in the King James Version of the Gospel of Luke (Luke 3:23-31).

When the Greek manuscripts are examined that the King James Version was translated from, it is shown that this not a translation error by the translators.  They also contain these contradictions.

Even the oldest Greek manuscripts of the Renewed Covenant (B'rit Chadashah aka The New Testament) ever found contain these contradictions.  Even the oldest Greek copies of these individual books that are older than the oldest Greek manuscript contain these contradictions.

So, these contradictions are not found only in the King James Version but also in almost every modern translation including the New International Version.  It even exists in the Orthodox Jewish Bible.

However, if there had been such a contradiction when the Man of Truth was born, then his enemies would have found it and made it known.  His entire claim to be the Messiah of Israel depended upon having the right linage.

They would have been able to find out quickly since the linage of all of the returning exiles and their descendants were kept at the Temple since the time of Nehemiah (Nechemyah) (Nehemiah 7:5).  The fact that his enemies never included this in their many reasons to reject his claim tells us that these contradictions did not exist when the Man of Truth walked the Earth.

So, this means that the problem has to be with the Greek source documents.  This is not conjecture for every single Church historian before 300 AD says that the Gospel of Matthew was written in Hebrew originally and then translated into Greek.

According to Eusebius, the translators were not speakers of Hebrew and had to try to translate as best as they could.  Consequently, they made several mistakes in translating from Hebrew to Koine Greek.  These included a mistake concerning Mary the Jew – the mother of the Man of Truth.

The Hebrew copies of the Gospel of Matthew that are older than the Greek copies say Joseph the father of Mary (Mariam).  This removes the contradictions completely and explains why the enemies of the Man of Truth were not able to discredit him based on his genealogy.

The reason that the original Greek translators used “husband” instead of “father” for “ab” was that they used the Greek copies of the Gospel of Luke and Gospel of Mark for comparison to their Greek translation of the Hebrew Gospel of Matthew.  In those texts Joseph is only called the husband of Mary, but Joseph the father of Mary is never mentioned, so they assumed that “ab” also meant husband.

It did not occur to them that the father of Mary could have the same name as her husband.  This error got perpetuated in new Greek copies in the Gospel of Matthew.

However, it has been long known as shown above that the language of the Renewed Covenant was not just Greek.  In fact, some of these Church historians went to India to obtain a copy of the Gospel of Matthew written in Hebrew reportedly by Matthew the Jew (Matityahu aka the Apostle Matthew) himself.

They brought it back and had it placed in the Library of Alexandria in Egypt after the False Church of Rome became the official church of the Roman Empire.  It remained there until the Crusaders recaptured Alexandria from the Muslims and it was placed in the Vatican.

In fact, the Vatican has many copies of the Gospel of Matthew written in Hebrew within its vaults.  Many have not been catalog, but some like Vatican 100 have been.

So, again the fault is not in the translation work of the King James Version translators but in the text that they translated from just like had happened with the Masoretic Text.  Other translations that used the same faulty Greek text have the same mistakes.

There are also a few other errors where the translators chose the wrong word in a few places outside of the Gospel of Matthew in the King James Version.  For example, they translated “Iesus” as “Jesus” instead of “Joshua” who led the people of Israel into the Promised Land (Act 7:45).

In Greek and Hebrew they both have the same name - but not in English.  It should have been translated as Joshua who actually did this in the book that bears his name in English.

However, other translations have even more translation issues.

This has been shown by analysis performed by computers numerous times.  Most of these analysis have been performed on different parts of the Book of Truth by different groups.

For one thing, as shown above, these newer translations repeat many of the mistakes of the King James Version instead of correcting them.  Then they add new mistakes on top of those.

Among them is the one disturbing sentence found in the New International Version and many other translations.  It was not found in any English translation until it was first included in the Revised Standard Version in 1946.

Adding “(Thus saying he declared all foods clean)” in their translation of Mark 7:19 was a purposeful attempt to distance the Man of Truth from the Law of Truth (Torah aka The Law).  It was part of a movement based on higher criticism to create an American Jesus who was less Jewish that Americans would find more relatable.

On top of that, many translations like the New International Version have footnotes that undermine the authority of the text.  For example there is such a footnote for the resurrection of the Man of Truth, the giving of the Great Commission, and the promise of power to back up the message of the Great Commission, found in Mark 16:9-20.

Their claim is that the oldest and most reliable manuscripts do not contain the footnoted passages.  This is mostly based on the Sinaiticus which is claimed to be the oldest complete manuscript.  However, this is not even true because it is missing significant parts of the Original Covenant (Tanakh aka The Old Testament) as well as parts of the Renewed Covenant as described above.

More than that, the text in it is far from pristine as it contains over 23,000 corrections and numerous variations of the same passages of scripture that do not agree with each other.  It is full of editorial instability and would never pass the rigorous standards applied to Rabbinic or Byzantine manuscripts – or even later Catholic manuscripts.  This is probably why some folios (pages) of it were found in a discard basket destined for the trash heap.

More than that, it is not oldest document that contains the Greek text of the Renewed Covenant.  There are many older documents that contain all or parts of every book of the Renewed Covenant.  Every single passage that is missing from the Sinaiticus has been found among these older documents.

For example, the ending of the Gospel of Mark noted above was found in Papyrus 45.  It was discovered in the 1930s and was available to the translators of the New International Version that was translated in the 1960s.  It was very poor scholarship on their behalf at best to add this footnote.

However, it is more likely that this older copy of the Gospel of Mark was intentionally ignored to boost their claims about the Sinaiticus and to cast doubt on the ending of the Gospel of Mark.  The ending of the Gospel of Mark is very troubling to many preachers because it says that supernatural signs will confirm that they are preaching what the Man of Truth preached and teaching what he taught.

Examples of this being done was when the Father of Truth raised my son from the dead because He knew that I would fulfill the vow that I made to Him and how the Man of Truth stood between the Impossible Girl and death three times.  These things were done because I was preaching what the Man of Truth preached and teaching what he taught.

However, these signs never occur at any time throughout their entire denomination.  These verses shows that this is the case because they are not preaching what the Man of Truth preached and teaching what he taught.

They are probably not preaching what the Man of Truth preached and teaching what he taught to avoid persecution.

The Man of Truth also promised that those who did what he did would be persecuted – even by their own families (Matthew 10:35-37).  For example, the persecution by my own father - even as I strived my entire life to fulfill the promise that I made to him after my parents divorced.

However, most of the persecution in America is economic.

For example, I was fired numerous times by Corporate America because I would never go along with evil to get along with evil people like a good Nazi.  This was after saving these companies literally hundreds of millions of dollars over my career by reporting fraud waste and abuse, eliminating costly inefficiencies, closing IT security holes, and preventing them from making disastrous business mistakes.

These religious professionals simply are not willing to suffer such economic persecution. They also value unity with each other over obedience to the Man of Truth.

After all, he is the most divisive man who ever lived.  You cannot preach what he preached and teach what he taught without causing division between those who are willing to change their beliefs to match his teachings and those who refuse to do so.

Since they refuse to change their message to match his message to avoid persecution and avoid causing division, there are no supernatural signs to confirm that their message is the message of the Father of Truth.  So, a translation like the New International Version that discredits this confirmation is very appealing to them.

This is at the heart of why no one has made a better translation.

The first English translation was by John Wycliff.  How did the religious professionals repay him for his long labor and toil to create as accurate of a translation as possible that was available to everyone who could read English?

He was put on trial for heresy five times by the False Church of Rome.  He was fired from his position at Oxford University and driven out of public life.  After death, he was declared a heretic and his remains were exhumed, burned, and scattered to erase his memory.

His followers, called the Lollards, continued his work and published his English translation among the peasants – who they taught how to read.  They also published his translation among the nobility.  They were likewise persecuted for about a hundred years for their efforts with many of them being martyred.

Afterwards, William Tyndale made a more accurate English translation based on Hebrew and Greek text that John Wycliff did not have access to.  How did the religious professionals repay him for his long labor and toil to create the most accurate translation possible for everyone who could read English?

He was forced to flee England, and they burned the first copies that were smuggled into England.  Ultimately, these religious professionals paid a friend to betray him.  This led to William Tyndale being strangled and then burned at the stake.

Afterwards, when the Church of England broke off from the Roman Catholic Church, the Church of England had the Great Bible created as the official Bible of England.  It was virtually a word for word copy of the Tyndale Bible and the work of his disciples – but it did not give Tyndale credit for his work to translate it.

Later the Great Bible was used to create the Geneva Bible – the first translation to had chapter and verse numbers to make it easier to find the location of passages in the scriptures.  That was in turn used to create the King James Version.

In fact 80% to 90% of the Renewed Covenant in the King James Version is the work of William Tyndale.  Much of his translation work of the Original Covenant from Hebrew was destroyed, but most of the Pentateuch (Genesis through Deuteronomy) and Job in the King James Version are his work.  The rest are mostly from the Matthew Bible that one of his disciples, Myles Covendale, created to finish the work that Tyndale had been executed to end.

So, the payment that the religious professionals gave for making an accurate word-for-word translation in English was persecution and death.  What payment did they give for making a less accurate thought-for-thought translation that was more to their liking?

Over 450 million copies of the New International Version have been sold with the original translation corporation collecting around a 10% licensing fee for each copy sold.  The publishing companies report that as much as 84% of their sales every year are from this one translation.  Retailers have also made millions of dollars selling this translation. In short, the religious professionals have paid billions of dollars for a translation that has been altered to say what they want it to say.

So making a better translation that helps people better understand how to better follow the Man of Truth leads to persecution and death while making a polluted translation that tells people a message that they want to hear leads to great wealth and influence.  Therefore, no one has made a better translation.

How far does this resistance to making a better translation go?

It has not just been the New International Version that has followed this process.  In fact, eight out of the top ten selling English translations have the exact same errors as it.  The only two that do not are the King James and the New King James.

Even supposedly more accurate Jewish translations like the Complete Jewish Bible contain the same errors as the New International Version.  So, they are all actually less accurate than the King James Version – even though they could have been made more accurate.

Some of these translations were not only published with these known errors but have introduced new ones as well that cannot be supported by original source documents.  They disagree with other translations, but appeal to niche groups by saying things that those groups want to hear.

For example, the Inclusive Bible removes all references to gender differences.  So, Genesis 1:27 reads “humankind in God’s Image” instead of “male and female created He them”.  The Divine Feminine Version takes this further by referring to the Father of Truth as the Mother and the Man of Truth as the Daughter.

Another example is the New World Translation that alters the text to remove any reference to the Man of Truth also being God.  It changes John 1:1 to read “the Word was a god” using the same wording that is used of demons and idols in other places.

Other translations like the Cepher Bible include the so-called Missing Books of The Bible as scripture.  This includes the Book of Enoch that contradicts the Book of Truth in many places and is specifically referenced in scripture as an example of the Jewish fables that we are commanded to avoid.

People can find a translation that suits what ever they want to believe – without regard to the actual words of the original source documents.  If not, then they will make one up to gain followers who also want a translation that tells them what they want to hear.

This is why it is so important to know how to pick a good translation.  Otherwise, you can end up believing another Gospel that was given by another spirit that tells about another Jesus instead the one given by the Spirit of Truth (Ruach HaQodesh aka The Holy Spirit aka The Holy Ghost) that tells about the Man of Truth.

It would not be hard to make a better translation.

The problems of the King James Version using 400-year-old English have already been largely solved by modern updates to it like the New King James and the 21^st Century King James translations.  They could be used as the basis of a better translation.

The known issues with all translations – including these updates of the King James Version – could easily be fixed.  It is already known what they should be saying instead as shown above.  It is really just a matter of making the fixes.

The truth is there are not really that many of issues to be fixed as shown by the comparison of the King James Version to the Dead Sea Scrolls.  None of them concern things essential to coming to faith in the Man of Truth.

Still, this does not mean that these errors are unimportant.  Leaving them uncorrected gives room for skeptics to attack the validity of the Book of Truth.

Also, no translation should contain known errors because those are known corruptions of the contents of the Book of Truth.  It contains the Incorruptible Word and every translation should reflect that.

However, you do not need to wait for a better translation to come into the House of Truth.  Almost every translation will tell you how to do that.

You need to know that the wages of sin is death (Romans 6:23).  You need to know that sin is transgression of the Law of Truth (1 John 3:4).

You need to know that sin is about the heart – that you will be judged for your thoughts and not just your deeds (Matthew 5:27-29).  You need to know that those with sin in their hearts will suffer eternally under the wrath of the Father of Truth (Ephesians 5:3-6).

You need to know that the Father of Truth loved you so much that He sent His son to die in your place to save you from His wrath (Romans 5:8-9).  You need to know that He does not want you to be eternally perish (2 Peter 3:9).

You need to know that anyone who call the Man of Truth “Lord” - but does not obey him - is a fool that will be destroyed (Matthew 7:21-27).  You need to know that if you truly make him lord of your life because you believe in your heart that the Father of Truth raised him from the dead, then you will be saved (Romans 10:9).

Come into the House of Truth!

How To Pick A Good Translation

How can you pick a good translation of the Bible?

A few months back, I was examining various translations of a couple of verses to see how they differ.  

I started by looking at Mark 7:19 in various translations. 

Some translations had a sentence like this (the Good News Translation (GNT), for example) at the end of Mark 7:19 "(In saying this, Jesus declared that all foods are fit to be eaten.)" that was missing in other translations (the King James Version (KJV), for example).

 

Some translations like the New International Version (NIV) have a footnote that says that this sentence is in the oldest and most reliable manuscripts.  However, if you look in the Greek text in these manuscripts for yourself on various websites that make it available, then you will find that it is not in a single one of those manuscripts.

Even if it was, they are not the oldest source document for the Gospel of Mark.  The oldest document that contains the Gospel of Mark does not contain the entire Renewed Covenant (B'rit Chadashah aka The New Testament).  It is about a hundred years older than the oldest manuscript that contains the entire Renewed Covenant.

This oldest document with Mark 7:19 is also missing this entire sentence.

 

This entire sentence that is missing from the other translations is not found in a single Greek manuscript out of the over 5300 manuscripts that have been discovered.  It is not found in a single Greek source document.  This is why I refer to it as "one disturbing sentence".

 

So, why is this sentence in some translations and not in others?

 

One ancient manuscript does have a note in the margin that contains the commentary of the scribe with this sentence, but it is not part of the scripture that the scribe was commenting on.  So at best, people transferred the commentary in one manuscript out of over 5,300 manuscripts from the commentary column to the scripture column.

No scholar of any merit would allow this to happen.  They would verify that it was in other manuscripts and then realize their mistake.  

 

So, this is not the reason why the sentence has been added, but it does shed light on the thought process of why it was added.

 

The translations that have this sentence are all thought-for-thought translations while the ones missing it are all word-for-word translations. The thought-for-thought translations added this sentence to the words of the Man of Truth (Yeshua HaMashiach aka Jesus Christ) because their translators thought that this was his unspoken thought. The word-for-word translations do not have it because the Man of Truth never said it in the source manuscripts.

 

The thought-for-thought translations say that the Man of Truth nullified a commandment of the Law of Truth (Torah aka The Law).

 

This would be breaking the commandments of the Law of Truth to not do such a thing (Deuteronomy 4:2).  No one can change the commandments of the Law of Truth (Deuteronomy 12:32).  The Man of Truth would have been a sinner if he did that - for sin is transgression of the Law of Truth (1 John 3:4). 

 

The word-for-word translations say no such thing about the Man of Truth.

I also looked at Luke 21:36 in various translations.

 

The word-for-word translations all say something like "Watch ye therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man." (KJV), while the thought-for-thought translations all say something like "Be on watch and pray always that you will have the strength to go safely through all those things that will happen and to stand before the Son of Man." (GNT).

 

The fact is that there is not a single Greek manuscript or source document that supports the idea of having the strength to get through these things.  The oldest source document is P75 and it has variations of the Greek root words "kataxioo ekpheugo" - like all other manuscripts and source documents.

 

People have translated the Greek word "kataxioo" as things like "be able to get through" in the Easy-to-Read Version (ERV) or "have the strength to" in the Complete Jewish Bible (CJB). 

 

This Greek word literally means "to deem entirely deserving".  It is used in this sense throughout all ancient Greek writings and is never used of having strength to get through anything.  It is accurately translated as "accounted worthy" or "counted worthy".

This Greek word is used in three other places in the Renewed Covenant.  Even translations like the CJB translate it as "accounted worthy" or "counted worthy" in Luke 20:35, Acts 5:41, and 2 Thessalonians 1:5.  Only in Luke 21:36 do they translate it as something like "have the strength to".

So, not only does their translation of "kataxioo" in Luke 21:36 as "have the strength to" contradict the literal meaning of the word and how it is used in all ancient Greek documents, but it also contradicts how it is translated everywhere else in their own translation.  If they were consistent, then Luke 21:36 would read "accounted worthy to escape" like it does in word-for-word translations.

 

The next Greek word in all of these ancient source documents is "ekpheugo".  People have translated the Greek word "ekpheugo" as things like "to get through" in the ERV or "go safely through" in the GNT.

 

This Greek word literally means "to flee to safety".  It is used in this sense throughout all ancient Greek writings and is never used of going safely through anything.  It is accurately translated as "flee from" or "escape".

This Greek word is used in seven other places in the Renewed Covenant.   Even translations like the GNT translate it as "escaped" or "ran away from" in Act 16:7, Acts 19:16, Romans 2:3, 2 Corinthians 11:33, 1 Thessalonians 5:3, Hebrews 2:3, and Hebrews 12:25.  Only in Luke 21:36 do they translate it as something like "go safely through".

So, not only does their translation of "ekpheugo" in Luke 21:36 as "go safely through" contradict the literal meaning of the word and how it is used in all ancient Greek documents, but it also contradicts how it is translated everywhere else in their own translation.  If they were consistent, then Luke 21:36 would read "accounted worthy to escape" like it does in word-for-word translations.

More than that, these translations that have Luke 21:36 translated as something like "Stay alert, always praying that you will have the strength to escape all the things that will happen and to stand in the presence of the Son of Man." like the CJB also have the one disturbing sentence in Mark 7:19.

 

So, the same translations that say that the Man of Truth sinned by nullifying a commandment of the Law of Truth also say that people are to pray for strength to go through the Tribulation.  The translations that do not make Man of Truth into a sinner say for people to watch and pray to be accounted worthy to escape the Tribulation.

 

It is not only the Renewed Covenant where people have to be careful about the translation.  

 

The word-for-word versus thought-for-thought translation process can also distort a translation of the Original Covenant (Tanakh aka The Old Testament).  I have found significant difference between both types of translations.

However, there is another layer of concern when it comes to the Original Covenant.

There are two primary types of manuscripts that the Original Covenant is translated from.  One is the Masoretic Text written in Hebrew and the other is the Septuagint written in Greek.

The oldest copy of the Masoretic Text is from the tenth century AD.  The Rabbis say that it is a copy of a much older complete Original Covenant manuscript written in Hebrew that has not survived.

The oldest copy of the Septuagint is from the fourth century AD.  It is a copy of a much older Greek complete Original Covenant manuscript written in Greek that has not survived.  That manuscript was a Greek translation of an even older complete Original Covenant manuscript written in Hebrew that has not survived.

 

The problem is that there are passages of the Masoretic Text that cannot be translated into Greek that matches the Greek that is in the Septuagint.  Most of these passages are about the identity of the Messiah. 

However, neither of these are the oldest source documents for the passages where these irreconcilable differences occur.  These passages are found in much older Hebrew source documents from as early as the second century BC like the Dead Scrolls.

In every single case, these oldest Hebrew source documents can be translated into the Greek in the Septuagint and contradict the Hebrew in the Masoretic Text!

So, a good translation of the Original Covenant not only is not a word-for-word translation, but also one that gives preference to the Septuagint where it conflicts with the Masoretic Text.

The best way for most people to tell is to look at a Messianic passage like Psalm 22:16.  The Greek of the Septuagint and the Hebrew of the Masoretic Text plainly differ greatly in the last phrase of this verse.

If this verse was translated word-for-word from the Septuagint then it will end with a phrase like "they pierced my hands and feet".  However, if it was translated word-for-word from the Masoretic Text then it will end with a phrase like "like a lion - my hands and feet". 

 

There is one more thing to look for: books that are missing from the Original Covenant or the Renewed Covenant or additional books that are not in either.

 

A good translation has only the books that certain to be part of the Book of Truth.

 

Some translations like the GNT have additional books found in the Apocrypha included.  These books contain a mix of history, fables, and Rabbinic doctrine.  

 

While they have some value as study resources, they are not part of the Book of Truth.  Their inclusion in some translations of the Book of Truth - especially when they are inserted between the Original Covenant and the Renewed Covenant - give the appearance of being part of Word of Truth.  

 

This causes confusion among many readers that would be avoided if they were put in the appendix with other resources like the maps or placed in a separate book like other study aids such as Strong's Concordance. 

 

There have been translations that contained books written well after the time of Apostles as well like the Epistle of Clement.  In like manner, there are translations that contain books were supposedly written before the time of Moses (Moshe) like the Book of Enoch.

 

The books that belong in the Book of Truth must meet a few minimum requirements given in the Book of Truth.

 

The Father of Truth (YHVH aka God aka THE LORD) entrusted only the Jewish people with His Word (Romans 3:1-2).

 

So, the first requirement is that the book has to have been written by a Jew.

This excludes books like the Book of Enoch, who was plainly a Gentile who lived long before Abraham was marked by circumcision as the father of the Jewish people (Luke 3:34-38).  It also excludes books like the Epistle of Clement from the Renewed Covenant because it was written by a Gentile.

The Book of Truth is the writings of the Prophets of Truth and the Apostles of Truth (Ephesians 2:19-20).  These are the words that we are to remember (2 Peter 3:1-2).

 

So, the second requirement is that the book has to have been written by a Prophet of Truth for the Original Covenant or an Apostle of Truth for the Renewed Covenant.

The Father of Truth promised that a time was coming when there would be a great famine of words spoken by Him through the Prophets of Truth (Amos 8:11-12).  The arrival of John the Baptist marked the end of the famine since he was a Prophet of Truth (Luke 7:28).

The Original Covenant contained all of the words spoken by the Father of Truth until John the Baptist (Yochanon the Mikveh Man) arrived (Luke 16:16). 

The books of the Apocrypha were written during this famine between when the time of the Malachi, the last book written by a Prophet of Truth and the birth of the Man of Truth.  So, while the books of the Apocrypha were written by Jews, they were not written by Prophets of Truth or Apostles of Truth.

 

The books of the Apocrypha were written during the over four hundred years of silence between the Original Covenant and the Renewed Covenant.  They are not part of the Book of Truth. 

 

In like manner, there have been others, like Martin Luther, who made translations that did not have all of the books of the Book of Truth.  They claimed that the Book of Truth had been corrupted by having these books included.

 

The fact is that there are no missing books of the Bible.   In like manner, there are no extra books either for the Book of Truth is the incorruptible word.  Every piece is needed and fits together with no gaps from missing pieces to reveal the deep things of the Father of Truth.

There is overwhelming evidence from ancient documents and archeology from almost the time of the Apostles of Truth that the list of the books as belonging to the Renewed Covenant is the same list that is found in translations like the KJV.  In like manner, the list of books given in the KJV for the Original Covenant is the same as the oldest list of those books as well.

So, in summary consider these things to pick a good translation:

1)  Look at Mark 7:19 to make sure that it DOES NOT have a sentence like "Thus saying Jesus declared all food clean" at the end.

2)  Look at Luke 21:36 to make sure that it DOES contain a phrase like "accounted worth to escape" near the center.

3)  Look at Psalms 22 and Isaiah 53 to make sure that the wording describes the Messiah of Israel being killed by crucifixion.

4)  Look at the list of books for the Original Covenant and Renewed Covenant to make sure that it matches the same list of books used by the disciples of the Apostles that is listed in the KJV.  Make sure that it is not missing any books or had any books added.

(NOTE: Some translations might have only one book of Kings or Chronicles.  This DOES NOT mean that they are missing any books.  This is because these are only one book in ancient Hebrew source documents but were broken into two books in later translations.  

 

So, if a translation has only one book listed for these, just check the beginning and end of the book against the beginning and end of the set of books in another translation. The wording in beginning of the first chapter of the single book should be similar to that the first chapter of the first book of the split set.  Likewise, the wording in the end of the last chapter of the single book should be similar to that the last chapter of the second book of the split set.  If they are similar, then there is not a problem.)

 

So, besides the four considerations listed about there is a fifth thing to consider in picking a good translation - it must be a translation that you can understand!  

 

It is better to pick a version with five words you understand than one with ten thousand that you do not (1 Corinthians 14:19).

So, a good translation is any translation that meets ALL five of these considerations.

 

The KVJ is an example of a good translation and the one that I use for the following reasons:

 

1) There are more reference materials that are indexed to the KJV than any other translation.  

 

This includes works like Strong's Concordance, Thayer's Lexicon, and the works of Eidersheim.  Some of these works have been indexed to one or two other translations in the last few years, but most are still indexed only to the KJV.

 

2) The KJV contains fewer flaws than almost any other translation.  

 

Most of the flaws that people cite are actually due to changes in the English language since the KJV was made.   

 

For example, the word Greek word "enkonos" translated as "nephews" in 1 Timothy 5:4 in the KJV actually means "grandsons".   This was not a mistranslation.  The English word "nephew" meant "grandson" when the KJV was translated.

 

3) The KJV is not perfect, but I know where the flaws are at and what should be done to correct them.  This is not true with other translations.  

 

I found the easiest way check if there is a flaw in other translations is first compare them to the KJV.  If it is still not clear, then I dig deeper - usually using reference materials that are indexed to the KJV, but not to the translation that I am examining.  So, sticking to the KJV saves me a lot of time.

 

4)  The KJV is the most quoted translation, so passages of other works such as books and movies that contain a quote from the Bible without a reference can be found most of the time by doing a search using the KJV.

5) The KJV is translation that I have read the most, so most of the time when I remember a piece of scripture, I am remembering it from it.  

 

However, I am not advocating that the KJV is the only good translation. When I read the KJV, I am often translating 16th century English into modern English in my head.  Not everyone can do this. 

 

So, what is driving people to make these sometimes-absurd translations?

 

There are four factors driving people to make them and promote them.

The first is simply telling people what they want to hear, so people will seek out false teachers.  

Many people want to hear that food they have been eating for years like ribs and lobster are now clean.  

 

This is driven by a misconception that the food they eat must be clean for their spirit to be clean from sin.  The irony is that this contradicts the point of the discourse that contains Mark 7:19.  The point of the discourse is that a person being physically clean - their hands - has nothing to with their heart being clean.

The Gentiles do not have to be circumcised to be saved (Acts 21:21-25).  They only have to keep the entire Law of Truth if they get circumcised as a sign that they are obligating themselves to do so (Galatians 5:3).

There is nothing about eating unclean food in what they are required to do (Acts 15:28-29).  Eating unclean food is not one of the things that will keep people from inheriting the Kingdom of God (1 Corinthians 6:9-10).  Eating unclean food is not one of the things that causes people to spend eternity in the Lake of Fire (Revelation 21:8).

So, the Man of Truth did not need to declare all food clean for them to be part of his Kingdom.  He was not sinning by changing the Law of Truth.

 

He did shed his blood to clean food but to clean people.  Clean food is still clean food and unclean food is still unclean food.

So, creating translations that tell people what they want to hear makes people more susceptible to heaping up teachers who tell them what they want to hear, so they can be turned to listening to fables instead of the truth (2 Timothy 4:3-4).

The second is a desire of false teachers and the like to get people to pay them money or follow them. 

 

The Jim Fakers of the world are trying to sell people Tribulation Survival Kits.  They do not care about the Children of Truth - only what they can sell them (2 Peter 2:1-3).

 

The message of "People get ready!" is bad for business.  People who believe this message will invest their money in taking care of orphans and spreading the Good News instead of trying to prepare to survive the Tribulation.

 

Others want to draw disciples after themselves (Acts 20:30).  So they distort things like The Greater Exodus.

 

A translation that tells people to invest their time, talent, and treasure into the purposes of the Man of Truth, so they will be accounted worthy to escape the Tribulation is bad for those trying to draw followers after themselves.  

 

This message destroys the fear, uncertainty, and doubt that drives people to follow them.  Those who are doing what the Man of Truth said to be accounted worthy to escape the Tribulation will not fear it.  Instead, they will say "Bring it on!".

The third is to keep Jewish people from knowing that the Man of Truth is the Messiah of Israel.

The Rabbis will not come into the House of Truth and put up as many obstacles as they can to keep other Jews from coming into the House of Truth (Luke 11:52-54).

 

These translations distort the words of The Prophets - especially Psalms 22, Isaiah 53, and the Book of Daniel.  This is just another example of Rabbinic Distort.

The simple truth is that the Rabbis are liars.  The Rabbis are the source of Jewish trouble.

The fourth is simply to "prove" a teaching that cannot be proven using the Book of Truth, the whole Book of Truth, and only the Book of Truth.

 

The False Church of Rome and others include the Apocrypha and other books in some translations because their doctrines contradict the Book of Truth.  In like manner, some have made translations with books removed from the Book of Truth for the same reason.

 

Yet, others create translations with extra or missing books because they love to create controversy and cause general confusion with "new and exciting revelations".

They will argue that the Book of Enoch must be scripture - even though Enoch the Gentile was not a Jew - since Jude the son of Mary quotes the words of Enoch the Gentile (Jude 1:14-15). 

 

Jude the son of Mary was quoting what had verbally been handed down from Enoch through the scribes - not the Book of Enoch.  These writings were written down as part of the Talmud later.  Even if he was quoting from the Book of Enoch, would that make everything written by Enoch the Gentile scripture?

 

The Man of Truth quotes a Greek play to Paul the Jew (Shaul aka Saul aka The Apostle Paul) on the road to Damascus (Acts 9:5).  Does that make the rest of the plays written by that Gentile scripture?

Paul the Jew quotes Greek philosophers and poets at Mars Hill (Acts 17:28).  Does that make the works of those Gentiles scripture?

Paul the Jew also quotes a Cretan prophet (Titus 1:12).  Does that make all the words spoken by this Gentile prophet scripture?

 

In like manner, they will argue that the Book of Jasher must also be scripture because it is quoted in the Book of Joshua (Joshua 10:13).   It is also quoted in the Book of Samuel (2 Samuel 1:18).  Does that make everything written in the Book of Jasher scripture?

The inclusion of investigation and execution of Bigthan and Teresh that was recorded in the Chronicles of the Kings of the Medes and Persia is quoted in the Book of Esther (Esther 2:21-23).  So, this event was read from the same chronicles later in the Book of Esther (Esther 6:1-2).  The Book of Esther ends with the deeds of the king of Persia and Mordecai being recorded in these chronicles (Esther 10).  Does that make everything written in the Chronicles of the Kings of the Medes and Persia scripture?

These two books are obvious frauds with multiple versions that contradict each other.  The tenth chapter of the Book of Jasher uses Medieval European names for different regions of the world - even though it reputes to have been written during the time of King David!

Those who are trying to treat these books that plainly do not meet the requirement laid out in the Book of Truth to be scripture, are rejecting the sound doctrine founded upon the words of the Man of Truth (1 Timothy 6:3).  They are proud and know nothing but love to create envy and strife (1 Timothy 6:4).  

They use these books to teach Jewish fables and the commandments of men that turn from the truth, because they do not know the Father of Truth (Titus 1:14-16).  They use these books to create envy and strife that stirs up confusion and every evil work (James 3:14-15).   

 

Their use of these books has been a major contributor to the Messianic Mess.

 

The Children of Truth are to withdraw themselves from these teachers with perverted minds that are desolate of the truth (1 Timothy 6:5)!

 

So, which type of translation are we going use to understand the message that God is speaking to us? 

 

One that makes the Man of Truth into a sinner where the translators have added their own thoughts to the actual words OR one that only says what the source documents say?  One that tells us to ignore everything that the Father of Truth said about food OR one that does not?

 

One that tells us to hide from the world and preparing to survive through the Tribulation OR one that tells us to obey the commandment of the Man of Truth to go into the world with the Good News, so we can be counted worthy to escape the Tribulation?

 

One that makes the identity of the Man of Truth as the Messiah of Israel unmistakable OR one that was purposely altered to hide his identity?  One that contains the same list of books that the Apostles of Truth handed to their disciples OR one that contains a different list of books?

 

Or are we just going to pick and choose whichever translation agrees with whatever we already think?

 

This is important because it influences how we live our lives.  Picking the wrong translation can cause us to follow another gospel that is different than the one taught by the Man of Truth or preached by the Apostles of Truth. 

 

So, choose wisely which type of translation that you pick to read and believe.

 

As for me and my house, we have chosen translations that do not add the thoughts of the translators to the words of the source manuscripts, that do not rely on altered source documents, and that contain the same list of books that the Apostles of Truth gave to their disciples.

Still, the most important thing to understand from any translation is how to come into the House of Truth.

You come into the House of Truth by surrendering control of your life to the Man of Truth because you believe the Father of Truth raised him from the dead (Romans 10:9).

Come into the House of Truth!