One in Messiah Congregation
This study is “Not’ done by any means,
Today I would like to speak about a Bible version: the Complete Jewish Bible, translated by David H. Stern.
First, I would like to say, I have nothing against David Stern nor have I ever met him.
I am simply stating what he has stated himself in his Bible version introduction.
I find it very interesting in his credentials, he has a PhD in economics and from UCLA he was a professor, a mountain climber and a co-author on surfing and an owner of a health food stores.
I see he received a Master of Divinity decree at Fuller theological seminary,(a protestant christian school) and did graduate work at the University of Judaism. (they don't believe Yeshua is the Messiah)
He has many other protestant christian and messianic affiliations.
In the introduction of this Bible I see on page XIII, paragraph 3, at the very end, it states:
David Stern says, I certainly had no special expertise in biblical Hebrew that would justify my trying to translate TaNaKh. (the Masoretic text)
Now on page XIV he says however, there were many places where I questioned the JPS version’s renderings. In such cases I translated the Hebrew of the Masoretic text myself.
This is an obvious contradiction in itself.
At the end of this paragraph he said he translated the books of the New Covenant from the original Greek.
To me this is amazing because the original Greek doesn't exist today 2011.
What original Greek text?
I personally do not believe David Stern can speak Koine Greek because it does not exist today. Can he speak any kind of Greek? J
In other places in his introduction, he says he decided to paraphrase the entire JPS TaNAKh, an obvious contradiction from the previous page.
He says he uses many Bible versions to assist him in expressing certain verses in modern English. He says all Bible translators do this which I don't believe. I can say for sure, I do not believe he met all the Bible translators.
Then he goes on to say, frankly I can admit that the team might have done a better job but I have done the best I can. I hope readers will not be disappointed. He doesn't sound he too sure of himself.
This does not sound like the kind of Bible version you can trust or is reliable enough for your soul.
It is frightening to write a new Bible version because this is the word of God and we are not supposed to add nor diminish from the words of God. We already have way too many Bible versions to confuse the readers on their journeys to the kingdom of heaven.
It's sad to say, many Bible versions have chapters missing, verses missing, and opposite meanings of a particular verse. I believe Satan is having his way in changing the word of God.
This is why it is so vital and important for you to make sure you know the underlying manuscripts from where your Bible came from.
Just think, if I gave you two or three hundred roadmaps to get to a place you never heard of, I bet you would probably get lost, correct?
Please read the introduction to his Bible version and I am sure you will see many other discrepancies.
All the above information are very good reasons not to purchase this Bible or any other Bible that comes from the Alexandrinus Codex, Sinaiticus Codex or Vaticanus Codex.
If you read English, the best English version of the Bible is the King James Version. This version is not perfect but is not from the Alexandrinus Codex, Sinaiticus Codex or Vaticanus Codex.
Now, let's look at some particular Bible verses and discuss them
I noticed that all through his bible he uses the word ADONAI instead of YHVH or Yehovah. This is very wrong because it replaces the name of God with a title instead of His name Yehovah. Most bibles are wrong on this point, they use "LORD" which is wrong.
In the book of Isaiah, chapter 7 verse 14, he says a young woman will become pregnant.
The word in Hebrew is alma, and means virgin. This takes away from the amazing prophecy that a virgin shall have a child and call His name Immanuel, meaning God with us.
As you know, it's not that amazing for a young women to become pregnant and have son, but a virgin to have a son, this is a sign and a miracle of God.
In the book of Isaiah Chapter 14, verse 12, he wrote, how did you come to fall from the heavens, Morning Star, son of the dawn?
This translation is from the erroneous Bible versions. The word star is not in the Hebrew text, this is totally made up. In the book of Revelation, Yeshua says he's the Morning Star not Satan. Isaiah Chapter 14 is talking about Satan.
On page 1555, in the book of Revelation, chapter 22, verse 14, he says blessed are those who "wash their robes", so that they may have right to eat from the tree of life and go through the gates into the city.
This is directly from the NIV Bible, which is very corrupt.
Here is what the Bible actually says,
Rev.22  Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.
In David Stern's Jewish New Testament commentary, on page IX, he says he decided to try translating the Greek text itself and discovered that he liked the results.
Then he goes on to say, thus the Jewish New Testament was born, as an afterthought.
Basically he says he's just giving his opinion on what the verses mean.
Also he uses many comments from various writings that are not scriptural. To mention a few, he cites Jewish literature, the Midrash Rabbah, Pseudepigrapha, the Talmud, and terms from the Kabbalah and many other Jewish writings that are not scriptural written by rabbis that rejected the Hebrew Messiah Yeshua.
He says he uses the Greek text used for his commentaries taken from the United Bible societies critical text, 1975 edition which is the same as Nestle-Aland. - very bad...
So you see his commentaries on the New Testament are from various unscriptural writings and from basically his own opinion which is not accurate in many verse renderings.
On page 610, he explains versus 16 in Colossians 2 like this,
don't let anyone pass judgment on you in connection with optional matters. Gentile believers are free to observe or not to observe rules about dining and Jewish holidays, as is clear in Roman 14 will in first Corinthians in which he has no idea what he's talking about.
He breaks down these verses like any other Christian commentator and states clearly there are two sets of rules, one for the Jews and another for the Gentiles. He says Gentiles can eat basically anything, like pork, and they don't need to take heed to these commandments because that was given to the Jewish people, not the Gentiles, which is totally unscriptural.
This doctrine is not new to me, I see many other messianic groups that teach Gentiles do not need to concern themselves with the the commandments of God because they were given to the Jewish people thus making two bodies when the Bible declares plainly there is one body, one Lord, one faith, one baptism for all.