His Word is Truth

Unadulterated Biblical Truth

Mistranslations  and  Alterations  of the Bible

Deuteronomy 4:2 "You shall not add to the word which I am commanding you, nor take away from it, that you may keep the commandments of YHWH your Elohim which I command you"

Proverbs 30:6 "Do not add to His words or he will reprove you, and you will be proved a liar"

Revelation 22: 18 "For I testify unto every man that hears the words of the prophecy of this book, if any man shall add unto these things, Elohim shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book, and if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, Elohim 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"



On this page I will make people more aware of the fact that not all things called "Bibles" are the same book, and that there is error and deception among the translation texts.
 Even within the translations that the denominations may be praising and teaching are perfect.

Not everything being called "scripture", is actually scripture.
 Understand that biased translators can and will make additions and subtractions that suit them, and choose wording that is more in line with the ideas that they have in their head.
We should especially be on guard in this generation where companies are constantly putting out new "translations" for profit.
 You should not be so trusting when publishers are coming at you claiming that they have the perfect Bible for you

I will collect and show various mistranslations and alterations in the popular texts that may corrupt the true words and assist in leading people to deviate from the actual meanings and contexts.

I would really like to get the point across that in our modern age men are corrupting the scriptures for the sake of pride and profit, and we need to be careful with what we and our loved ones are using to learn from.

I pray that YHWH bless us all with the ability to see through corruption when we seek him humbly, and that he may keep us from causing it as well so we do not harm ourselves and others according to the satan's desires.

Think about this, there are multiple Bible translations, each one is a slightly different text, some contradict others directly, yet they are all claiming to be and supposed to be translations of the same original true document.

When you try to show some that a verse they are using is not entirely true to the "original" text and should be worded slightly different, and that the bad translation may help to teach a false doctrine, they may ignore what you are sharing.
 Some may without really considering what you've shared, bark at you something like "The Bible is the incorruptible word of God!", since men are teaching people to respond in that way.

When one replies in such a way, they're often implying that you are a wolf trying to lead them astray from the truth and that their book they are using is flawless and all that they ever need.

They may have been able to use the excuse to some degree that their Bible was misleading them if they were doing some things wrong, that is until up to the point when they were told the information they needed to free them from error and they chose to reject it and not consider or hear it.
 At that point they no longer had true ignorance, but made a choice.

So please do not hastily make a bad choice, and be open to hearing others out so you're able to test logically what is shared concerning such things, and an entire new world of information can be opened up to you.

The fear of Elohim over the centuries has helped these texts to be copied very accurately, however in our modern time that we live in, the very people who claim to serve Elohim does not fear him as generations of the past did and even teach to be totally fearless, so if the very people who are using these scriptures do not fear him, then of course the big companies trying to make money from Bibles do not fear him.

It is so important to realize a translation is never the original text, and a translation is you trusting what someone else says, it's not you trusting the original text and original author when you use these translations.

Many are looking at translations as if they're the original, and being content with the translations as if they replace the original, and this seriously becomes a problem in modern times when corrupt translations are out there and people are picking what they personally like best, not submitting to the true authority and truth.

Translations are someone telling us what the original says, and sometimes this middle-man makes an error or tells us something not true to the text.
(This error can be non-intentional, or intentional, either way it's an error that we would like to be without.)

All you have to do to realize your personal Bible translation may not be perfect is to actually look at the different English translations of the Bible.
One Bible verse in one version may say something, and in another say something a bit different, and another in some places will literally say the opposite, 2 different books claiming to be the same thing, yet inside you're being told to do contradicting things.

A quick example of opposite is Proverbs 18:1 http://bible.cc/proverbs/18-1.htm this one verse has so many different forms inside of different English Bibles.
(Also keep in mind, that website will allow you to compare different translations easily in the future, so it's a good idea to put it on your favorites bar. You can also easily notice with this tool that it looks like the popular versions borrow from eachother, and choose to follow world views and opinions, and are not doing as much fresh translation work as we may think.)

I certainly do not want to destroy anyone's trust in the scriptures, so do not misunderstand and think I am telling you it's pointless to study the scriptures, and that we don't have the scriptures, because we do have the scriptures.

This is just about an infection creeping in and needing to be dealt with before the healthy bodies are harmed.

There are modern versions of the Bible that are beautifully accurate when considering how large they are, and I feel that YHWH has helped make sure the true scriptures were not destroyed and hidden to where we could never find them and obey if we really cared about them.

When YHWH gave his Word to his people, he told them that his Law is not out of their reach and they should not say it's unavailable to them, so I feel like his truth given back then is maintained in the world, and it's the world trying to use tricks and such to hide it since it is not able to take it away.
(For example, evil may not be able to remove the Word, but it may be able to freely ask you to choose corruption and reject the truth in order to get you to willingly ignore the Word.)

Deuteronomy 30:11 "For this commandment which I command you today is not too mysterious for you, nor is it far off, it is not in the heavens that you should say, who will ascend into the heavens for us and bring it to us that we may hear it and do it? Nor is it beyond the sea, that you should say, who will go over the sea for us and bring it to us that we may hear it and do it? But the word is very near you, in your mouth and in your heart, that you may do it"

People are losing trust that they have in their Bible, and causing them to lose motivation for actually reading it, when they start to notice the translations are different, but it doesn't have to be that way, the solution is simple so do not lose hope and give up so easily.

Before we buy a Bible, it is a good idea to test and consider the different translations and their translators, and see if they openly admit they lied in their translation, it is hard for some to accept but many translations clearly say their translation is a lie, and some also use it as their selling point to get a lot of sales with.
And sadly it's usually these terrible translations that the people love and they recommend to their friends and family.

It looks like the majority of people skip over the parts of their Bible where the publisher includes some writing, such as the preface, check over what they say and they may clearly tell you that they corrupted the text, and it was their preference to corrupt it.
I had a book that was supposed to literally translate text and in the preface I found out it didn't actually translate literally everywhere since they feared it not making sense, so they paraphrased some things.

In times past, before everyone could easily compare digitally the different translations and see how far off some "translations" really were, it looks like many shockingly bad translations were actually out circulating and misleading families.
Today those versions have been mostly updated to be more similar to the others and not way out there, but you can keep that in mind to realize older generations may have certain teachings and traditions they hold to based on those false translations, and as well some people may still be holding on to those old books and be in need of a replacement.

The living Bible is a paraphrase of a translation, bibles like this  should be destroyed if someone is going to take it as the actual text, because a man rewrote an already translated English Bible into words that "anyone could understand", and how he thought the verses should be interpreted.
Bibles like this are popular since the people reading them barely have to think much, which causes them to barely get much from their reading.
When I 1st started reading the bible from a modernized KJV with updated wording, it was still somewhat foreign to me in the way it spoke and got points across, but after I got used to it, my mind was expanded in a very positive way, and you may miss out on that benefit of improved thinking and comprehension.
It really only takes a small amount of effort, not even 1 day of trying to get used to it, and kids can understand it when they're used to it, so people are being too lazy to try to think for just a few hours so they're opting for books that are written like they're a simplistic explanation, so that laziness to avoid such a small amount of thinking to learn, impacts the person heavily for years.

Some of the ways the man for the living translation originally had the verses written was almost laughable, but when you realize the great evil he has done and the people who are using his "personal bible", it becomes horrific.

There is a false doctrine of "we must obey man's laws", and this man had literally wrote it into his Bible so that those who read it honestly think it is true, because his personal bible really says that(newer versions appear to have corrected this).
So if your bible actually tells you to obey your tyrannical government, then you may become a little confused when that government commands you to take the mark of the beast.

Also, one of the most popular versions of the Bible today, the New International Version(NIV), the translators take pride in their false translations and use them as a selling point!
Last I heard they were excited about their newest version that is less feminist and less anti-homosexual, Where they are going to remove even more of the actual words of the Bible and replace them with different words that encourage you to not get the proper meaning fully. This will be very popular with the groups teaching abominable lies that you can disobey everyone and just serve yourself, doing as you please.
You may also also find it interesting to know that the men who work on and publish the New International Version and make money from it, also publish the disgusting: "The Satanic Bible" and "The Joy of Gay Sex". You probably shouldn't support them with your money.

The translators claim that the man added words are italicized, but it is actually difficult most of the time to even tell when a word is italicized next to non-italicized words, and while they may claim to, all actually do not even italicize every added in word.
(I will find something later to add in here to show this)

Also important to realize is the mistranslated words are not italicized as they're claiming these mistranslated things are actual parts of the text.

I may as well bring this up, I find the KJV to be a decent translation among the popular versions today, however there are large groups of people who say the King James Version is the only true English bible, implying it is perfect and from Elohim, which is a big statement and a horrible thing to teach if it's not true, and I want to make sure you know this is a false teaching, because it is not perfection.
So, what is one of the issues with this false teaching? This teaching can give power to certain false teachers, by exploiting certain verses chosen by the KJV that are not accurate or could have been worded differently.
This can go both ways, those who support the bible of Elohim, and those who are against it and they take the errors and use them as ammo to get people to turn away from the scriptures.

Some have gave these people with the false teaching the title "king james version onlyists".
Even though the "KJV onlyists" constantly say the word translation, they seem to ignore what it truly means to be a translation(though I suppose they justify this by implying it's a translation from Elohim).
This in itself states it is likely a weaker version of a previous text unless the translator was absolutely perfect, and a translation from men can NEVER be greater than the original.
It can be as good as, though it's difficult to get that to 100% unless you have mastered both languages, know perfectly all idioms and sayings from that time, and really are the person who wrote the previous document, and still mistakes can be made on a large project even when you know better.
There are also things which could be brought up about the translators and King James, but I won't go there.
While it can be as good as, it can never be greater than the original when you are dealing with scriptures.

The KJV is not flawless and contains serious errors, additions, and mistranslations, and I will show many errors from the KJV below.

It only takes one corruption to prove that the "KJV onlyists" are saying things which are not true.
So for the 1st corruption, the KJV adds in "the LORD" nearly 7000 times when the document they were translating from said no such thing.
That is nearly 7000 intentional corruptions just from this one simple thing.

2nd, I would like to mention that the KJV that most people are using today, and saying only the KJV is the perfect translation from "god" that has no errors (they have just made this up and started teaching it as fact), isn't even the actual KJV and is a work that has been altered from the 1611 KJV. So they use a text that isn't actually the exact KJV, then praise the KJV as being flawless.
If you wonder if it makes a difference, the answer is yes. Words were replaced that do not have the same meaning, names and words were changed. It's a new text, and if the original was perfect as they say, why would they change it and not want to use it.

And if you want me to throw a 3rd example out there, then how about KJV includes an error in the genealogy of Yahushua the Messiah in the book of Matthew.
Not only does the error give the wrong number of generations, but it says it's giving Joseph the husband of Mary's line, when it is not his line but Mary's line, and this is important since Mary was the one Messiah was actually related to, not her husband. So the KJV gives Joseph the husband of Mary's line twice, and the 2 lines don't match up but are different. Obvious problems, though modern Christianity invents up solutions and teaches them instead of just thinking about and resolving the issue and getting to the truth.
Take note of that behavior, as it is what makes modern Christianity what it is today.

The Masoretic Hebrew text which the KJV used, and is the most popular Hebrew text used today, also was slightly altered in itself.
The Masorites were copying an older Hebrew document to make their document, and even though it was Hebrew to Hebrew, they still managed to alter the text in a way as if they were translating and not only copying.
They added in vowel pointing which changes the words to say exactly what the Masorites thought they should say/be, this also caused many letters in words to be removed since the full spelling of things were no longer needed once vowel pointing was added(the original Hebrew did not use vowel points, that is a more recent addition to the language)
They intentionally corrupted pronunciations of certain things such as the name YHWH, where they put the vowel points for the word adonai on his name to remind people to say adonai instead of YHWH.
They as well changed thousands of peoples names through out the scriptures that had part of the sacred name as their name.
The Masorites also even outright removed the most sacred name of our Father in 134 places in the Tanakh("old testament") and replaced it with adonai("my lords") which was then translated to English as lord or the lord.

With that being said about the KJV, I will say again, it is still a very good English translation compared to the modern popular versions, and most other versions has just copied off of other translations including the KJV and changed a few things to make money.

There is an important piece of information to realize on Bible translations, there are around 150 English translations of the Bible, that says something in itself, also the law of man is you can not get a copyright and make money from your translation unless your version is 10% different than the original/others, now a good question I have heard asked is, are there 150 different ways to say each of the verses in the bible?

At some point you are going to have to intentionally say something in a bad or wrong way, to get a copyright and make money.

Also there were many Greek Documents circulating around, and the ones our English Scriptures come from often have writings in
"[ ]" indicating it was something added in by someone, kind of like a note, and other known earlier copies of the same document do not have the writing which you find in the "[ ]".
I personally see the evidence is our English New testaments were translated from a Greek document that was translated from an Aramaic document which was probably translated from Hebrew, which if that is the case, the documents have suffered some unavoidable meaning loss in some areas, a popular example could be "camel through the eye of a needle", as in Aramaic camel and large rope is the same word and it's up to the translator to realize what is meant, and when it was brought over to Greek, the translator chose camel, leaving the question, were they correct?
A camel through the eye of a needle? Or, a large rope through the eye of a needle?
The teaching is preserved with both words however as both a large rope and a camel is not going to find it easy to go through the small eye of a needle, so that is good.

Some "scholars" and modern Christians teach that the "new testament" was originally written in Greek, however it is very obvious our Greek texts we have are not originals especially since the Greek texts contain many pagan words and names, and we can even see the evidence of translation error on some words which show they came from a Semitic language, one of these possible evidences is the popular verse; "it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the kingdom of the heavens", this verses meaning is still retained however when we consider that in the Semitic language that the word for camel also can mean a large rope, we can see camel may not belong there and could be an easy mistranslation of Aramaic.

The largest portion of "scholars" however teach that these writings were originally in Aramaic and that the Messiah even spoke Aramaic and not Hebrew, which there is no proof of.
We do know that the Yisraeli were influenced by Aramaic speaking people.
I personally find it odd that the Yisraeli would lose their native tongue that their scriptures they were entrusted with were mostly written in, and I also find it odd that when you look for the old documents that would have been used around the time of the Messiah you see few Aramaic scriptures in existence and they are all mostly in Hebrew. The Messiah read from the scriptures on the 7th day Sabbath and I really feel like he was reading from the Hebrew scriptures that were numerous in those days.
The Dead Sea Scrolls which were found are often spoke of by people in ways which mislead others to believe they could have been mostly in Aramaic, but they are estimated to be 90%-95% Hebrew, and the rest is Aramaic and also a small portion of Greek.

Not to mention, Acts 26:14 says that the Messiah speaks to Paul in the Hebrew tongue.

I will also take a short moment to mention, if you have any document that has been translated or "updated" by Catholic organizations, then beware, because they intentionally lie and mistranslate, and also leave out words so documents fit to their Catholic doctrines better.

Catholic leaders have also perverted the Spanish Bible and documents greatly, so if you know anyone who reads from Spanish Bibles make sure to discuss this with them and recommend they seek out the non-corrupted texts.

Also, in this age of social media, people who like to share Bible related posts for likes and such, often make use of the poor translations such as NIV and Living translation. Be on guard.

I will share links to interlinear bibles to help you see the mistranslation, though do keep in mind foreign languages can not be perfectly translated to your language always, so you may have to get used to the language a bit before you can absorb what it is saying, and idioms can create obstacles for translating as well.
Though you're going to be able to easily see mistranslations and additions in many places, because you may have a bible adding in a sentence about "jesus", and go to find that "jesus" wasn't even written anywhere around that verse! You will see this example below.

Finally now that you know texts are not flawless, you need to beware of false teachers who will use this to teach false things.   For example, a modern day Pharisee who knows Hebrew may want to ignore all you say to him and take an easy way out of being condemned by what you're saying, so he may say that the Hebrew says something totally different and you're reading it wrong, even if it's actually perfectly clear in both the Hebrew and English.
If you do not put any effort into using the interlinears I share, or learning a bit of Hebrew or how to check over the Hebrew, these Pharisees for example will use that against you and may stick to their common response of the Hebrew is different and your translation is completely wrong and you don't know what you're talking about. It is a tactic so while this tactic is less common, I still thought it would be good to warn you.



Mistranslations, alterations, and corruptions, of the scriptures.

"the LORD" - "GOD"

A very damaging "mistranslation" to our texts is "the LORD" and "GOD".

In the "Old Testament" every time you see "The LORD" or "GOD" in all upper case letters, it really says YHWH which is the sacred name of our heavenly father, but it was covered up by wicked traditions of men.

Not only does this corrupt the text and they also have to lie in many places to make up for using "The LORD", but we don't develop as great a personal connection to our creator because we don't know his personal name.

Praise YAH though because we are able to at least know where his name is at in the "Old Testament", but in our "New Testament" that has been translated many times, we have no idea how to know where it actually says YHWH the sacred name.

There are some places where it quotes the "Old Testament" and we know those places the name used to be, but the rest of the scriptures can create some confusion and we have to make our best guess at if it is talking about YAH or if it is talking about our Lord/Master
Yahushua the Messiah, because it calls the Messiah "the lord/master", since he IS our lord/master of course.

This mistranslation helps encourage people to accept the Holy Trinity Theory more easily since they have seen "The LORD" all through the "Old Testament" when it is talking about YAH, and then they get to the "New Testament" and see
Yahushua the Messiah called our lord.
Trinitarians do not care about knowing when Messiah is being talked about or when our Father is being talked about, so that is another reason to avoid their teachings since they twist what is really said and who is being talked about and you may leave their teaching attributing something to Messiah that was really attributed to YAH the Father of all. 
For this reason I try not to attend Modern Christian congregations any more because they constantly say "the lord" and I am frustrated trying to figure out who they are talking about.

So make your best logical guess who is being talked about, and still know it could be either YAH or his Messiah at some places.


Another thing that can be mentioned and is often overlooked is punctuation in Bible translations.
Punctuation is added in by the translators and this can potentially create mistranslations by altering the context.

The original texts did not contain the punctuation we use.
Men add this in based on how they think it should be put in, so if you can, look over it and not trust it to show you the context of a scripture.

For an example I will show you a well known spot that can have varying meanings just by moving a "," around;

Luke 23:43 "I tell you the truth, today you will be with me in paradise"

Luke 23:43 "I tell you the truth today, you will be with me in paradise"

In this example you can see how simple punctuation has the ability to alter texts.
One says that they will be in paradise together that day, the other says they will be in paradise at an unspecified time which could be thousands of years later.

Now picture bible translators who are rushing to get their translation published, and also picture men trying to figure out where punctuation should go when they are reading words confusing to them if they're not actually reading the bible with their heart and are just rushing over the surface.
So it may be best for us to ignore the punctuation if possible, the original documents did not have all of the punctuation that translations do.

The Masoretic Text and Niqqud

People who were known as the Masoretes, took Hebrew scriptures and did something to them similar to the point just above on the English punctuation.

This took place many years after the sacrifice of the Messiah, a diacritical mark system was created for Hebrew writing, and men applied it over the Hebrew scriptures.
This refers to marks and dots placed on and around letters to distinguish how they should be understood and said.

The word "diacritic" derives from a Greek word meaning "to distinguish".

This is often called Hebrew vowels, and a vowel pointing system, but it also distinguishes other things and not just vowels.
 Be aware the Hebrew does not need this system to have vowel sounds, it has always had the vowel sounds, some people misunderstand and try to read Hebrew in a very unnatural way.

Here is a Hebrew word without the niqqud, this is how the scriptures actually appear;

Here is the same Hebrew word with the niqqud applied, the diacritical mark system;

Reading this with the "vowel points", this says shalom, and can not say anything else because the vowel points specify exactly how it is said, no guessing required.

This can certainly be helpful in some situations, like with me it helped me learn Hebrew far easier, and you can read Hebrew just as quickly as you can learn the letters and the nikkud, so you can actually read Hebrew with nikkud and not actually understand any of what you're reading.

Native Hebrew speakers do not need this system, just like us native English speakers do not need a system like this in order to be able to read English writings.
 Hebrews today normally do not use the nikkud and do not see much of it in their daily lives, however when they refer to their scriptures, there they do see them since they use the Masoretic text.
 The niqqud forces them to see the words in the exact ways that their "religious" leaders have wanted them to, and if you understand how the denominations have strayed and the leaders are not on the path of truth, you will understand that this can be a problem.

As a result of their work and their personal understandings, they've influenced how English translations are translated.
 The Pharisees we read about in the New Testament, have had multiple ways to influence the English translations, and some of the things in the English translation is not really on the Hebrew text, but is based on a tradition of the Pharisees.

Very notable is the fact that they've placed these marks on YHWH's name, but those who placed them there did not want anyone to say or use his name, and they intentionally put the wrong marks.
 They've also done this in many other situations too.
It's why when you see reference to YHWH's name at the beginning of a name it will tend to be said as yehu or yeho, but when it occurs at the end of the name, you will see yahu.
Supposedly they did this so no one would accidentally say the sacred name if they started out pronouncing it.
 I'll give an example in-case I'm not being clear enough, with the name Yahushua, they were afraid someone would read it but make a mistake and say the actual sacred name Yahuah instead, therefore they vowel pointed Yahushua to twist it into yehoshua when read with their vowel points.

Additionally, it is said they flat out removed the sacred name a few times!

So what is important to understand from this point is that the Hebrew language and writing did not have any such system in the past, and the scriptures do not really contain the niqqud.
 Understanding this will help your growth in understanding, and the actual truth can not be obtained if you hold onto this tradition of man as if it's part of the truth and perfect.

Further, they have also used this as a way to justify removing many Hebrew letters, since the full spelling was no longer always needed. The vowel points made it to where fewer letters could say the same thing.
 So like I touched on already, these men did these things according to their understandings and misunderstandings.
 So problems can easily arise.

If they've made a mistake, it's much harder to realize when they've destroyed the actual word, and we're not able to see it to figure out what else may have been meant.

Fall of the Levites and the Gentiles starting to collect scriptures

Before the destruction of the temple around 70AD, the Levites were responsible for preserving and maintaining the scriptures.

According to Jubilees, this task and responsibility was passed on to Levi, the son who was tithed to YHWH, and was a priest to YHWH.

Jubilees 45:16 "And he gave all his books and the books of his fathers to Levi his son that he might preserve them and renew them for his children until this day"

The Levites would carefully copy the texts, for the sake of having multiple copies available to people, and to also replace worn copies.
(It's common sense but can be overlooked, the fact that scrolls and books need "renewed". The things the texts were inscribed on would not last forever, so it is painful to see modern colleges act like the original copy should and must exist or else the text's origin is considered to be from the time of the last copy.)

They apparently did a very good job, and was zealous to not corrupt the text, and if a text did have an error they may destroy the whole thing and start over.
 And of these people, those who desired to teach false doctrines, at least did not seem to pollute the texts themselves, but would just speak their interpretations to people verbally, or write their own commentaries for people to read, an example of this is the confusion that is known as the Babylonian Talmud that the Pharisees willingly indoctrinate themselves and their children with.
(As a side note, Pharisees are not Levites, Pharisee'ism is a denomination, and the leaders of the Pharisees do not have to be Levites. Some men who call themselves rabbi are Levites, but it is not a requirement. Men calling themselves "rabbis" have by their own desire put themselves in the position of the Levites.)

The point I am getting at here is, there came a time after the Messiah, when many different people, even foreign people, non-Levites, who were not following the heritage of Levi, began to have interest in the scriptures and obtained their own copies, and started leading their own groups of people.

After the scriptures were dispersed throughout the world, corruptions became a concern since people who did not have the same heart would add and subtract verses and statements.

Due to this, we should consider multiple texts to help in painting a picture of what belongs and doesn't belong, just in-case some person has tried to insert their own personal doctrines in the text, to act like it's actually there.

This information can help you if you have a lesser known document presented to you by someone, and also some English translations actually make use of different texts than the KJV did, and it will help you understand why there can be some unusual difference between English translations.


Paragraph titles

Another addition to our texts that behaves like numerous mistranslations to those who are not aware that these are added in, are the little titles they put above many paragraphs and chapters.

That stuff was not in the original document, and some of it at times may twist what you're about to read by influencing you to see and read through their filter.
So if possible, look over these as well.

There are so many of these, it's hard for us to imagine what all is added in, and some bibles out there may even have false teachings in these titles, that people are mistakenly taking as fact and being part of the actual scriptures.

I used google to find an example to show you what I am talking about, the added in text that was not part of the original documents is in bold print above paragraphs, I will place a red line over the top of them to show


There may be multiple mistranslations from color confusion.
 That is, things being called the wrong color, due to modern language being different than language in the past.

In times past, languages had a different understanding of colors than we do now.
 Many languages I know of did not have words describing exact shades of colors like we today try to have and use, and our adjectives for exact shades of color may actually be a modern thing.

Modern words for colors may have settled differently than what they were in the past. We have evidence to support this even with Hebrew.

This information can change how we understand many scriptures, for example, in modern Hebrew yarok means green, though in the scriptures the metal gold is called "yarok".
 So, would you describe solid gold as green?

The KJV translators however do not translate yarok in that spot to "green" saying "green gold", but they chose to say yellow instead.

We may have actually damaged our understanding of the past by altering the meanings of the words we use to describe colors, and letting that knowledge be forgotten.

This is likely why ancient people made use of the technique of saying what something looked like, when trying to share to us the color.

 You will notice the Hebrews made use of that technique of telling you what something looked like by comparing it to the appearance of something else.

For example, "green" in times past may have just meant something that looked like vegetation, and that could be all sorts of shades of greens, yellows, and greenish-yellows, but if we say it was green like grass, that may help us visualize the color better.

Again with the Hebrew word adom, modern people will tell you it means red, though I've heard in the past it could even describe brownish things.
 This could imply to us Adam the 1st man was brown, not red.
So while adom meaning red may be true in the modern usage of the language, it doesn't actually mean that, and we shouldn't try to change what someone meant in the past by a modern language that came well after their time.

You could say modern languages are only based on their ancestors.
 This is very true for modern Hebrew as well, it is a language based on original Biblical Hebrew.

So knowing this, it can change how you interpret many Hebrew or Greek scriptures.


What did Elohim call the periods of light and darkness?

I've made it a point to include this since I feel it can help expand your mind to see things differently, and to train yourself to be even more aware of the truth in all matters.

Genesis 1:3 "Then Elohim said, Let there be light, and there was light, and Elohim saw the light, that it was good, and Elohim divided the light from the darkness. Elohim called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night"

That is what the English translations say, but I would like to bring to attention that the translation is actually rendering a false statement, right?

I will give you a moment to reread the Bible quote to see if you know what I am talking about or can figure it out, if you would like.

The issue here is, did Elohim really call it the English word "Day" and the English word "Night"?
 After all for example, in the Spanish Bible you may see that it says he called it "Dia" and "Noche".

So the question is, what did he really say?

According to the Hebrew text, he called the light "Yom", and the darkness "Laila".

For me, when I read this verse now, I say the Hebrew words since that is what the source text says.
From the Bible alone, it appears that Hebrew was the original language used before the mixing up of tongues at Babylon, the names of the people named back in those days were Hebrew names that had meaning in Hebrew, and the watchers, what people commonly call angels, also had Hebrew names.
(Outside of the Bible, the Book of Jubilees confirms this, and adds that Hebrew was taken away from the people at Babylon and they forgot it. That would mean any text that existed was now a mystery to the people who lost the ability to understand it. It also shares that Hebrew was later given to YHWH's servant Abraham.)

I personally say the Hebrew words when reciting this to others, but make mention to anyone listening that in English this means Day and Night.

Acts 12:4

At Acts 12:4 in some Bibles, they've removed "Passover" and replaced it with a festival of the heathen!

You can't really call this a mistranslation, but a lie and wickedness.
 They insert "e*****" when the text actually said Passover.

Most modern Christians do not take this too seriously, when they should be disgusted.
 Passover has NOTHING to do with "e*****"!

Passover is one of YHWH's holy days, and so very significant in a number of ways, one being the significance of the Messiah having to do with the Passover as he was our Passover lamb.

This great information and wisdom is being covered up, and we're being dumbed down by following these traditions of men.

"e*****" is the name of an idol that the heathen worship, and it is also the name of the heathen festival for that useless idol.

For further information on this modern "holiday" that people are celebrating instead of the Festivals of YHWH, view page 12 modern "holidays".

Mark 7:19

Some translators bear false witness on the Messiah at Mark 7:19 by saying that he declared all foods clean for us to eat now, implying clean and unclean has been done away with.

This severe mistranslation is purely added in, and does not appear on the source text at all!

This statement being added in does not even fit with the context!

People are using this mistranslation to try and convince others that pork for example is now perfectly clean and edible, and that they can ignore the commandment of YHWH Elohim when he said we are not to eat those things he declares unclean.

The number of different translations carrying this mistranslation possibly shows how people selling these bibles are copying others rather than sitting down and creating a fresh work striving to have an accurate translation, or maybe it shows a common evil at work.

I am not saying this is how it is for sure, but it seems more like they are taking the text of another translation and just going through altering it and then reselling it as a new translation making large profits from people who are thinking they're buying a perfect translation of scriptures.

You can view how multiple translations render this verse with this link.;

Here are links to the source texts that these translations are supposed to be translating from:

Greek interlinear;
Here is a screenshot from this Greek interlinear, Greek is read like English from left to right;

Aramaic interlinear;
Here is a screenshot from this Aramaic interlinear, remember you read Aramaic from right to left;

The text says digestion and excretion purifies the thing, not anywhere does it say the Messiah made claim, or commanded, that all foods are now clean and there is no such thing as clean or unclean anymore.

People are missing the point the Messiah was making.

To think that the Messiah ever made such a statement that they're claiming should be a red flag, since that would be going against what YHWH the creator has instructed us.

The mistranslation that they add in does not even fit with the context if you read the whole thing and it stands out as a visible addition to the text through this as well.

If this mistranslation was true, that would contradict the Bible greatly that states clean and unclean is still important for us now, and in the future when the Messiah returns, it would also contradict the clear words of the Messiah in other places.

There are many people out there with Bibles carrying this error,  telling them at this spot that they can eat anything now and that it is okay, but they need to be warned of this lie from men, and that eating unclean things is DANGEROUS.

It's sin which results in death, and if their heart is truly right, they're going to want to know this so they can flee from it.
 Unclean foods also often show to be unhealthy and even disease causing.

So many people have fallen ill from parasites coming from these creatures. Listen to the Father and treat such meats as an unclean abomination that you will not willingly touch.

While people may think they have a valid excuse to eat unclean by hiding behind this mistranslation, no one should ever think that way, because they only had to read their entire Bible, even the ones with various mistranslations, to see the bigger picture and know they can't eat unclean animals.
 When you read all of the text, textual error and corruption becomes visible to you and stands out.

The people who believe this mistranslation, and tell others that the Messiah said this, may not fully know it but are lying on the Messiah.

This lie is harmful to the souls of many, the people who know better, that the real Messiah would never say such things that ignore the Law of YHWH, they're then influenced to reject the "new testament" because they think it's obviously a fraud.

This is actually happening with people when modern Christians insist that the Messiah said such things, and those people reject the Messiah before looking further into the matter for themselves and verifying the teachings of those modern "Christians".

It is important that we take mistranslations like this seriously.

Here is a link to the misconception page relating to this verse;


Romans 14:21

Many people fail to see the context of this section of the Bible, and there is actually a mistranslation here that is helping cause people to be more likely to misunderstand and fall for false doctrines.
 If the word was translated correctly, it would help people see the context of multiple verses from Paul.

In the English Bibles, translators have translated the Greek G2907 to say "meat", but it really means flesh of a sacrificed animal!

Here is the link to the Greek Dictionary showing the meaning of the word used, and it also shows you all of the places it is used in the Bible;

The misconceptions surrounding this verse and others like it can be found here;

Mathew 1:16 genealogy mistranslation

There is a significant mistranslation in modern Bibles from the Greek which includes the KJV, in the 1st chapter of Matthew, it mistranslates "father" to "husband".

Due to this simple mistranslation, people for years have been confused concerning the genealogies of the Messiah, Mary, and Joseph.

This may have even helped cause some people to lose faith in the scriptures because of the modern Christians confusing this verse and making it look like the Gospels do not know the genealogies.

This mistranslation can be major because this is the very start of the gospels, and it can potentially lead people into thinking that it says the Messiah is not the son of David, when it's known that the Messiah would be from David's line.
 Also, the mistranslation causes a contradiction with verse 17.

Verse 17 states that there are 14 generations from Abraham to David, then from David until the Babylon captivity are 14 generations, and then from the Babylon captivity to the Messiah there are 14 generations;

Matthew 1:17 "So all the generations from Abraham to David are 14 generations, from David until the captivity in Babylon are 14 generations, and from the captivity in Babylon until the Messiah are 14 generations"

This actually helps us confirm the mistranslation, and when the mistranslation is corrected, there is absolutely no contradiction.
In the texts carrying this mistranslation, if you actually count the generations then it will only shows 13 generations from the Babylon captivity to the Messiah, and from this you can see there is definitely something wrong there.

Also from this error, another problem is the mistranslation says that it is showing the genealogy of Joseph, the man who was engaged to Mary, but Mary was already pregnant before they became married, and the Messiah was not related to Joseph the husband of Mary other than through adoption.

So all of this is due to the mistranslation where it says at Matthew 1:16 "Joseph the husband of Mary", when it should say "Joseph the father of Mary".

When translated to father, this correctly shows 14 generations from the Babylon captivity to the Messiah, it also shows that this genealogy is about Mary the mother of Yahushua the Messiah who was from David's line.

When looking at the old Aramaic texts of Matthew, there is a word that literally means "protective male", it is this word that translators have made to husband which causes these problems, when it should be father when read in context.
You can view this on the Aramaic interlinear here: http://www.peshitta.org/ )

Mary's Father and her Husband both had the common Hebrew name "Joseph"(Yosef), which seems to have helped cause this error and confusion.

At Luke 3:23 it actually goes over the genealogy of Joseph the husband of Mary, and it reveals a few details, 1 being that he also is from David's line, another is that his line lists different names than the 1 at Matthew chapter 1!

The father of the Joseph being talked about in Matthew 1:16 is named Jacob.
 The father of the Joseph who married Mary is named Heli and we are shown this at Luke 3:23.
  So this as well shows us something was not right with the Greek Matthew 1.

So with the mistranslation, people think Josephs line is went over twice and Mary's line is not went over at all, which would mean it never fully showed how the Messiah was from David.

Pay attention to the 2 genealogies from Matthew 1 and Luke 3 and you will see that they do not even match up, showing they're 2 different people even more obviously.

(Some Modern Christian teachers actually attempt to switch these out and say Matthew 1 is talking about Joseph and Luke 3 is talking about Mary, but that is backwards.
These teachers see the apparent contradiction and some try to say "heli" was Josephs father-in-law, but that is just an attempt to grab at what they can to try and solve this obvious problem in the English texts.

Here is the correct Matthew 1 genealogy, showing the 14 generations;

1 Abraham
2 Isaac
3 Jacob
4 Judah
5 Perez
6 Hezron
7 Ram
8 Amminadab
9 Nahshon
10 Salmon
11 Boaz
12 Obed  
13 Jesse
14 David

15 Solomon
16 Rehoboam
17 Abiyah
18 Asa
19 Jehoshaphat
20 Joram
21 Uzziah
22 Jotham
23 Ahaz
24 Hezekiah
25 Manasseh
26 Amon
27 Josiah
28 Jeconiah

-Babylon captivity due to Yisrael's disobedience to YHWH's Law

29 Shealtiel
30 Zerubbbabel
31 Abiud
32 Eliakim
33 Azor
34 Zadok
35 Achim
36 Eliud
37 Eleazar
38 Matthan
39 Jacob
40 Joseph
41 Mary
42 Yahushua the Messiah of YHWH

Did the Messiah instruct us to do everything that the Pharisees tells us to do?

This can be an important point and I will add to it and refine it. I had to get the basics down quickly.

At Matthew 23:1 in our English Bibles there appears to be a mistranslation that  says the Messiah tells us to do everything the Pharisees tells us to do.

Such a thing would obviously sand out as inconsistent with the numerous other teachings from him that teaches us to beware of what the pharisees say, and don't do what they say according to their wicked commandments.
 The New Testament enlightens us fully to the fact these men are not Biblically accurate and are following the world rather than YHWH, even if they're assuming they're following Elohim.
(Pharisees=Modern Judaism)

The Messiah deliberately disobeyed their commandments numerous times and rebuked them. They accused him of sinning and breaking YHWH's Law when he was only breaking illegitimate commandments and assumptions of men.

We're also taught by YHWH to only obey YHWH and not add to or subtract from his Law.
 Also other places in the Bible as well warn us to not obey these commandments of men and we see the curses given to the people who strayed from YHWH for words of men.

The pharisees are guilty of twisting and adding so many commandments and claiming that they must be obeyed, that it is burdensome work to just keep up with them, and like I just said, YHWH has commanded we shall not add to his Law, and we can recall John's words where he told us YHWH's commandments are not burdensome.

It's really important for us to understand the pharisees and modern Judaism, so I will try to cover that topic on page 9 "Religion & Denominations".
 Without at least a basic understanding of them, you're really not able to see clearly what is going on in the "new testament".

Now most people here at this verse may stumble around as they try to make sense of it, and just take this spot to mean to do what they say that is good, but do not do after their own ways, though the verse still stands out as inconsistent which has caused people to seek out previous texts and an answer to this problem, which led to looking at the surviving Hebrew copies of Matthew.

If we look at a surviving Hebrew version of Matthew, we can see that a single Hebrew letter, the letter vav/waw, is all that is the difference between the apparent issue here and something that is exactly consistent with the rest of the New Testament.
 So it's very possible there has been a scribal error in the popular Greek documents past.

This is how the above mentioned Hebrew version renders the verse;

Matthew 23:1 "Then Yahushua said to the crowds and to his disciples, the scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses’ seat, so do and observe whatever he tells you, but not the works they do. For they preach, but do not practice, they tie up heavy burdens hard to bear, and lay them on people’s shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to move them with their finger"

This version makes perfect sense and is consistent with all that the Messiah taught, and it also really brings out the point of how different these Pharisees are compared to actual righteousness.

We also here clearly see Messiah telling us to obey Moses, that is the Law of YHWH.

There is a terrible problem in modern Christianity, and that is many people are teaching the Pharisees were obeying the Law of YHWH, when they were not, but they had twisted, subtracted, and added to what we should be doing.

If we were to actually obey the pharisees and all that they tell us to do, that would mean we do things like wash our hands before we eat and it also includes saying a wicked statement every time we wash our hands, and the Messiah rebuked the pharisees for this which is very well known.
 It would also mean we must obey men and whatever they tell us to do, and we would become very corrupt as we stray from the path of truth, and our eyes would be blinded by all of the leaven.
 It simply does not add up that we should obey wickedness.

It's practically impossible to obey whatever they tell us to do and their commandments, as the men creating these commandments sometimes disagree with each other and have contradicting commands.
 So while Pharisees teach we must obey their men, that is one of the obvious issues with their teaching as their men may sometimes directly disagree with each other.

As a side note, "Moses's seat" was an actual seat inside of synagogues that people would sit on to read the scriptures, they would sit there and read the Law given through Moses.
 You can actually go and sit on "Moses's seat" still today.

I've offered the information I've uncovered concerning this section, you can draw your own conclusions.

Revelation 6:8   A "pale" horse?

In our translations of this section, they've told us Death was sitting on a "pale" horse.
I think myself and many others were led to visualize a grey looking horse due to the adjective "pale" being used here, but the Greek text that the translation came from actually says Death was sitting on a "green" horse!

For those trying to recognize the signs of the end times, they should be aware of this.

The Greek word used is G5515 chloros.
 In Mark 6:39 it is used to describe "green grass".
In Revelation 8:7 it is used to describe "green grass".
 In Revelation 9:4 it is also used in reference with plants.
In times past, languages didn't have exact color adjectives like modern languages try to have, but from the meaning of this word and the usage, we can see it's not describing the color grey.

Revelation 6:8 "And I looked, and behold a green horse, and his name that sat on him was Death, and Hell followed with him, and power was given unto them over the fourth part of the earth, to kill with sword, and with hunger, and with death, and with the beasts of the earth"

John 1:17  "but"

Translators in some versions have inserted a "but" into John 1:17, and people today are focusing on it and using this "but" to try and twist the scriptures and tell people to ignore the Law of YHWH.
 If it is in your translation, notice it is likely in italics, indicating it's not really on the source text but is an addition.

The verse should be rendered like;

John 1:17 "For the Law was given through Moses, grace and truth came through Yahushua Messiah"

(This verse says nothing about casting away the Law of YHWH given through Moses, and grace and truth is not contrary to the instructions of YHWH!)

John 6:4    It is not in every old text.

I am going to research this more, and am not saying it is a mistranslation or addition yet.

Masculine and feminine words.

Another thing that some may consider a mistranslation is in Hebrew many words are masculine and feminine and also plural and singular that when they're translated to English now, the gender is removed, and also the specific quantity is removed.

An example of this in the English bible is the word "you".

So the English translations may leave someone with a few questions unanswered that the Hebrew actually specified.
These spots also may allow for English readers to develop "interpretations" that are not biblical, and the Hebrew text actually does not support.

So while this doesn't seem to be a wicked mistranslation of deception, but just due to the differences in the languages and what people are wanting, just be aware of it and know if you have some questions you may be able to look at the Hebrew and get some more answers.

Though if you're not familiar with Hebrew and foreign languages, don't jump to conclusions as foreign languages are just that, foreign.
For example, at some places a word may be masculine and some unaware of the mechanics of the language will assume it's only speaking about males, such as the Hebrew word yeladim(masculine form of children), but really this could be referring to males and females, since if a male is in the group it will take on it's masculine form.

In modern translations I would like to see something like (p) and (s) added next to some words to tell if they're plural or singular in the Hebrew, or even (ms), (fp), etc. to also include gender.
That may be useful.

There are actually words in old English that accomplish some of this, but they have been weeded out of usage today. Words like thee, thou, thy, thine.
This is why these words were used in some bible translations, since they match up more accurately to the Hebrew. They did not use these words because they themselves talked like that normally.


A significant mistranslation, which I mention on page 4, is "god".

With the current world defining "god" as the most high creator, this makes "god" a mistranslation since elohim, the word they usually translate over to "god", does not mean the most high creator, and can be applied to other things.

In the bible this mistranslation occasional shows errors and inconsistencies in the text that some may notice if they actually have read the text.

Also, most translations have translated elohim to other things, and not only to "god", this shows that these translators are aware of this, and this also shows their inaccuracy with translating, though the average reader is oblivious to these things.

The reason that this mistranslation is important to be aware of is due to the false doctrines gaining strength from the word "god", such as the false doctrine of holy trinity.

I'll mention again, 1 of Yisrael's sons is also named "god", and this is a Hebrew word. They spell it Gad in English, though it is said the same way. In Hebrew gad means fortune, luck, troop.


Some English bibles such as the NIV use the word "yeast" when the word should be "leaven". These 2 words have a relation yet may not be the same.

Cross and crucified

If you're from a modern Christian society, then it may take you a moment to process the fact that the Bible does not really say the words "cross" or "crucified", and I am not just talking about language differences either.

From traditions of men, men have added them in.
 The traditions surrounding these things have become so important to the people they don't care what was actually said in their place.

The Bible actually says "stake", that is a pole, and speaks of the Messiah being put on a stake or pole.

This can be an important difference, and can help tie Messiah into the prophecies concerning him better.

The Cross is a symbol revered by sun worshiping pagans.
 This doesn't mean the pagans who executed the Messiah didn't indeed place him on one, but this is important to know, and when you consider modern Christianity has been tricked into wearing pagan symbols just like pagans of the past did with their "crosses", it should set off a red flag.

Modern Christianity looks extremely pagan and not "Jewish", and this is yet another layer of pagan imaging that can be peeled away.

So again let me ask that you don't go out and attack people for their images and trinkets of crosses, while they're thinking it has to do with Christianity.
 Share and educate others in love!
If someone really cares about YHWH and his Messiah, then they will take true information and change their behaviors and perceptions.

Name Confusion

There may be instances of missing context due to confusion over names.

For example, the name David in Hebrew means "beloved".
It is the exact word for beloved, so for example in the Song of Solomon you will see "David" in the Hebrew scriptures multiple times, but it isn't talking about Solomon's earthly father David, it is saying the word "beloved".

Song of Solomon 6:3"I am my beloved's, and my beloved is mine"

So what I am getting at is, what if a translator wasn't sure to translate over to English as "David" or "beloved"?

Or possibly the greater context is to understand both at the same time, since the Hebrew speaker would just be seeing the 1 word that carries those multiple meanings?

This is another thought I wanted to put out there because it too can increase our understanding, and when analyzing texts of different languages this may be useful to have in mind.

Refer to the next point below about the Ezekiel Messianic Prophecy for 1 example.

Ezekiel Messianic Prophecy

When I mentioned above under "name confusion" about what if a translator didn't know to write in English "David" or "beloved",
I had this specific spot in mind.

At Ezekiel 37:24 there is an instance where interpretation can possibly go on to alter the context, this may be a passage that the translators got it wrong from "name confusion", or may have even been encouraged to get it wrong by blind men who want to alter Messianic prophecies to either hide the Messiah from someone, or to hide the Law of YHWH from someone.

Here is the passage with the alternate "translation";

Ezekiel 37:24 "My beloved servant shall be king over them, and they shall all have one shepherd. They shall walk in my judgments and be careful to obey my laws, They shall dwell in the land that I gave to my servant Jacob, where your fathers lived. They and their children and their children’s children shall dwell there forever, and my beloved servant shall be their Prince forever"

This is a Messianic prophecy for the end time, when the kingdom is restored and YHWH's people are no longer cast off.
 This Messianic end time prophecy is yet another that contradicts modern Christianity since it reveals that in the future the restored people in the kingdom to come will observe YHWH's judgments and be careful to obey his laws.
 It seems while this verse says "David", people in modern Christianity have little interest in sharing it or learning it.





Further Information


.                        ^Back to the Top of the Page^                           .