NSB-Notes Jn1-1plus
N S B Notes: Non-Trinitarian Bible
Translations
BestStatementFound.htm open BestStatementFound.htm about
Non-Trinitarian Bible Translations
COMPARE John 1:1: Approximately four hundred and fifty
English translations of the Christian Greek Holy Scriptures have been written
over the past five hundred years. Of this total, about forty have rendered John
1:1 with wording that is different then the usual Trinitarian statement: “the
Word was God”.
The following Bible translations of John 1:1 would indicate that perhaps these
were Non-Trinitarian Bible Translations. Other important Scripture verses would
also need to be examined to determine how non-Trinitarian they really were.
Some of these translations read very much like the Trinitarian Biased Translations
in other verses.
SBT Library-- adds more references for you!!!
Open and Study BiblePunctuationMarksPLUS.htm-& N0.1
-Trinitarian Bias Test- TrinitarianBiasTestPLUSmore.htm
BiblesTwoTypes.htm-WhatIsagod.htm
-Aa.htm-GODorgod.htm-B2.htm-BestNonT/OnenessBibles- BestStatementFound.htm Plus
BiblePublishersAccountableToWho.htm- and-IntroductionForConcernedStudents.htm
The ALPHAandTheOMEGA.htm--
As Free As God----Is that Possible ?
See Open FREEasGOD.htm-- Lu
come
after me, let him disown himself and pick up his torture stake day after day
and follow me continually.
Matt
Jn1-1AndTheRansomSacrifice.htm- GodtheSon.htm- Coptics.htm- CopticsPlus.htm- The Coptics in 200-300 A.D.
understood God’s word and translated John 1:1 as "a
god" back before the Nicene Creed appeared in 325AD.
200-300 A.D. Open SahidicCopticGospelofJohn.htm
The Coptics understood Koine Greek very well
and used it every day as an Administration language Open CopticsPlus.htm
John1.1 Any difficulty in understanding this
verse is Intentionally caused by the
translators –and Bible Printers.
Study 1- GODorgod.htm -2 -AllManuscriptsWereWrittenInAllCaps.htm--Coptics.htm- Who is I Open-Jesus--Jesus always
spoke of His own individuality. Pro-Nicene-Creed Believers Intentionally- (IntentionalFallacy.htm) deny that Jesus is Real of His Own individuality.
see the Nicene Creed in
current use. 5 4
What are humans that you are mindful of them, mere
mortals that you care for them?
6 5
Yet you have made them little less than a god, crowned
them with glory and honor.
http://www.nccbuscc.org/nab/bible/psalms/psalm8.htm#foot5
Footnotes New American Bible
http://www.nccbuscc.org/nab/bible/#psalms
List –More
Good Notes After List
Reijnier Rooleeuw, 1694, "and the Word was a god"
Harwood, 1768, "and was himself a divine person"
Newcome, 1808, "and the word was a god"
Abner Kneeland, 1822,
"The Word was a God"
Thompson, 1829, "the Logos was a god
Leicester Ambrose, 1879, "And the logos was a god"
Stage, 1907, "Das Wort
war selbst gttlichen Wesens" [The Word/word was itself a divine Being/being].
Charles A.L. Totten, 1900, "the Word was Deistic
[=The Word was Godly]
J.N. Jannaris, 1901, [A]nd
was a god"
George William Horner, 1911, [A]nd (a) God was the
word"
Holzmann, 1926, "ein Gott war der Gedanke"
[a God/god was the Thought/thought]
Robert Harvey, D.D., 1931 "and the Logos was divine (a divine being)"
Ernest Findlay Scott, 1932, "[A]nd the Word was
of divine nature"
William Temple, Archbishop of York, 1933, "And the Word was divine."
Rittenlmeyer, 1938, "selbst
ein Gott war das Wort" [itself a God/god
was the Word/word]
Goodspeed, 1939, "the Word was divine
Lyder Brun (Norw. professor of NT theology), 1945, "Ordet var av
guddomsart" [the Word was of divine kind]
Ervin Edward Stringfellow (Prof. of NT Language and
Literature/Drake
University, 1943, "And the Word was Divine"
Torrey, 1947, "the Word was god
Pfaefflin, 1949, "war von gttlicher
Wucht [was of divine Kind/kind]
James L. Tomanec, 1958, [T]he Word was a God"
New English, 1961, "what God was,the Word
was"
Cotton Parch Version, 1970, and the Idea and God were One
Moffatt, 1972, "the Logos was divine
Translator's NT, 1973, "The Word was with God and shared his nature
Philip Harner, 1974, "The Word had the same
nature as God"
Maximilian Zerwich S.J./Mary Grosvenor,
1974, "The Word was divine"
Siegfried Schulz, 1975, "And a god (or, of a divine kind) was the
Word"
Barclay, 1976, "the nature of the Word was the same as the nature of
God"
Schneider, 1978, "and godlike sort was the Logos”
Schonfield, 1985, "the Word was divine”
Revised English, 1989, "what God was, the Word was”
TRANSLATIONS THAT CAN BE READ ONLINE:
Open
-B2.htm-BestNonT/OnenessBibles- For
2001 TRANSLATION, "In an ancient time, there was the Word. The word was
with God and the Word was powerful."
The New Simplified Bible is Not Trinitarian Biased! John 1:1, 18;
COMPARE John 14:10: Now let’s compare how John
1769 Authorized Version of KJV: “I am in the Father.”
1902 Rotherham Bible: “I am in the Father.”
1933 George M Lamsa Translation: “I am with the
Father.”
1961 New World Translation: “I am in union with the Father.”
1989 New Revised Standard Version: “I am in the Father.”
1995 New American Standard Bible: “I am in the Father.”
2000 New International Version: “I am in the Father.”
2001 2001 Translation: I’m in unity with the Father.”
2003 New Simplified Bible: “I am with the Father.”
Best Bibles Plus-- YOU Can Now
Test Them-
If Bibles are not
printed accurately it is impossible to support accurate man make doctrines Read Preface.htm
Now That We
Are In The CommunicationsAge.htm We Can ***Examine *** Everything
Ourselves
2-Groups of Christian Bible Publishers Are Printing Words.
YOU Can Now Test Them with
the BestBibleDictionariesPLUS.htm --Plus Who did
Jesus say to Worship? It’s your free Study
Matt 10 -8 -Without
cost you have received; without cost you are to give. V8-5.htm
COMPARE THESE BIBLES
WITH YOUR FAVORITE BIBLES
***Group 1***- The Three Newly Restored Sacred Name New King James Versions
+ The
(1)
Sacred Name King James Bible (2) RNKJV
Scriptures: (3)
Sacred Scriptures, Family of Yah Edition—
If YOU Combined the New American
Bible with the
Restored New KJ Versions/it would be close to the B2.S Bibles
Compare to Open B2.S Bibles--77.htm By Date 2001 Translation 2001/2006+-New Simplified Bible 2003+-
Nazarene 2000- 2000+--New World Translation --NWT is 1950/1984-are B2.S Bibles
or BestnonTrinitarianOnenessBibles.htm
There are some words in most Bibles that
were not in the original inspired writings. Plus
Many use
Words or Word Expressions to---fit --their Beliefs with unbiblical Words that are not inspired Words of YHWH 010.htm.
Second +Word Meanings Belong
in Foot Notes.
For a list of words or word expressions to be on
alert for Study what’s in--IntroductionForConcernedStudents.htm Plus
More
in http://simplebibletruths.net/BestBiblesPlus.htm
Nearly all English Bible translations use the phrase
“I am in the Father” at John
COMPARE John 8:58: Take a closer look at John 8:58. Most Bible translations use
the deliberate Trinitarian phrase, “Before Abraham was,
I am.” This is Jesus Christ the Son of God speaking. They want you to think
that phrase “I am” means God. But does it? Or does it simply mean “I exist
(existed).” The word they translated “am” is from the Greek “eimi.” It has several meanings including: am, exist, and
was. Notice how the the translations compare:
1611 King James Version: “I am”
1901 American Standard Version: “I am”
1933 George M Lamsa Translation: “I was”
1961 New World Translation: “I have been”
1989 New Revised Standard Version: “I am”
1995 New American Standard Bible: “I am”
2ooo New International Version: “I am”
2001 2001 Translation: “I existed before Abraham was
born.”
2003 New Simplified Bible: “I existed before Abraham was born”
Again we find the same four translations that champion the true God of the
Bible, a Monotheistic Deity. They are the New World Translation, George M Lamsa Translation, the 2001 Translation, and the New
Simplified Bible.
COMPARE Exodus 3:14: This is where the devious conspiracy begins! The
Trinitarian translators mislead the unsuspecting Bible student at the very begininng of the the Holy
Scriptures. The Hebrew word that they translate “I AM WHO I AM” is “hayah.” It can be translated “am”, “have been”, “will
become”, “exist”, remain”, “will be”. Look at these
translation comparisons:
1611 King James Version: “I AM THAT I AM”
1901 American Standard Version: “I AM THAT I AM”
1933 George M Lamsa Translation: “I am AHIAH ASHAR
HIGH, (that is, THE LIVING GOD)
1961 New World Translation: “I SHALL PROVE TO BE WHAT I SHALL PROVE TO BE”
1989 New Revised Standard Version: “I AM WHO I AM”
1995 New American Standard Bible: “I AM WHO I AM”
2ooo New International Version: “I AM WHO I AM”
2001 2001 Translation: “I am the One Who [Proves] to
Be!”
2003 New Simplified Bible: “[I exist and] I will be who I will be”
Again we find only four English translations that recognize the true God of the
Holy Scriptures. These translations are the New World Translation, George M Lamsa Translation, the 2001 Translation, and the New
Simplified Bible.
Do you see the difference? The Trinitarian translators want you to believe that
God is called “I AM” in the “Old Testament” and Jesus is called “I AM” in the
“New Testament” and, therefore, they must be the same…and part of a mysterious,
inscrutable, combination of three-Gods-in-one or God in three persons. This
mystifying belief is even beyond the average human imagination. Only Satan the
devil could have thought up such deceit and confusion!
Are there other translations? If you know of another translation that does not
promote the mysterious man-made doctrine of the Trinity please send information
to simplifiedbible@yahoo.com.
THE
For Original NSB’S Page-Trinitarian Bias Test
Open to Read NSB’S
Send
E-Mail to: newsimplifiedbible@webspawner.com
Open and Study BiblePunctuationMarksPLUS.htm
BiblesTwoTypes.htm-WhatIsagod.htm
-Aa.htm-GODorgod.htm-B2.htm-BestNonT/OnenessBibles- BestStatementFound.htm - -TrinitarianBiasTestPLUSmore.htm & BiblePunctuationMarksPLUS.htm BiblePublishersAccountableToWho.htm- and-IntroductionForConcernedStudents.htm
The ALPHAandTheOMEGA.htm--
As Free As God----Is that Possible ?
See Open FREEasGOD.htm-- Lu 9:23 Then he went on to say to all: “If
anyone wants to come after me, let him disown himself and pick up his torture
stake day after day and follow me continually. Matt
We
are in The Communications age.—What Does That Mean For Proclaimed
Christians??
Newer Technology is in Linked Commentary
(open) http://www.2001translation.com/
It is Highly Recommended That You Compare Them All and Others— For Your Search For Truth
Open Commentaries.htm
of BestBiblesPlus.htm
Sbt Separates (kepts) Philosophy and Unscriptual
Traditions From The Scriptural Teachings –
Review These
pages Lies.htm and DOCTRINEBuster1.htm Plus WORDarguing.htm and HiddenTruthsPLUS.htm
It is Amazing What Translators And Common
People Will Do To Serve Tradition
Many Popular
Bibles----On the Verses of
Mystery, Tradition and Imitate --it is as followers
(1)- The Original Stewards of God’s Word (with the inspired
writings) solved any questions about
God and His Purposes for men
and angels with their Teachings. Open MysteryPlusVerses.htm
(2)-Traditions were established and were in place and complete, for every good work in teaching.
Open--MysteryVersesPlusMore.htm
It
Is Doubtful That Those That Teach Mystery Doctrines And/Or
Unscriptural Traditions and Customs Will Stop Doing So—Why ?
Details in the Review-BiblicalLOGISTICS.htm &
TraditionalTeachingsREVIEW.htm
Matthew
15:1-9 – Open [Verse 6 in Original Greek]
Matthew
15:1-9 - [Verse 6 in Original Greek]
8 `THIS R566 PEOPLE HONORS ME WITH THEIR LIPS,
BUT
THEIR HEART IS FAR AWAY FROM ME.
9 `BUT IN VAIN DO THEY WORSHIP ME,