Customer Reviews

The Book of Yahweh (Assorted Colors)

5 star:		(16)
4 star:		(4)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(9)

 

 

IMPORTANT NOTE:

Before I begin, this critique comes from someone who can read and understand Ancient Hebrew, Ancient Aramaic, Modern Hebrew, and Mishnaic Hebrew. A number of years ago, starting in the 90's, I made a decision that instead of relying on translations I would put the work in and learn these languages for myself. I also read from the oldest Hebrew and Aramaic texts of the the Tanakh (the Hebrew Scriptures) so I don't have any bias towards one translation or another. Also, as of 2007 I live in Israel near Jerusalem. I did all of this because of love for the Creator of all things, YHWH, and I wanted with all my soul to have a correct understanding of Torah.

I will also warn you that this review is long and detailed so you can have as much information as possible with which to make your own decision.

You may be asking yourself why is it important to that Hebrew and Aramaic are mentioned in relationship to loving YHWH? The reason is that the Torah (the five books of Moses) were all written in an ancient form of Hebrew from about 3,000 years ago. The prophetic texts were written in a latter form of Hebrew from between 3,000 to 2,000 years ago. The writings of Ezra/Nechumya/Daniel were written in a mixture of Hebrew and Aramaic from between 2,500 to 2,000 years ago.

So this means that an English text, based on these texts, would need to be grounded in a proper understanding of each era of said languages to have the proper concept of how said texts were to be understood. A person who takes the time to learn and understand said languages often does so because living by the truth of said texts makes them feel closer to both the speakers and writers of said text. Since no language is 100% literal there are times when a translator must know what is being said whether it is literal or metaphorical.

Also, the reader of a translation is not reading the original texts but an ATTEMPT by the translator to convey the ideas, imagery, concepts, and philosophy of said texts in a foreign language. Sometimes this is easy and sometimes this is hard because some languages lack the qualities to place the reader of the translation on the same ground as the reader of the original. Further, a reader of a translation must be concerned over whether those who translated are competent enough to translate correct.

Some people unintentionally or intentionally mistranslates based on mistakes, lack of knowledge, or an agenda that they have. Having a proper understanding of the original text is akin to having the right spirit and frame of mind to base one's life on said text. If a person's translation of the book of Proverbs, for example, is incorrect a person may make life decisions because they are reading from a text that doesn't explain the meaning of various proverbs correctly.

Quality translation involves the following:

1) accurate: representing the meaning of the source text as faithfully as possible;
2) natural: using the receptor language in ways appropriate to the text being translated; and,
3) communicative: expressing the meaning in an understandable way to the intended audience.

For example, if a text says an Eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth, is it literal or figurative? How does a person who doesn't know Hebrew know when they have no connection to the culture? Maybe the saying is not literal and maybe it simply an example of something bigger. Having the correct translation and interpretation would be critical to living and dealing with people in a proper manner. Furthermore Isaiah 8:20 makes it clear that having a proper understanding is critical since it says there is a Torah and a Tedudah (witness, revelation, tradition) and if something doesn't speak like them then it has no dawn in it. I.e. there is the Torah and correct way for it to be understood and utilized.

For those of you who are former christians you have probably already seen how mistranslation can cause you to either follow the wrong thing or have you worshiping the wrong stuff. You should also be vigilant about trusting some other group just because they claim that they have the truth.

I am not concerned with the theology or the status of a group like the House of Yahweh and whether they are a cult, so I am not writing this out of some axe to grind with them. So essentially, what I am talking about is the text and issues about the text. I am also not relying on some scholar I have never met to tell me whether this book is accurate or not. I did my own research, using ACTUAL, EXISTING, and REAL ancient Hebrew and Aramaic texts.

All sources that I used can be provided to anyone who wants to know. In short they are the Yemenite Tajjim (Torah Texts found amongst Yemenite Jews), the Samaritan Torah texts, and the Aleppo Codex (from Syria). All of these texts are easy to find and I am more than willing to direct anyone who wants to these texts in their original languages. Feel free to ask me to provide proof of what you find in my review. I am more than willing to provide it in a format that you can easily see and research for yourself.

Also, in my review I will transliterating things using Yemenite Jewish Hebrew and Samaritan Hebrew. These are considered two of the most ancient Hebrew dialects. I tried to include the actual Hebrew in this review but Amazon doesn't allow Hebrew characters in these reviews. Seeing it in Hebrew for yourself helps in understanding the points I make. Please note that at the end of my review I give my analysis for people looking for a good translation, though you may not find it the easiest path.

If you find a spelling mistake in my review, that is because I typed this review a few years ago. I correct things every once and a while to make things more clear. I state this because for some reason a minor spelling mistake I made in my review several years ago was being discussed in an outside forum of H.O.Y. supporters.

THE REVIEW:

For the intent Biblical student your best bet is to learn Hebrew and Aramaic, and read from the ORIGINAL texts for yourself. Relying on a text like this is definitely not the way to go. This a part of my review that I noticed some critics of my review ignore.

There are many who say this book is the most accurate translation out there. Yet, my question to them is, "As compared to what?" If you want to compare the King James Version and the House of Yahweh, they are both biased and riddled with in-accuracies in just as many places when compared to the ORIGINAL HEBREW and ARAMAIC manuscripts they both claim to be translating from.

For those who initially come across this book because they are seeking the truth, I must warn you that this is not the path you want to take for it. What I am about to write is not based upon some disdain I have for the House of Yahweh, but from experience in terms of reading the Book of Yahweh initially, thinking it was an accurate text (before I learned to read and understand Hebrew and Aramaic). Then later learning Hebrew and Aramaic and seeing how off base (just like most translations) the BOY really was when compared to the ORIGINAL Hebrew and Aramaic texts.

The biggest is that the book has a number of translation problems. By this I mean huge number of places where they [House of Yahweh] have added things that don't exist in any ancient Hebrew text. It can only concluded that they added them for their own political/theological purposes. Several theological issues, which are incorrect because the text is not based on any known Hebrew text.

The text does not give any clear indication of being translated from any reliable source. For example, there are no pictures or even clear descriptions of the source text they claim to be translating from. Thus it can't be called a translation. It would then have to be assumed that the HOY simply took an existing translation and changed a few words here and there to fit their needs.

Also, there are numerous Etymology issues that are incorrect in their book. One example is the claim that Athonai (Aleph-Dhaleth-Nun-Yod), Elohim (Aleph-Lamed-Hey-Yod-Mem) as pronounced in Yemenite Hebrew, and El (Aleph-Lamed) or (Aleph-Yod-Lamed) are all of pagan origin. First off, most Hebrew words come from three letter roots called "Shoreshim". The same root that El comes from is from a similar root that the world Il comes from. The Book of Yahweh makes the claim that El is pagan, and Il (or Yl or Ul as they sometimes spell it) are not. Yet, one of the books that the Book of Yahweh references says that Il/Yl is also the name of a pagan deity. (The reference book is the Encyclopedia of the Gods which is listed in the BOY sources)

Note: the reason is that El, Yl, Il, and Ul all come from the same Semitic root (Aleph-Yod-Lamed) or (Aleph-Waw-Lamed) which all mean "strength." Aleph-Lamed can be pronounced as El, Yl, Il, and Ul and the Semitic pagans used and knew all of them, because all basic Semitic languages have similar roots as Ancient Hebrew. (Sources for this can be found in any Hebrew Lexicon.)

The House of Yahweh also translates the name of Shet as "Seth" and the name "Seth" is the name of a pagan deity. (Encyclopedia of the Gods, page 233). This seems strange since they seem to have a thing, the HOY, against certain words or names if said names have pagan origins, yet they are willing to translate "Shet"-(Shin-Tet) as "Seth." They also translate the name Hawwah as "Eve," "Eve" is of course Latin, and is claimed by some Sacred-Namers to be of pagan origin also.

A few other problem areas are the changes that they have made to the names of people to fit their own purposes. Here are a few examples.

1) They claim that the Hebrew name of Joshua (English) was Yahshua, which does not exist as a name in any ancient Semitic language. Yod-Hey-Waw-Shin-Ayin, Yod-Hey-Waw-Shin-Waw-Ayin are the only two ways that the Joshua is spelled and in the ancient dialects it would be pronounced Yahoshu`a in Teimani Hebrew (note that the Ayin has no English equivalent and in Ancient Hebrew was not silent, the a in the Yah part can also be an "e" but very short), or as the Samaritans pronounce it Yuhosha. There is no historical evidence to attempt to transliterate (without the Shuruq) ancient Hebrew 1400 BCE-600 BCE the way they [The House of Yahweh] did in this instance.

2) They change Ezra's name to Ezrayah without providing any evidence that his name was Ezrayah. They do the same with Yehezqel's (Ezikiel), changing it to Yechezqyah; Hoshea (Hey-Waw-Shin-Ayin) they change to Hosheyah (which would have to be spelled Hey-Waw-Shin-Yod-Hey and needless to say is not even Hebrew); and the list continues. They basically add "yah" to peoples' names who never had "yah" in their names, and they provide no evidence in these situations that they are correct in adding "yah" to these people names. People who try to defend the HOY choice in doing this OFTEN misquote Strong's and other sources, by changing the wording when they post it.

Now there are some other issues in terms of translations that are problematic.

Genesis 1:1

The Book of Yahweh adds "Yod-Hey-Waw-Hey" to a place that it does not exist in the Hebrew texts. They replace Elohim with Yahweh because they claim that Elohim is a pagan term. Yet, even reading the Samaritan Torah we see that the Samaritan Torah, which is not connected to the Jewish Torah, has Eluwwem and not Yahweh. In Samaritan Hebrew Aleph-Lamed-Hey-Yod-Mem is pronounced "Eluwwem" not "Elohim". Those who know their history know the significance of this.

Genesis 3:7-8

The House of Yahweh book inserts of number of things in these two verse that don't show up in any ancient Hebrew text or in the Samaritan Torah. They add a statement in verse 7 that Adam and Hawwah were afraid that they did not keep "Yahweh's Laws" which does not show up in any ancient Hebrew text, and in verse 8 that Adam and Hawwah heard the "Laws and the Prophets" which doesn't show up in any Hebrew text. So essentially if you compare there text with the oldest Hebrew texts out there you will find that they added words to the Torah that were not there, which is a sin according to the Torah itself.

Now it is important to note, that some people claim that in King Solomon's time that the Torah had Yod-Hey-Waw-Hey in it more times and that the Tikkun Sofrim (Scribes) changed this. The problem is that people who claim this have no copies of any Torah scrolls from King Solomon's time. The oldest fragments of Torah comes from the 2nd Commonwealth during the second Temple period and those are only fragments. The earliest partial Biblical text is from about 300 BCE. Hundreds of years AFTER King Solomon. The Dead Sea Scrolls are only from about 200 BCE or so.

The next oldest is from the Aleppo Codex (600 CE). Then next is the Leningrad (1000 CE). The other texts are either Samaritan Hebrew, Greek translations, Aramaic translations, Latin translations, and Arabic translations. I once asked someone who claimed that the BOY was based on Solomonic texts to show me said texts, and they could not. For those who want to investigate this ask BOY supporters to show actual texts in Hebrew and have them review with how they came to their translation especially when it comes to the names where they add "yah."

Also, there are those who bring up the Documentary Theory aka the Graf-Wellhausen hypothesis in order to defend the BOY. This theory posits that the Pentateuch is not a single text written by Moses but a series of documents collected over time. The problem is that the Documentary Theory is about the different writing styles in the Torah and it is only a THEORY. There is no hard evidence that it is true. Jewish sages explain the use of different writing styles in Semitic culture in order to push certain points.

In terms of the Documentary Theory there is no proof that it true, which is why it is called a THEORY or a hypothesis. Besides proponents of the Documentary Theory would say that the BOY is wrong since a part of this theory claims that there never was a unified text. The HOY seems to act like their translation is from an original text, or an attempt to recreate the first text in English.

Also, if the documentary theory were correct the Samaritan Torah would have Elohim in it more than YHWH. Yet, the Samaritan Torah has YHWH in it more than Eluwwem (this is the Samaritan pronunciation of Elohim). The Samaritans descend from the Northern Tribes of Israel and according to the Documentary Theory Northern Israel used Elohim in their texts as compared to the tribes of Yehudah (Judah) who used YHWH in their texts.

As the BOY goes on it gets worse. The book makes claims about the New Testament that are incorrect, as they ignore historical evidence and also the Aramaic texts in order to come to some of their conclusions.

For the intent Biblical student your best bet is to learn Hebrew and Aramaic, and read from the ORIGINAL texts for yourself. Relying on a text like this is definitely not the way to go. Besides it is a lot cheaper to learn the languages than it is to spend money searching for the supposed most accurate translation.

Also, consider the fact that the people who praise this book as being an accurate, or the most accurate translation 100% of the time can't read Hebrew or Aramaic so they would not know if it was accurate or not. This book is by no means a translation or even accurate in it presentation of ancient Israeli and 1st - 2nd Cent. history.

Yet, don't take my word for it. Take this book to an Ancient Hebrew and Aramaic scholar, who could care less about Judaism or Christianity, and see if they agree that the Book of Yahweh is a correct "translation" by any means when lined up with KNOWN Hebrew and Aramaic texts. Better yet, learn Hebrew and Aramaic for yourself and then you will never have to buy another translation ever again.

For those who claim that knowing Hebrew/Aramaic isn't important then a translation should also be just as unimportant. If reading Hebrew was good for Mosheh (Moses), who wrote the Torah in Hebrew, and it was good enough for King David who wrote the Tehillim (Psalms) in Hebrew, then Hebrew is where the proper context starts. Which would be better seeing YHWH's name AND words in Hebrew the way it was originally written or in English while having to trust the ability of the translator? In a Hebrew text a person can see YHWH's name and his words in the same format the ancients saw it in.

My basic advice is instead of wasting your money on this book learn Hebrew and Aramaic, even if it is just a little bit. There are a number of good resources on Amazon with which to learn, and it actually easier than you think, so there you have it. Even if you can't learn the languages fully you may want to invest into a Tanakh (Hebrew/Aramaic) that has Hebrew/Aramaic on one side and English on the other side. That way you actually check as you learn if the translation is correct and it makes it clear that the Hebrew is THE text. A person doesn't need to join any organization or accept things by the explanations of others. The ability to research and know for yourself is something that YHWH all humans with.

The ability to learn directly from the original texts is worth the work and the benefits of knowing that you are following the correct Torah of YHWH is a better feeling than any translation can give you. This way you will never have to worry about what translation is more correct by having the Hebrew/Aramaic Scriptures in front of you which you won't have to second guess.

If you look in the comments section to this review I have provided additional information that explains the above points visually.

I can only assume that all the people who are raving about this book have no real knowledge of Biblical languages. I read exerpts of their 'translation' of the Hebrew Bible side by side with the actual Hebrew, and there are many differences. Here are some random ones I noticed:

In Gen. 4:3 they have 'YHWH's Sabbaths', which is not in the Hebrew text, which simply reads something like 'after a certain time'.

Their Gen. 6:3 is completely mangled, and they add 'My word, the Law and the Prophets', which again is not in the Hebrew.

Gen. 6:4 is another mangled translation, again with an addition ('enemies of YHWH') which is not in the Hebrew.

Proof that the translators are not very proficient with Hebrew can be seen on every page of this translation, for example on the first page of Genesis in the note at the bottom of the page (right hand column). The note states that the word 'them' in v. 28 is atam, but as any person reading the Hebrew text will tell you, the word is otam. The following comment (1b) incorrectly states that the word usually translated 'them' later in the verse is ham, but again the actual Hebrew word is hem, and it does not even appear alone in the verse being commented on. In both cases the note cites a Hebrew lexicon on these words (which are so basic that any first year Hebrew student would know them, thus there should be no need for this translator to look them up) and incorrectly assumes the verse to mean whatever the translator wants it to.

In note g on the first page of Genesis it states that the word they translate as 'have rulership' is, in Hebrew, 'yaradu', but the Hebrew word there is in fact pronounced 'yirdu'.
This note goes on to say that in the 'third person future tense' the word means, 'stewards, overseers, teachers, priests'. But these are all nouns, while 'third person future tense' is a description of a verb and the word in question is a verb, not a noun. Moveover, if you look up this verbal root in a reliable Hebrew lexicon, you will find none of these meanings.

These examples indicate that these people cannot even pronounce Hebrew correctly, much less translate it.

In note r (corresponding to Gen. 3:8) they again do not know how to pronounce the word 'kol' (a noun meaning 'voice, sound'). They go on to translate it as 'to proclaim' which is of course a verb. They cite Brown, Driver, Biggs Hebrew Lexicon in defense, but this is incorrect and this lexicon does not support such a translation. What the translators did was scan through all the possible nuances and meanings of the word (it is a very long entry) and found one that suits their purposes, regardless of whether it is appropriate or not. In this case the word 'kol' could be translated 'proclamation' (a noun) but not the verb 'to proclaim'. Furthermore this reading is only called for in places like Exodus 36:6 or 2 Chronicles 24:9, but not here in Gen. 3:8 where 'sound' is more suitable. This translation does this consistantly, scanning through all the meanings listed for a word in a variety of sources and using out of context whatever suits what the translator wants the text to say. The entire first half of verse in question (Gen. 3:8) in this translation does not even resemble in any way what the Hebrew text actually says. It has been changed, no doubt because of the blatantly anthropomorphic portrayal of God, which I'd imagine the translators were uncomfortable with.

One reviewer claimed that these additions are clearly indicated with italics, but this is untrue, the additions (which are not called for and most likely reflect the theological views of the translators) to the texts are in the same font and style as other words.

These are just a few examples randomly selcted from a few pages, but these sorts of mistranslations/ deliberate additions are found on every page of this book. They completely abuse respectable sources on Biblical languages and rely on questionable ones (for instance using Jastrow's Hebrew/ Aramaic dictionary which, while a great resource, is specifically a dictionary of Rabbinic and not Biblical Hebrew). Anyone with a passing familiarity of Biblical languages will wince both at this translation, and the annotations (which defend the translation by incorrectly citing other sources). One is left wondering whether these people actually know anything about Hebrew or Greek.

In the end, this translation reflects no existing manuscripts for either the Hebrew Bible or Christian scriptures. I have given so many specific examples above mainly because I cannot stress what an awful 'translation' (I use the word lightly) this is.

As for their supposed use of real names, I have objections to that as well. They transliterate the proper name of God, despite a long tradition which views that name as too holy to speak, a tradition which pre-dates Christianity, and which early Christians themselves kept (consider that the New Testament always uses the Greek words Theos 'God' or Kurios 'Lord' and never attempts to transliterate the name of God into Greek.). This is also true of the Septuagint translation of the Bible, which was begun around 200BC, and the group that wrote the Dead Sea Scrolls also pronounced YHWH as Adonai 'Lord' out of respect for the name of God.

Additionally this group's insistance that YHWH is free of any pagan influence is simply untrue. There is evidence that YHWH was the name of one god amidst a pantheon. For example, at Kuntillat Ajrud an inscription was found saying, "May you be blessed by YHWH and his Asherah" (the name of a Canaanite deity). Another inscription was found there reading, "I have blessed you by YHWH and his Asherah." In both of these inscriptions YHWH has a consort, a wife. With these inscriptions was found a drawing of the couple together!

Similarly, El (Elohim, Eloah, etc.) despite what they claim, is not a uniquely 'pagan' word. El (in various forms) is the standard Semitic root for any divine being, and in the Hebrew Bible is used both as a generic word for other gods and most often refering to the God of Israel (just as the English word god can refer to either). Elohim, which is plural in form, is not plural in meaning when refering to the God of Israel. Many Hebrew words are plural in form, but singular in meaning (shamayim 'sky', rachamim 'mercy', panim 'face' to name a few)

Also, I thought it was common knowledge that Jesus' original Hebrew name was Yeshua or Yehoshua. Yahshua, which they claim to be the real name of Jesus is not even an actual name. They make no effort to transliterate correctly other names in the Bible, leaving, for example, Eve, which in Hebrew is Havah, or Seth, in Hebrew Shet.

What they claim to be the real names of various Biblical figures have no basis in the Hebrew language or Jewish and Christian tradition. Just look at the book's table of contents and you will encounter many names which simply do not exist. Here are some of the names as they transliterate them followed by the common English version and what they actually sound like in Hebrew: Yahshua (for Joshua, Yehoshua), Riyyah (for Ruth, Rut), Samuyl (for Samuel, Shemu'el), Ezrayah (for Ezra, Ezra), Isayah (for Isaiah, Yeshayahu), Yechetzqyah (for Ezekiel, Yehezkel), Yahyl (for Joel, Yo'el) and so on and so forth. None of these reflects what these names actually are. THEY HAVE BEEN MADE UP!! They should either use the traditional English versions of these names or faithfully transliterate the true Hebrew forms, how can you trust the rest of this translation when they can't even get the names right?

My point is, if you want to really understand the Bible, learn the original languages (Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek). DO NOT BUY THIS BOOK.

P.S. One other reviewer has accused those of us who question the worth of this 'translation' by claiming that we simply do not properly understand Biblical Hebrew,(see 'People just don;t understand' by D. Hayes among the reviews). I have spent the better part of a decade studying specifically Biblical Hebrew, and it is in this respect that I and others more or equally as qualified as I judge this translation to be worthless.

After reading this translation for over two years, I still discover differences between the Book of Yahweh and my copy of the King James Version of the bible. Each time that I find a difference and then check the various bible reference books, like Strong's and various lexicons, the Book of Yahweh has always proven to be the most accurate translation that I have found. I would recomend this translation to any person that is seeking the Father in Heaven. The book has His name - Yahweh.

This book has completely changed my life! In my search for righteousness I read this book and found it to be crystal clear and very easy to understand! In trying to de-code the king james version, thou was getting caughteth upeth in kingseth englisheth and could barely understand the true meaning of the books and the events that occured in the lives of the prophets and apostels. I could not understand what our Heavenly Father wanted us to know. In reading the bible, I found that there was particular emphasis placed on the name. Once I searched out what the true name of the creator and his son were, this book put the whole plan of salvation and the purpose of mankind's mere exsistence into perspective. In my years of study, I have found this book to be the closest thing to the original hebrew there is! Thank you House of Yahweh for helping me walk along the path of righteousness!

This Bible is made from quality material,the content is i believe the best translation i have read.I would fully reccomend it!

If any person interested in reading the holy scriptures wants to read them in their original form, that person would have to learn Hebrew. It is a fact that the original holy scriptures were written in Hebrew, and that the righteous men of old and the Messiah were Hebrew men. There is even a book in every bible called Hebrews. The most accurate English translation of the Hebrew holy scriptures is The Book of Yahweh. You will thorougly enjoy it, and will be better able to understand the words our Creator inspired to be written for us. Since recieving and reading this book my life has definitely changed for the better.

I have purchased 3 copies of this book. one for myself, one for my wife and one for a close friend who's mother and brother now also want their own copies. Say what you will, but this book is the closest to the original Hebrew. Yes, some things may not sound familiar because we all grew up being taught from a book with over 22,000 errors. I have researched many books and I have also gone to Israel, and NOONE can say other wise. The name of the creator is Yahweh and his book is named after him.

If you want the truth, you'll buy this book and read it everyday. You can even try to prove it wrong if you like. But you will eventually have to face the facts. and THE TRUTH HURTS!

I have been studying from the"BOOK OF YAHWEH"for some months now and I have not found one word of ot to be untrue, in addition, for the first time in my life get a true sense of what it means to be a believer, all I ever got from any other translation was alot of conflicting information and contadictions which only left me confused and I think we all know who the author of confusion is. Rev12:9 in any bible tells all of us what the evil one has done and is still hard at work doing and Matt4:4 tells all of us how we should live and now thanks to the "BOOK OF YAHWEH" I know exactly how to do that. "PRAISE YAHWEH"

a great book, easy to read, it's nice to have the proper names replaced in scripture...a very great help in my studies but please, please keep in mind the title of this reveiw...especially in mal4:1, Is2:2-5 Is43:1-13, Is44:1-8, 45:4, 49:1-3, may yahweh bless your understanding...

I grew up in a home with a Catholic father and a Protestant mother. Yes, I was well-indoctrinated in the "be good or you're going to hell!" theology.

As a teenager I began listening to "The World Tomorrow" program with Herbert W. Armstrong, and was first exposed to keeping the Holy Days of the "Old Testament", and keeping Sabbath from Friday sunset to Saturday sunset, and not eating pork, shellfish and other "unclean" foods. Of course, as a teenager I fell away from that group -- going out to do teenage things and learn about the world on my own.

When I was about 28, I became curious as to what had happened to the Worldwide Church of God, I knew that Mr. Armstrong had died, but I never saw anything about "The Plain Truth" nor "The World Tomorrow" program. I finally tracked down the toll-free number for the Plain Truth, and they told me I had to pay for a subscription for it. What? It had been free the whole time Mr. Armstrong was alive. When I received my first copy, I found that it was nothing more than Evangelical rhetoric, nothing of the thought-provoking writing Mr. Armstrong had always filled it with. I immediately cancelled my subscription.

Not too long afterwards, I found a small congregation here in this small Pacific Northwest town, and the pastor of the congregation invited me to a Sabbath meeting. This congregation was not associated with the House of Yahweh, and in fact at one time Pastor Bill had been a "Jesus Christ Preacher" as he put it, until he found out about our Creator's name, and about keeping His Laws.

We as a congregation did use the Book of Yahweh as our main scripture, but not the only scripture. After a few years, though, many of us all seemed to have the same revelation at the same time, and you could have heard a pin drop Sabbath morning when Pastor Bill gave the official sermon. And some members left the congregation after that.

I do agree that the Book of Yahweh is a misleading translation of the Holy Scriptures, but I WILL say this, if I had read the following verse in any OTHER translation, the full meaning of the verse never would have hit me the way it did -- it tore the scales of long-held beliefs in lies from my eyes.

That verse was Isaiah 43:11:
"I, even I, am Yahweh, and beside me there is NO OTHER SAVIOR."

Now I read the Tanakh.