Here's Why Christians Should Be Concerned About The Passion Translation of the Bible

…abandoning all interest in textual accuracy, playing fast and loose with the original languages, and inserting so much new material into the text that it is at least 50% longer than the original. The result is a strongly sectarian translation that no longer counts as Scripture; by masquerading as a Bible it threatens to bind entire churches in thrall to a false god.
​

1. TPT was not translated by credible scholars who have a command of the biblical languages.Bible translations are typically written by teams of scholars who are well-trained in the original languages. There have been single-author exceptions such as the Wycliffe Bible, the Tyndale Bible, and The Message Bible (see update below). However, the writers of these works were qualified and respected in the field of biblical translation. In contrast, the sole translator of TPT, Brian Simmons, is not trained in the biblical languages, and lacks the credentials necessary to produce an accurate translation of the Bible.Another thing that sets TPT apart from these other single-author translations is that Simmons claims that Jesus visited him personally, took him to the library of heaven, and asked him to write the translation. He claims to have received "downloads," and "secrets of the Hebrew language" from Jesus Himself. Simmons even admitted that he has minimal background in biblical languages and needed the Lord's help to translate.(3)If all of that isn't troubling enough, in the television interview cited above, he claims that Jesus promised to bring him back to heaven and give him a brand new chapter of the gospel of John that has never yet been discovered—John chapter 22.Although the website for the Passion Translation states that a team of "respected scholars and editors" evaluated the material, no names are given. Trustworthy versions of the Bible are safeguarded from the insertion of individual biases, interpretations, denominational backgrounds, theology, and personal preferences by utilizing teams of scholars who have one goal in mind: faithfulness to the original words and meanings of the text.

2. TPT adds to the text or changes the meaning. 

In his review of TPT of the Psalms, Shead noted that the end result is at least 50% longer than the original. Here is an example: 

Psalm 18:1:

NIV: "I love you Lord, my strength." 
ESV: "I love you, O Lord, my strength." 
KJV: "I will love thee, O LORD, my strength." 

Compare these with Simmons's translation: 

TPT: "Lord, I passionately love you! I want to embrace you, For now you’ve become my Power!"At first glance this rendering may not seem very objectionable—loving God with passion is a good thing. However, Shead explains that for a translation to be faithful, it must not "add or subtract from the original words, or change their meaning." He goes on to warn that even if a translation is generally faithful, these additions can cumulatively add up to a picture of a different God—much like in the New World Translation used by Jehovah's Witnesses. Along with adding words, TPT also changes the meaning of the text in several places. Shead notes that TPT frequently changes the conversation of speech about God or others into speech to God, concrete images into more abstract ones, and removes historical references—even deleting about half the references to enemies and nations.

Bible scholar Dr. Andrew Wilson noted:
​

​3. The manuscript sources are sketchy. Without getting too deep in the weeds about the science of textual criticism, the standard among scholars is to use the earliest and/or most reliable manuscripts when translating the Bible. (Sometimes the earliest manuscript is not the most reliable, but scholars who specialize in this field endeavor to discover the best manuscript evidence for a given text.)Contrary to the consensus of the vast majority of scholars, TPT claims that the  New Testament may have been written in Aramaic, rather than Greek. (4) ​Thus, Simmons translates some of his New Testament from the Aramaic, rather than the earlier and more reliable Greek manuscripts. 

In his review of TPT of the book of Romans, Dr. Lionel Windsor wrote:
​

Aramaic was a language spoken in the Eastern Mediterranean. It was common in Syria, Judea, etc. Jesus probably spoke it, and Paul probably knew it too. But nobody thinks that Paul actually wrote Romans in Aramaic. Why would he? Very few people in Rome would have understood him if he did that.

Shead's closing words are succinct:
​

TPT is not just a new translation; it is a new text, and its authority derives solely from its creator. Like Joseph Smith and The Book of Mormon, Brian Simmons has created a new scripture with the potential to rule as canon over a new sect. Judging from The Psalms alone, I would say that it would be a Christian sect, and that unlike the Mormon cult its scriptures will point its adherents to saving faith in God the Son, the crucified and risen Lord Jesus. But TPT is not a Bible, and any church that treats it as such and receives it as canon will, by that very action, turn itself into an unorthodox sect. If the translation had been packaged as a commentary on Scripture I would not have needed to write this review; but to package it as Scripture is an offence against God.

The Word of God is perfect and doesn't need any embellishments, changes, or added emotional flourish. In the original languages, the Scriptures are exactly what God communicated to us, and our translations should endeavor to convey His words as faithfully and honestly as possible. TPT fails to capture the purity, intended meaning, and tone of the biblical texts, and therefore it should not be called a “translation,” nor should it be used as such.

*Since this article was originally published, I have become more informed about some problems with The Message Bible. See JR Miller's post here for more info. 

​References:
 
(1) At the time of the writing of this post, the PT translation of the New Testament was #23 on Amazon in the Bible category. 
(2) See Dr. Andrew Wilson's review here, and Dr. Lionel Windsor's review here. Also see author Holly Pivec's series of posts on TPT here. 
​(3) In an interview with the Welton Academy's Podcast, Simmons stated, "I had minimal background in biblical languages, so yeah, it was something that, honestly, something the Lord has really helped me with." (14:52) **UPDATE** Since the publishing of this article, the Welton podcast has been taken down. However, the audio is saved and can be listened to here: https://videopress.com/v/dDTilIPH
(4) In the introduction to the 2013 edition of Letters From Heaven by the Apostle Paul, (Five Fold Media) Simmons wrote, "Some scholars now lean increasingly towards the thought that Aramaic and Hebrew texts of the New Testament are the original manuscripts, and that many of the Greek texts are copies, and a second generation from the originals! This is radically changing translation concepts, and will result in many new translations of the New Testament based on Aramaic."

Thanks for drawing attention to this. Keep up the good fight.

Thank you so much for your thoughts on TPT me and my husband agree that this is not an accurate translation and should not be termed a translation of the Bible our former pastor of a church that we ended up leaving peacefully would not agree to even consider not using the passion translation and that was the ultimate reason why we left I couldn't sit there Sunday after Sunday and hear that preached as the word of God when I knew in my heart that it was not. It broke my heart and set off an internal alarm every time I heard it.

Text in raw form is not important, whatever version it may be. Holy spirit is the key to interpretation and understanding of the Word.

I am in the same position Dawn Summers, over here in Australia, but one difference The Passion and The Message is also used, which makes life interesting. I am trying to leave peacefully. Honestly some times believing this kind of stuff I find the Pastors incredulously not aware of these translations .It just breaks my heart as so many people are deceived.

Thank you for your comments, our pastor and wife have started preaching solely from tpt and i just don't have peace in my heart about it. I'm seeking God about what to do. 🙏☝️💪

KAPIL BALU B you nailed it. Somehow we as the church have skipped over the part that Jesus said he gives us the Holy Spirit to teach and guide us in all truth. The Bible is the most important book ever by far. Nothing compares. However we've become too much like Pharisees and have studied 'the word' without KNOWING him. John 5:39, John chapters 14 and 16.

Thank you for writing this article exposing TPT. Very deceptive that Brian Simmons is. He needs to repent. We would be wise to avoid him and any minister who supports him since he is a false teacher. Thanks again for exposing this heretical translation. Proverbs 24:11-12….we must warn people about this translation.

I am very suspicious of anyone who says they've been to heaven and looked through Gods library.????

What qualifies your meaning of scholar? Are they filled with the Holy Spirit? Do they believe in the 5 fold ministry? I’d like to know if they are mere book learned people who you are using or actual followers of Jesus

I tried lovelingly sharing my concerns with a public pastor and she kind of shrugged it off…kind of made it sound like it was ok because her peers do..This is a woman pastor!!!…who leads 2 churches with her husband. I felt like it was a fight worth fighting, but I did not think she would shrug it off…I guess my words fell on deft ears. I just cannot understand how someone in that role could be so careless as if not to have the fear of the Lord! Out of concern for the flock I gave her a video and some background info. and she basically posted a video the next day about how we need to be careful with our words.Geesh. I really have no patience with these people…Lord help me!!! 2 of her pastor friends (both woman…that's a whole other issue) also endorse the passion on facebook and I'm assuming in their congregations as well.

I want to thank you my sister for doing your homework I knew something didn't settle right in my spirit every time I would see someone share the scriptures using this (TPT) I love how God exposes The Truth from a Lie 📖🙏👍🙋🏼‍♀️

I respectfully disagree with Mr. Zeagler and Mr. Balu B in their light view of the importance of scripture. John 5:39 is being taken completely out of context. Jesus was saying that they were missing the very One (Himself) that the scriptures they were studying should have been pointing them to. The Pharisees thought that obeying the law was their ticket to salvation. The truth is that the only way we today know anything about God, other than that He exists, is through the revelation found in scripture. If the text is not carefully preserved, how can we know the truth? Accurate, precise translation of scripture is of the utmost importance.
Can you tell me that you would know anything about the Son of God if you didn't have the Bible? The Holy Spirit helps us understand the scripture we are reading (illumination), He doesn't give us independent enlightenment.

Sounds like some jealousy going there

I've posted about 3 responses total in my life so not sure how to do this. I'm trying to reply to Jeremy but don't see a reply tab under his comment.
Thanks for being respectful Jeremy. And I 100% agree with you that Jesus meant the Pharisees missed that scripture was pointing to HIM. And I want the text preserved as you do but I believe it is good when someone allows God to speak through them in a unique way. I would oppose with all my being if Brian Simmons or anyone said "the translation I have written is better for everyone" and tried to eliminate past versions. My only point that may differ is Jesus said he sent the Holy Spirit to communicate with us. He didn't send scripture. Jesus referenced scripture when he preached at the synagogue but then he taught and lived out of what his Father said or did. Then He told us (because we read it in scripture) he set it up for us to do the same thing. That's what Jesus said (red letters), this isn't my idea. I didn't come up with it. Fortunately we have scripture to show us what He said. I would say that God isn't dependent on scripture being translated into an unknown language before that people group can follow him. They just have to be told about Jesus and the helper (Holy Spirit) that He sends will guide them. Having the written word is hugely beneficial. No other single item is close to as important. But what is more important to new believers is that we disciple and teach as Jesus did. To believe in faith that we hear and to act on the voice of the Holy Spirit. There are people that God uses scripture to speak to them most of the time. There are other people that hear His voice giving direction audibly (not me so far but I'd love it). For me it's mostly an inaudible voice or pictures that I get from the Holy Spirit. He's so gentle it's just amazing. When I hear His voice, that is still the word God. We need to write it down and act on it. Read what He said specifically to us days or weeks later when we may need the encouragement and go after that thing He said for us to be or do. Church leaders tend to be overly concerned when their congregants say they heard from God. I agree a lot of people have acted very wrong and said God told them. This is partly why it is so important for us that do know him, and hear His voice, to act in LOVE and make WAVES wherever we go. Being a follower of Christ is to walk with sinners and the so called 'scummy' people. Again Jesus said that… it's not my idea. I thank you Jeremy (and others) for your responses. Keep pursuing truth as I'm going to do. I know I am complete…. but yet there is more. God is amazing in that way.

The Bible strictly states. Not to Add to or Take away from His Word!!! And when the Apostles were here God commissioned them to go ye and preach the gospels. So as to preach the Gospel. So it could spread. To all the World. This man is adding to taking away and being more expressive. I'm Not buying it…

You are absolutely correct, especially regarding the NIV which is notorious for tampering with the text to force it to conform with the theological biases of the translators. Look what they did with 2 Peter 4:6. The deplorably added the word "now" which does not exist in the original language. They wanted to make it seem like Jesus did not preach the gospel to the dead, which is indeed it's plain reading.

Can we all not give the title THE Passion TRANSLATION to this? Rather the Passion "translation", or the Passion book, or the Passion novel, or the Passion supraphrase? Giving it the full title is like saying "choice" instead of abortion-murder. Titles are VERY important. Naming is VERY important. We give creedence to this abomination by adhering to this self proclaimed title.

In truth we have the Holy Spirit who teaches us all things. I have been greatly blessed by this version. Some may choose to call it version, commentary, expansion, review, or whatever. Let's be mindful of the meaning it is conveying in comparison with other versions so as not to arouse unnecessary 'war' over it that can detract from its original intents – of bringing passion into reading and understanding the 'same' word. Which is what it has done for me. The English language has evolved so much from the original form, there is greater need for the younger generation – modern English speakers to speak, read and understand modern English

Jesus warns us about false teachers and preachers in the last days. Thanks for sharing this with us

My question is why would you trust NIV and not TPT? NIV takes stuff out of the bible!! For example in Matthew 6:13 NKJV it sayss “And do not lead us into temptation, But deliver us from the evil one. For Yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever. Amen.”
But in ‭‭Matthew‬ ‭6:13‬ ‭NIV “And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one. ’”
‭it doesn’t have the last part “for yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever”! Why would you take that out!??

The Passion Translation is just beaútiful, it só speak to my heart !! Why criticize any translation, as all of them have "mistakes" ? its the message of Christ that counts, His love for His Bride.. you and me 🙂

I guess I’m pretty dismayed by the vitriol I read in too many of these posts, the judgmental attitude, and divisiveness. I would recommend reading the introduction to his Book of Genesis for an explanation of the purpose behind this work. I am an avid student of the word, of the “original” languages and own many and varied translations. When a passage in the TPT causes my brow to wrinkle, I go to other trusted translations (or sometimes to the Hebrew or Greek) for a clearer understanding or for clarification. Hebrew is a language of the heart, and simply cannot be fitted into a Western a=b formula. Even Jewish scholars cannot agree on the meanings of many words. I appreciate a scholarly evaluation of any new translation and will prayerfully consider what they have to say as I make a personal evaluation. I know that not everyone has the background to do this kind of evaluation, and there’s nothing wrong with that, but anyone can read prayerfully, and seek revelation and understanding! Some of my wisest mentors have been people with few credentials from this world, and very little scholarship, but they knew Him intimately, and that is far more valuable to me. Let’s try for a bit of gentleness, humility, and a Berean attitude. If you’re concerned about others’ understanding, why not pray for them and then make yourself available to the Lord for helping those whom you fear might be led astray.

THANK-YOU for your timely article on The Passion "Bible"! It is about time, too: I have been talking it up for many months now, to little avail. But you have some greater credibility on the Net, so I welcome this accurate purview, and am sharing it on Facebook! (Why NOT me??) Thanks!

As a chrustian and believer in Jesus Christ. As a child that was born into an old babtist church. As a vessel for the one and only God. We are supposed to pour out our love to the Creator and the creations. I undwrstand not taking wmaway ir adding verses. But how would you decribe your relationship with God ? How would you decribe your love for him and his creations ? We should love God with the upmost part of us. We as his children should give ALL of us to him. TPT shows the fact that we as his children should show the love and gratitude and the power he has given each and everyone of us. To show the world who Jesus is and who Jesus is so that they too might be saved. Our relationship with Jesus should be Greater Love, Joy like crazy, and giving ALL of us to him daily. I love the old king james version cause theres no add or take away. But a version to show the depth of his love towars us and how we should show that same love towards him and all creation is vital.

I love this, you're really on point. The world is fast changing, the use and understanding of the old english language is getting harder in the society today, so there is need to integrate the word of God into the current lifestyle so people could really identify with the word as it applies to their lives in this dispensation.

I don't think it's the right thing to ask her to get personal with you about her own relationship with God. That is between Her and the Lord. If the Original manuscript isn't enough (that translated from the original texts and languages) then somehow God didn't get His message across and now we have to create a new translation adding fluff that isn't supposed to be there. I don't agree with this TPT translation at all. And the way it came about is completely unbiblical.

Thank you for standing out. I fully believe that God led me to this translation because it has so much love in it. Just like He has so much love in Him. It sucks that we as His children, still can't let our guard down with Him because we want to look scholarly correct instead of fallin' freely in love with our Savior. I'm grateful for what Jesus Christ has done for me, including giving me the TPT bible.

Hi, I was just going to ask for links to the reviews by Dr. Wilson and Dr. Windsor but I now see that you gave them in the references. Great little article by the way. And one last thing… any links to material written by Dr. Shead? Thanks 🙂

Hi Donmali, so your answer to the darkness in the world is for Christians to 'modernise' God? Are you talking about the God who said in Malachi 3:6, "For I am the LORD, I change not"? Are you sure you know the "I AM WHO I AM" (Exodus 3:14)? I doubt that you have encountered Him or His Son Jesus Christ.

Interesting that Simmons supposedly saw a "John chapter 22" – but chapter and verse separations are a man-made invention and were later added to the books of the Bible.

Good point!

Why take everything literally when it's the idea that matters and serves to communicate a point. If John 22 expresses what is intended to be expressed, why not have a John 22!

I've read and listened to "The Message" Bible and have some concerns about it, too. I understand that it's not promoted as a translation, but most people – even believers – won't understand the difference between a translation and a paraphrase.
I'm not aware of "The Passion Translation", but the name itself will attract those who like the word "passion." It's a commonly used word by some Christians.
We don't need any more English translations of the Bible. If we don't have enough by now, we never will. Let's take a break for a hundred years or so. bjd

The Message is New Age inspired and includes New Age rhetoric.

Have you read any of Eugene Peterson’s books? All of my research, I’ve never seen any of his stuff as rooted in The New Age. Just wondering. I do believe that TPT is borderline heresy, especially if they publish the “22nd chapter of John.”

absolute nonsense. The Message has brought countless people to Christ.

Brad Dixon, I appreciate you bringing up your concerns about "The Message" Bible. I have great concerns about it as well. When people have quoted from it in Bible studies I have been astounded at how much the verse is different (not just a synonym here and there) from versions like ESV and CSB and NKJV. The verses are sometimes almost unrecognizable. I would NOT recommend "The Message" as a good Bible translation even with it being a paraphrased version.

A tree is known by it's fruit and we have seen a lot of good fruit from people who have been using The message bible.

Thank you

If you want a great defense for the AV1611 Bible and a great source to show the corruption of the new versions. I highly recommend Jack McElroy's book ''Which Bible Would Jesus Use: The Bible Version Controversy Explained and Resolved. (God Bless)

Hi Daniel, thanks for your comment. I'd recommend that readers also get "The King James Only Controversy" by James White for the other perspective.

Good catch on the King James Only adherent above and Great book recommendation.

Yes I agree…wonderful book.

The author is a New Apostolic Reformation believer and has written this based upon their beliefs.

Which Bible author were you referring to as being of the NAR – The Passion or The Message? Thank you. I wasn't quite clear on which one, after posts were written after yours. Thanks again, for clarifying.

I wrote about the author of Passion or Message being NAR – I forgot to checkmark to notify me via e-mail of your post to the website. Sorry! Thanks again –

The bible is the best selling book in history, and selling can turn to greed , and greed can turn to idolatry, and idolatry can turn us away from God, a lot of these versions and translations are unnecessary and nothing more than people trying to make a buck by bowing down to the ( golden calf of wealth and power) and watering down and perverting the truth along the way, whether intentional or unintentional (God knows) this is an intense subject, one that should not be taken lightly by anyone truly seeking Gods guidance in their lives, truly seek God (Jesus) with all your heart, and you will find Him and His (Holy Bible)!!!!!

Excellent point, in this day when corruption and greed overshadow everything…we need to be mindful of end times and the deception that is present. Confusion and distraction can lead you from God rather than draw you closer. Be prayerful and diligent in seeking and studying. I appreciate this information as I was considering the book.

Brian Simmons' pseudo-Bible is the latest in a long line of tendential Bible versions. In 1933 George Lamsa created "The Holy Bible from Ancient Eastern Manuscripts" based on his claim that the Aramaic New Testament pre-dated the Greek New Testament ("Aramaic primacy"). Despite virtual unanimous rejection of Aramaic primacy by scholars, now Simmons appears to have resurrected Lamsa's error. That, on its face, is sufficient to reject "The Passion Translation." However, when one adds in Simmons' mystical revelations that are included in his "Translation" (an inaccurate term where there exists no formal ability to translate from the original text–"Paraphrase" would be more apt), then The Passion Bible bears the same problems as The Book of Mormon or the Qur'an, namely no way to empirically verify the "revelations" because they are entirely subjective.
Ultimately, Simmons' work should be rejected for the same reason that Lamsa's version and The New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures ("Jehovah's Witnesses' Bible) are rejected (bias), with the additional ground that Simmons' personal "revelation" has no place in a work that is marketed to the world. Despite the obvious problems with The Passion Bible, don't be surprised if many embrace Simmons' version, since it is human nature to be attracted to "some new thing" (Acts 17:21).

I am late getting to the point of research on this subject; however, the Lord has shown me that what you say in reference to its being on par with The Book of Mormon or the Qur'an is true. I am not a renowned scholar of the Bible, but I know what the Word of God has done for me. I just wanted to thank you for your comments, as they were very supportive to what I had felt to be true.

I definitely agree with Miss Childers that this translation almost doesn't deserve the name, as the mostly straightforward meaning of the underlying text has been augmented with a lot of extra interpretation.

You know what it reminds me of? Movies based on books where artistic license causes the plot to be almost unrecognizable. I guess this so-called translation isn't quite as bad as that. It's not like the entire plot of the Gospels has been changed. But there's still a lot of artistic license involved, so it's hard to call it a "translation" with a straight face.

I also agree that this does not appear to be a work of scholarship. I have a strong suspicion, in fact, that Simmons' source material mostly is just other English translations. He might consult scholarly sources from time to time when there are text-critical issues at play (e.g. when the Aramaic/Syriac differs from the Greek) but I very much doubt he actually knows any ancient language. So, I would be curious to know whether my suspicion here is correct.

That said, it's not necessarily a bad thing to take an older text and update it with a new perspective and interpretation. Ancient texts can be very dry, and so a little bit of extra flourish helps us get excited about them. Only, let's be open and honest about what we're doing. Simmons shouldn't pretend that this is just another translation when it's clearly something else. He should have been more transparent, like Eugene Peterson was when he produced his "idiomatic" translation called The Message.

God doesn`t need scriptures updated. Holy Spirit will explain to you, and that is where the relationship is expected to flourish and grow in you is at…..

There is a reason why we Christians who are trained in the ancient languages: Greek and Hebrew, and some of the other ancient semitic languages, to translate the scriptures from the original language to modern English in a way that is not only keeping with the original language and the intent of the human author who wrote it, but also in keeping with the Lord who inspired the text. These folks work together and check each other on their translation accuracy and come to an agreement on the best possible translation into modern English. It appears the Simmons guy has no interest in this process.

“In a way that is not only keeping with the original language and the intent of the human author who wrote it, but also in keeping with the Lord who inspired the text.“ – this is a slippery slope if doctrine gets involved! Such as the NIV’s use of the term ‘sarx’?’ Most other translations use the term ‘flesh’ when referring to the condition of man (i.e. Galatians 5:16) because the word means ‘covering of the skeleton’, but the NIV uses the term ‘sinful nature’ – a Calvinist concept. This is very doctrinal and should not be in a Bible translation. It’s a doctrinal concept, not a transliteration.

And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God 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.
20 He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus.
21 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen.

Deuteronomy 4:2 King James Version (KJV)
2 Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you. it is all so from the law the father does not want us to change any of his words

Joel, it sounds like you are saying one can take away or add words to any other book of the Bible so long as it not the Book of Rev.if simmons could have just left the book of Rev. Alone he would have been home free

Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him.
Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.
Proverbs 30:5-6

the part of the revaltion was that he was thinking of stealing
in heaven i thought there was no sin in heaven

I just watched the video. Brian Simmons says clearly "They will not add to the Scripture, and that's a sealed book".

I’ve always been sick when I see articles like this. There are many people who think the king James version is the only “godly one” come on people. Why don’t you worry more about sharing the love of Jesus instead of acting like everyone who experiences the holy fire of God differently than you do are worthy of a money changers in the temple beat down. Have you ever considered when talking down about Gods other kids that you might actually be of the religious spirit that Jesus was put on the cross under? Stop accusing! That’s Satans job! Why join him in his works and say “im a great Christian it’s my job to accuse”. Jesus sure as heck interpreted scripture in a very different way as their Holy Scriptures came to life right in front of them with their own participation unknown to them as the “most learned in the land”. God doesn’t always talk through scholars. Check all your versions for who wrote the original versions and tell me they all were as “learned” as you and the niv scholars. May God give you peace and an understanding that we should join Jesus in His work sharing His love and the gospel of freedom from fear rather than joining Satan in his works of beating down others and accusing them alongside him.

I respect the commitment to education of theological scholars and I join in holding sacred that which is holy. However, I couldn't help but look at this review in light of the way scholars of the day critiqued Jesus and charged him with blasphemy before they murdered him; or how William Tyndale translated our Bible from original language to English, but was strangled and burned at the stake because of it.
In our divisive world, I hope the body of Christ can discover ways in which the head and the heart can work together without wanting to kill the other (metaphorically speaking…or not).
May we all have the humility to remember 1 Corinthians 13: For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when completeness comes, what is in part disappears. For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. NIV

That is lovely truth to bring in here. Thank you for saying it so eloquently. While we argue satan has his way.

Oh, my goodness. All this criticism from the guy who did the NIV? The NIV? Written in third-grade English and well known that large portions of KJV are left out. I didn't have my children learn "the baby bible" and which is written in a language so colloquial that they never could figure out whether it was a "scripture" they were quoting or just something from their head. I told them at least with KJV you know it's a Bible verse. NIV is dumbed down for the sad population, so they shouldn't be kicking the Passion.

The only Bible there that is fit to be called a Bible is the KJV. The NIV and ESV both used the corrupt Alexandrian text by Wescott and Hort who weren't Christians.

Eds–you should read James White's book about the KJV controversy.

Priscilla, you have been deceived by the King James Only Cult. The KJV used inferior manuscripts and archaic English that no one uses or understands anymore (including you). Read the "The King James Only Controversy" by James White. It will set you straight on some things.

I was reading part of TPT in comparison to the NIV and was feeling a little testy about the said 'translation'. So decided to do just a little digging and found that a not a few people take exception to it being called a 'translation'. I agree is should not be called a translation. I perhaps understand the added words may have been meant to clarify yet I found them at times to be just more confusing. If I was a new Christian trying to grapple with the language, sentences, and context then the TPT is not helpful. That said while I do agree who should not be adding it the Word of God I also am a little confused why people play the Revelation 22 card when verse 18 is more often then not taken out of context. Let me explain:
At chapter one John writes: "The revelation of Jesus Christ which God gave him to show his servants what must soon take place He made known by sending his angel to his servant John, who testifies to everything he saw — that is, the word of God and the testimony of Jesus Christ. Blessed is the one who reads the WORDS OF THIS PROPHECY (repeat, THIS PROPHECY), and blessed are the ones who hear it and take to heart what is written in it, because the time is near. (vv 1-3) Then starting at verse 10: On the Lord's Day I was in the Spirit, and I heard behind me a loud voice like a trumpet, which said: "Write on a Scroll what you see and send it to the seven churches:…….
So John writes what he sees to the churches as is read in the following 2 Chapters. John then continues to write about what he witnessed and heard in and from heaven through the Spirit which is the remainder of the PROPHECY of Revelation.
Chapter 22 ends Revelation with the River of Life, and the reminder that Jesus is coming. Chapter 22 verse 7 brings with a warning Blessed is he who keeps the words of the prophecy in THIS BOOK. Verse 16 "I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give this testimony (THIS BOOK) for THE CHURCHES. Verse 18 I warn everyone (this is Jesus still talking) who hears the words of the PROPHECY OF THIS BOOK: If anyone adds anything to them (THE PROPHECIES OF THIS BOOK), God will add to him the plagues described in THIS BOOK (REVELATION on the scroll John was writing down what he saw and heard). And if anyone takes words away from THIS BOOK (the SCROLL John was writing on) of PROPHECY, God will take away from him his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in THIS BOOK (REVELATION). This scripture applies to the PROPHECY given in REVELATION only. We need to remember that at the time John received this he was exiled to the Island of Patmos and was not with his brother and sister disciples. This book was received and written by John in the mid to late 1st century. Many of the apostles if not had all died by the time John wrote Revelation. Let's remember that the Canon (the Bible) we read today was complied in the mid to late 3rd century with the Book of Revelation being added and omitted even as late as the 6th century. So there was some debate about the importance of his book. All that to say although the TPT is written with lots of words added and I personally do not like it and agree it should not be considered a translation. Let's remember to keep what we read in context knowing that some of what we read may be allegorical, and metaphorical. Perhaps though we can agree regardless that " 16All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17 so that the servant of God[a] may be thoroughly equipped for every good work. (2 Tim 3). Blessings to us all as we become better biblical scholars who are open to debating, in love, some of the finer aspects of the canon.

It is a paraphrase and not a translation. If read as such it can be a real help as an incentive to greater devotion. I love the colourful turn of phrase and find the comments interesting although I believe some explanations go too far and are perhaps a little fanciful. (Eg to say that the the first letters of the inscription on the cross in Hebrew/Aramaic are the letters for the name of God is a bit of a stretch) But any reading of Scripture must be done with discernment and sound judgment.

When did we start playing God? God can, will, and has used ordinary people since the beginning of time to so sad the Good News of the Gospel by personal testimony of transformation in lives. There are countless people who have NO access the the written word who clearly have been transformed by the message of God's only Son, the Cross, and the blood. The Bible was never intended to make man more knowledgeable, it was written to transform us into the image of Christ. We know them by their fruit … I happen to love the Passion Translation and there is NO doubt in my heart or mind that the KING OF ALL KINGS has used it to help me know Him better.

I believe Simmons fell into the same trap as Taze Russell and Joseph Smith. Both were deceived by Satan. But we should use the same rule of thumb as we did with Russell's Translation with how he changed John 1:1 saying the word was "a" God. Simmon's changed John 14:16 by saying " I will pray to the father and he will send you another saviour" . Another Savior!! There is only 1 Savior and that's Yeshua(Jesus). That alone should be enough to throw this book out. There are other versus's here did the same. We have enough translations. We don't need any more. Thank you Alisa for revealing the truth about this translation. God Bless you

Here is a comparison of the Passion rendering of the Scriptures with four Bible translations/versions. There is clearly a difference on verse 13 chapter 1 of the book of John where the Passion which is not a transalation or parphrase states a different thing than the others which is an important verse, in which it refers to Jesus in the Passion yet it refers to born again believers and sons of God in the four versions, how did scholars and other folks who were supposed to help with the Passion rendering could make this mistake https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=john+1%3A12-13&version=TPT;KJV;AMP;ESV;NLT

I was initially attracted to this seeming translation because there is, literally, passion in it. I have some knowledge of Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek and I know that quite often a single English word fails to adequately capture the full meaning of the original. This translation addresses this frequently by providing fuller meanings. However, there are several other occasions where I find no basis for addition, subtraction or change. As such, I get the sense that Mr. Simmons may have let himself be carried away by his own imagination rather than being inspi