I have the german version of it. I never looked into it but now I took some time and looked into it and read the first few pages where Stern explains a few things which are absolutely astonishing and go against everything which I have heard before. If he is right then a lot of the things which we hear at our church are wrong! He says that the jewish new testament differs in some places from the other new testament translations and this has huge consequences. He answeres a few questions in his book such as: Has Jesus fulfilled the Torah? He says the greek word in Matthew 5:17 is "plerosia" which means to fill. But most translations translate it with fulfill. This leads them to the conclusion that Jesus fulfilled all prophecies of the Tenach, which relate to the Jews and that he also kept the whole Torah without any exceptions, so that nobody has to keep the laws of the Torah anymore. Then Stern goes on to say that this is a contradiction to what Jesus himself said because he said he came not to abolish the Torah. He says that the jewish translation doesn't translate "plerosia" with fulfill but rather with fill up, so that everybody knows exactly, what being obedient towards God requires. Stern goes on to say that this also fits together with the jewish tradition which says that when Jesus comes he'll explain the "dark" passages of the Torah and change them. Is the Messiah the end of the torah or her goal? Stern says that in nearly all translations Romans 10:4 is translated like this: "Christ is the end of the of the law, whoever believes in him is righteous." But Stern says that the greek "telos" means as much as purpose and not abolition. This means that the Messiah is not the end of the Torah. He says it's much more the way which the jewish new testament translates it which says that the goal of the Torah is the Messiah who offers righteousness to everyone who has faith. And then Stern says that this is also what Paul means in the passage from Romans 9:30-10,13. Stern also says that the new testament is a new torah! Another question which he answers is this one: Is the Torah legalistic? The greek phrase "erga nomou" and "hypo nomon" was used by Paul in Romans, Galatians and 1. Corinthians. It is usually translated with "works of the law" and this leads the reader to think that it the keeping of the Torah is to be avoided and that living according to the Torah is something negative. But the jewish new testament follows the interpretation of Cranfield and doesn't think that this phrase is related to the Torah but instead it's related to the legalistic distortion through the people. Because of this "erga nomou" is translated with "meticulous keeping of the laws of the Torah" and "hypo nomon" is translated with something like "in submission to the system which developes out of the distortion of the Torah which leads to legalism". From this the reader can conclude that any kind of legalism (christian,jewish or any other kind of legalism) is negative and that a life according to the Torah is good. What do you think about this? This stuff really confuses me. I mean what if he's right then huge parts of our theology are wrong because of having wrong bibles. Why should God allow this? This would mean that the ONLY correct new testament is the jewish new testament and unless you have this jewish new testament you can directly forget it. And what does this mean for us now? Does this mean that all the rules from the Torah are still valid and have to be kept? Does this mean that women are unclean for example during their days and mustn't touch anyone and that pork is still forbidden and that he have to follow all these hundreds of rules? I thought that Jesus had come to give us freedom but if Stern is correct then we're still bound to all these rules.