Review-Tree of Life Bible  (comments on the GNM strictly apply to the new edition which is not yet published, yet for most features the current published edition is the same).

     1. TLB renders "Lord" instead of "Adŏnai" for Yēshŭ`a. While I might have rendered Lŏrd in GNM, I feel enough people know Adŏnai or may learn it quickly.
     1.1 TLB avoids the divine name "Yăhwēh" (GNM) and uses ADONAI. The excuse given is that Jews would be offended because of their traditional ban on saying the divine name. Bowing to "tradition" is the reason why we have so many false translations. Coupled with the failure to use Adŏnai with Yēshŭ`a, the TLB undermines the deity of Mĕssiah.
     1.2 Uses the word "God" instead of a translation of Elŏhim ("Almĭghty" GNM) or "Elŏhim." This fails to translate Elŏhim corrrectly.
     1.3 Fails to mark any sacred name or title as GNM does: Yăhwēh, Almĭghty, Adŏnai, Yēshŭ`a, Făther, Sŏn, Spĭrit, Mĕssiah. The original texts marked all the names and titles of Elŏhim. Scholars call these markings nomina sacra. Modern Jews do this by writing G-d, L-rd. I do this by using an inverted breve, ă, ĕ,  ĭ, ŏ, ŭ. The marking shows that the name belongs to Elŏhim, and that Hebrew may be substituted. TLB missed an opportunity to preserve markings showing the deity of Mĕssiah and the Spĭrit.
     2. Places "Yeshua" in italic. This means italics do not have their standard use to indicate interpolations of the translators. Italics should be reserved for marking non-trivial interpolations or interpretations. TLB says that they use italics for transliterations of Hebrew words. GNM does a more accurate job of transliteration i.e. "Yēshŭ`a" vs. "Yeshua."  The vowel is marked long "ē" and the ayin is indicated /`/.  A special font is used in GNM for the ayin.
     3. Inserts unnnecessary Hebrew phrases, i.e. "olam ha-zeh" and "olam ha-ba" instead of translating them "this age" and "the age to come." This problem of mixing languages has plagued Messianic Bibles for a long time. Hebrew is great, but only if you know it, and it is a hinderance if you don't.  Most Hebrew words can be adequately translated. A big problem is also that many Hebrew terms have modern meanings different from their BH meanings or with different conotations from their BH meanings. The term olam is a perfect case of this. In BH it tended to have the meaning "time immemorial" but by the time of the Apostolics writings it acquired additional senses of "world" and "age"; using Hebrew in place of a good English translation, is therefore a missed opportunity to let the English reader know the differences. One has to really realy know BH, MH and the differences to benefit. And that excludes most Israeli readers also.
     4. Translates "believe" instead of "trustingly faithful" (GNM). This is an EPIC failure, and a step down even from the CJB. In John 1:7, the TLB has "might believe." GNM has "might become trustingly faithful" and CJB has "put his trust in God and be faithful to him."  The TLB is therefore an EPIC failure right where it counts most.
     5. The translators persist in the false label "New Covenant" for the Apostolic Writings.
     6. The translators failed to translate the word "synagogue", a word of Greek origin which means a "congregational meeting place." In GNM I translate it "congregation."  "Assembly" is used for Church.
     7. The failure to translate Elŏhim correctly shows up in John 1:2, "And the Word was  God" (TLB) instead of "And the Word was Almĭghty" (GNM). The original word is attributive, i.e. used as an adjective as the best Greek scholars will readily tell you.
     8. Romans 10:4, TLB, "For Messiah is the goal of the Torah as a means to righteousness for everyone who keeps trusting" vs. GNM "For Mĕssiah is the end of the norm for justice to everyone trustingly faithful." The translators show that they do not understand Paul's use of nomos, nor even Paul's point. Paul is saying the normal penalty does not apply to the faithful. While the mistranslation makes a valid point, it is not Paul's point.
     9. The TLB opposes the righteousness of the Torah to the righteousness of faith, viz. "For Moses writes about the righteousness that is based on Torah, 'The man who does these things shall live by them.' But the righteousness based on faith speaks in this way:"  The GNM has "For, Moshēh writes about the righteousness which is from the Law, in that, “the one who does them will live by them,” 6 namely—which righteousness, from faithfulness is speaking in this way:"  The failure was that the TLB translators interpreted the conjunction as contrastive rather than explanatory. This is due to 1. remaining anti-torah theology, 2. incompetence, 3. failure to realize that doing the Torah IS faithfulness. Also noted is the failure to correctly translate emunah (pistis) as "faithfulness." This is an EPIC failure and puts the TLB nearly on the same plain as other English translations.
      10. A huge mistake of the translators is the "Shared Heritage Bible" wherein the TLV is combined with the JPS version for the Torah and Prophets. They advertise "The Shared Heritage Bible is the authentic Jewish Publication Society Tanakh combined with the Tree of Life New Covenant in one binding. It is two translations making one Bible." They would have done better to combine it with the King James Version, because the JPS bible was done by unfaithful Jews who utterly reject Mĕssiah Yēshŭ`a! This rejection shows up up all over the JPS version, in Genesis 3:15; Isa. 7:14; Isa. 9:6; Zech. 12:10. See also JPS Isa. 53:10; Psa. 2:12; Psa. 22:16. Dan. 9:25-26. Sometimes the JPS is more literal, but they should have fixed all these problems before including it because it is sharing a heritage that corrupts Messianic Prophecies. The texts listed are certainly not ALL the prophecy problems, but they are mistranslations of the KEY texts that rise to the top of discussion with Jews. The user of the TLV-JPS will therefore be defenseless at these points.