Personal Finance PowerPoint Presentation, Variable Anuity. Prepare to get financially fit by practicing personal finance. Most of this information can be found at Investopedia Variable Anuity, which you can find online. Take a look at the references, resources, continue your research from there. This is by Akhilesh Ganti, updated April 30th, 2021. In prior presentations, we've been talking about insurance in general, then moving to the life insurance. Now we're looking at different kinds of annuities and within the context of that discussion, we're asking the question, what is a variable annuity? A variable annuity is a type of annuity contract, the value of which can vary based on the performance of an underlying portfolio of sub accounts. So an annuity, if you just think about the term annuity, it's basically a series of payments. When you're looking at an annuity as an investment, we're typically putting money into possibly in a lump sum or multiple payments into the investment, possibly with an insurance company. Hopefully that investment will grow. And then at some point, we're gonna get a series of payments in the future, possibly as part of our retirement plan or strategy. So oftentimes we're trying to get a series of payments that are gonna be somewhat dependable, which is why you wanna think about, usually with an annuity, the standard or baseline annuity to compare with would be the fixed annuity, which has more fixed components to it. And then look at some of the other kinds of annuities, such as a variable annuity. And we're typically looking at the ability of the annuity to kind of grow, which might have an impact on the amount of the payouts as well. With a fixed annuity, you got more of the portion that will have a fixed component to it with a variable annuity. As we can see here, we're gonna be tying it to the performance of an underlying portfolio, which gives us more potential exposure to gains if the market goes up, but it also, of course, the market could go down, which would possibly have a negative impact. So we could have less returns than we would have gotten in that case compared to like a fixed annuity would be the kind of idea. So sub-accounts and mutual funds are conceptually identical, but sub-accounts don't have ticker symbols that investors can easily type into a fund tracker for research purposes. Among annuities, variable annuities differ from fixed annuities, which provide a specific and guaranteed return. So that's why oftentimes when people think about annuities, you think about the fixed annuity first, because you might be working the annuity into your retirement contract and trying to have something that you could basically be very dependent upon. When you get to a variable annuities and you're basing the annuity on fluctuations in the market, that could be good because there could be a good outcome in the market, but you also have the risk involved, which could have a downside. So that's how you wanna balance those out when you're doing retirement planning. So understanding variable annuities, there are two elements that contribute to the value of a variable annuity. The principal, which is the amount of money you pay into the annuity and the returns that our annuities underline investment deliver on the principal over the course of time. So when you put the money into the annuity, like a lump sum, for example, into the annuity, that's like the principal that you're gonna be putting into it. It's gonna then be growing at some point and hopefully it's gonna be growing in this annuity because it's variable growing in alignment to some tying to market conditions or stocks that are picked a portfolio. The most popular type of variable annuity is a deferred annuity, often used for retirement planning purposes. It is meant to provide a regular, monthly, quarterly, annual income stream, starting at some point in the future. There are also immediate annuities which begin paying income right away. So usually when you set up an annuity, it would be nice if you could do it a little bit in advance so that you could put money into the annuity before the annuity starts paying out to you, meaning you're doing the investment side of things. You could, however, put money into an immediate annuity. So if you have a lump sum amount of money, you put it into the annuity and you start receiving the payments immediately, possibly hoping that in so doing, you could stretch that retirement nest egg out a bit by making an annuity from it. You could buy an annuity with either a lump sum or a series of payments and the accounts value will grow accordingly. And in the case of deferred annuities, this is often referred to as the accumulation phase. So the money is growing when you're putting money in and it's accumulating upward hopefully as it grows and you put money into it. The second phase is triggered when the annuity owner asks the insurer to start the flow of income, often referred to as the phase out phase. So now we're phasing out the annuity. Now you're not growing it. You're saying, I wanna take the money out of it, start paying me the money in annuity payments, poor, five or most annuities will not allow you to withdraw additional funds from the account once the payment phase has begun. So you can't really generally take the money out. That's one of the problems with the annuity because the point is that you've got the money in the annuity. You told the insurance company it's gonna be locked in there. What the insurance company is gonna do is they're gonna try to determine how much they're going to be earning on the money that you have locked in there and how much of that money they're gonna be paying you in accordance with whatever contract has been set up, which is a little bit more confusing because it's variable, but you can't get access to the money as easily as you could if you just had it in stocks and bonds for example, because that's the point of it being in the annuity. So variable annuities should be considered long-term investments due to the limitations on withdrawals. So you can't, if there's an emergency, you can't as easily just say, ah, just give me my money back in the annuity. If you had it just in the stock market, you could do that. But if you had it in the stock market, you also might have more exposures to losses if the stock market went down substantially. So typically they allow a withdrawal of each year during the accumulation phase. However, if you take a withdrawal during the contract's surrender period, which can be as long as 15 years, you'll generally have to pay a surrender fee. That's not good as with most retirement account options withdrawals before age 59 and a half will result in a 10% penalty. That's because you possibly got a tax advantage by putting the money into an annuity. So the IRS is trying to have you save for retirement if you took the money out before 59 and a half. They're saying you didn't save for retirement with it. So we're gonna penalize you for taking the tax advantage that we gave you and that's kind of the downside, of course, of that tax advantage component. So variable annuities versus fixed annuities. The fixed annuities is the one that you probably wanna keep as your baseline and then look at these more exotic kind of annuities from there. So the variable annuities were introduced in the 1950s as an alternative to fixed annuities which offer a guaranteed but often low payout during the annualization phase. The exception is the fixed income annuity which has a moderate to high payout that rises as the annuity tent ages. Variable annuities give buyers a chance to benefit from raising markets by investing in a menu of mutual funds offered by the insurer. The upside was the possibility of higher returns during the accumulation phase and a larger income during the phase out phase. So that's what they're trying to get little exposure to the market but of course the market could go up, they could go down. The downside was that the buyer was exposed to market risk which could result in losses. So that's, you know, you're giving up a little bit of a security on that and so you gotta weigh your pros and cons when you got your retirement planning. With a fixed annuity by contrast, the insurance company assumes the risk of delivering whatever return it has promised. Variable annuity advantages and disadvantages and deciding whether to put money into a variable annuity versus some other type of investment. It's worth weighing these pros and cons. Let's give pros on the pros side of things, tax deferred growth, income stream tailored to your needs, guaranteed death benefit on the con and then funds off limit to creditors on the con side of things. We've got the riskier than fixed annuities, surrender fees and penalties for early withdrawal and you could have some high fees for it in comparison to other possibly types of annuities and possibly if you just put money of course into just the stock market in an index fund, then you're typically gonna have less fees than you would with the insurance company with the variable annuity advantages. Number one, variable annuities grow tax deferred so you don't have to pay taxes on any investment gains until you begin receiving income or make a withdrawal. So that's similar to an IRA or 401K plan where the earnings could be deferred in taxes when you pull the money out then it might be subject to tax at that point in time. This is also true for retirement accounts such as traditional IRAs and 401Ks of course. Number two, you can tailor the income stream to suit your needs. I'm gonna tailor it to suit my jacket.  So that's nice. It's kind of like a life insurance component in there as well. Although again, once you have these kind of overlaps on insurance and annuities and you're trying to invest in one thing that covers multiple kind of angles that's actually a little bit confusing because of what you would like to do most likely is put your investments and buy the thing you're trying to buy. That's like the straightforward way to do it. If I'm buying life insurance, I wanna buy life insurance. If I'm buying retirement savings stuff, I wanna buy retirement saving stuff. So the overlap can be a little bit confusing sometimes. Number four, the funds in an annuity are off limits to creditors and other debt collectors. This is also generally true of retirement plans. Disadvantages, number one, variable annuities are riskier than fixed annuities because the underlying investment may lose value, which isn't good. Number two, if you need to withdraw money from the account because of a financial emergency, you may face surrender fees. So it's not as easy to pull the money out. If you put the money in somewhere else it might be a little bit easier to pull the money out if you put it into like just stocks and bonds. If you put it under the umbrella of an IRA, then you also have some restrictions to it to just take the money out early as well because that's kind of a point of putting it into some kind of account that's gonna have a tax advantage thing. The IRS is saying you can't take it out until you retire. But even when you're taking the money out here, you're gonna get it in a stream of annuity payments, which again, could be kind of restrictive. You can't just pull all the money out generally. So any withdrawals you make prior to age 59 and a half may also be just 10% tax penalty. So number three, the fees on variable annuities can be quite hefty. So what's the bottom line in all this? Why don't you just get to the bottom of it? Before buying a variable annuity, investors should carefully read the prospectus to try to understand the expenses, risks and formulas for calculating investment gains or losses. Annuities are complicated products so that may be easier said than done. So obviously when you're looking at a contract like this, different lot of different variables in mind. So bear in mind that between the numerous fees such as investment management fees, mortality fees and administration fees and charges for any additional riders, a variable annuities expenses can quickly add up. That can adversely affect your returns over the long term compared with other types of investments. So other types of investments for retirement planning could be things like of course an IRA, a 401K plan. So you wanna keep your tax advantaged options in mind doing the appropriate comparing and contrasting and see what fits in for your particular needs.


Here are 7 of the best Christmas Day performances from the last 20 years. First of all I want to wish everybody a Merry Christmas and a wonderful holiday. I also wanted to mention that about 3 years ago Dom2k made a very similar video but I thought that in the past 3 years we've seen some pretty heated Christmas Day battles that deserve to be mentioned in a video so this is a little bit different. There's a lot of matchups that happened recently that obviously weren't in his video and these are from the last 20 years. But if you would like to watch Dom's video I'll leave a link to that in the description box down below. But without further ado, if you enjoy these types of videos be sure to subscribe if you're new to the channel for more NBA content every single week. If you want to leave a like that would be very much appreciated. Let's say for Gary 2000 likes for the next video. Keep in mind these are not in any particular order and there are obviously so many Christmas Day games that will be left out so let me know your favourite Christmas Day performance in the comment section down below and let's get it started. 2018, Kyrie Irving 40 points and an overtime win. This to me is an underrated and recent Christmas Day game that had everything. A dominant player, a clutch sequence, a hype crowd and for many it's a recent memory. Kyrie Irving in the clutch is the best version of Kyrie but when you combine clutch and Christmas Kyrie is just different and this won't be the only time Kyrie makes an appearance on this list. We've seen him deliver on Christmas Day as good as Santa but in 2018 the Celtics point guard took it to another level from start to finish. He only had two seasons with the Celtics but when it's Kyrie it will always be memorable. And in 2018 just last season it was two of the best teams from the east battling it out. As Philly went to Boston in a rematch from opening night and by half time the 76ers looked strong but Kyrie finished the first half with 23 of their 57 first half points. He kept it up in the third quarter and when the Celtics needed a hero in the fourth he answered the call. Sending the game into overtime with his clutch basket. With one of the greatest offenders in the game in Jimmy Butler draped all over him. Kyrie put on his Superman cape and took over late. He finished the game with 40 points, 10 rebounds, 3 assists and his second 40 point performance of the season and the highest scoring Celtic on Christmas Day since Tommy Heinz since 45 in 1961. He showed us why he's one of the clutch players in the league and he gave the fans a show. Number 6 2013 Golden State vs Los Angeles Clippers If you're looking for the beginning of a rivalry between the Clippers and the Warriors I would say that this game lit the fire. This is part of the early stages of the bad blood between the Warriors and the Clippers. Not only did they have the controversy and the fighting the game itself was actually a very good game only one shot in it. This is before the Golden State Warriors became a dynasty and when the Clippers were seen as a likely team that could eventually reach the conference finals and possibly even the NBA finals if they could piece it all together at the right time. But as we all know that didn't eventuate. The game was tested from the start and got worse at the end of the third quarter when Blake Griffin had to be restrained by teammates following a heated exchange with Dreymon Green. Griffin received a technical and Dreymon was ejected for a flagrant foul too after throwing an elbow. But then Blake Griffin was ejected later after receiving two technical fouls. As for the game it was back and forth and then late in the game Chris Paul missed a layup that could have tied the game in the final seconds. Then to end it off the teams continued to exchange words and had to be separated after the game. Mark Jackson said we liked them. Merry Christmas. Number 5 2003 Tracer McGrady vs LeBron James Once again we have two crazy performances by individual players a rookie LeBron James dropping 34 points and a Tracer McGrady who wasn't injured dropping 41 but it was the actual game that was also very intense. It went to overtime and it also had the talent. Yeah this was LeBron James in 2003 and obviously that's his rookie season but you wouldn't know that by watching him. He was terrific in his NBA Christmas debut and he wasn't even a top player of the game. Tracer McGrady who averaged an NBA best 43.3 points per game on Christmas Day lit up LeBron and the Cavaliers for 41 points to pull off a win in overtime and spoil LeBron's first Christmas outing. Keep in mind this is one of the few occasions where we got to witness a healthy McGrady go ahead with another soon to be dominant player in the league. This performance came just one year after McGrady dropped 46 points on the Detroit Pistons in a Christmas Day game in 2002. McGrady went to lead the league in scoring in the 2003 season averaging 32.1 points per game and he dominated 2003 as a whole. Just as he did on Christmas Day getting the win in overtime and putting up some clutch shots. Number 4, 2010 LeBron James triple double and trash talk vs Kobe Bryant and the Los Angeles Lakers. We normally don't see LeBron James trash talk and I made a video on LeBron James and his little amount of trash talk in the past and I spoke about this moment here where he and Kobe Bryant got into it. So if you want to watch that I'll leave a link in the description. But in this moment it was also Christmas and it was also 2010 meaning that this was LeBron James and the Miami Heat's first Christmas Day game together. The Lakers before the 2010 season were seen as unstoppable. They had just come off an NBA championship they had made it to multiple NBA finals but the Miami Heat with their big three show why they were so superior to any other team in the league and why NBA fans really didn't like them because they really were that good. It was a season filled with hatred by the NBA world against LeBron James and the Miami Heat and they were out to spoil everyone's party as Kobe was trying to do to the Miami Heat on Christmas Day but it was LeBron James who put on the show on Christmas. He gave the Heat 27 points, 11 rebounds and 10 steals which were good enough to give the Miami Heat a comfortable win over Kobe and the Lakers. He also joined Oscar Robertson, John Havelichek and Billy Cunningham as the only place in NBA history to record a triple double on Christmas Day and this was before the days where we had Rusty Westbrook and Luca Donta getting triple doubles every single week. It was pretty rare to get a triple double in the league in 2010 but since then we've seen Rusty Westbrook and Draymond Green who would both eventually get triple doubles and join that list of players. Number three, 2008. The Los Angeles Lakers defeating the Boston Celtics in an NBA finals rematch. This was their first meeting since the Celtics defeated the Los Angeles Lakers in the 2008 NBA finals. Finally the Lakers would get their revenge by beating Boston and their 19 game winning streak on Christmas Day. Kobe obviously led the way with 27 points for the Lakers and the Celtics could not overcome their horrible shooting especially Ray Allen who went 3-11 from beyond the arc. The game was also significant because it had Phil Jackson winning his 1,000th NBA game and becoming the fastest NBA coach to reach that milestone. But what goes unnoticed is power of yourselves clutch performance during this game. He scored 7 points in the final 3 minutes to keep the Celtics out of it. Number two, 2004. The Lakers versus the Heat. This game meant so much in so many aspects. It's borderline impossible to top this Christmas Day game. You had Shaq and Kobe finally meeting each other for the first time since Shaq's departure from LA. You had the Heat looking like a finals contender with a dominant Shaq and a Dwayne Wade who was young but definitely eager to show the league what he could do. You had the media all in a frenzy about what would happen between Shaq and Kobe. Shaq not acknowledging Kobe. Shaq and his end of the game interview against Kobe. It had it all. Not to mention the game was insane as well. The Heat would get the win against the Lakers in overtime by 2 points. It was Dwayne Wade who led the Heat with 29 points and obviously Kobe Bryant who led the Lakers with 42 points but it wasn't really about the game obviously like I said before. It was about Shaq, his first game in Los Angeles after being traded to the Heat and if you weren't alive to see the game or you don't remember the game, this is what happened. Shaq found out late in the fourth quarter committing his 6th foul against his former teammate Kobe Bryant and obviously that was pretty significant. Then after the game, Shaq offered his explanation of what happened. He goes no layups, no dunks, especially for him. He also went on to say this. What are you thinking? I knew that it wasn't going to go in. That's all we wanted to do is come here and win. We're not trying to score 50 or 60 points trying to outdo anybody. We just want to play good team ball. In the end, Shaq also did his work. He dropped 24 points on 11 of 19, 11 rebounds, 3 blocks and 3 assists but yeah, it was Kobe Bryant. 42 points, 6 assists, 3 rebounds and he nearly hit a game winner but in the end it was the Miami Heat who got the win. The 2016 Warriors vs Cleveland Cavaliers. Like we started on this video, we're going to end on this video with Kyrie Irving. Another clutch performance by Kyrie and this was the most watched game on Christmas Day ever and for a good reason. It lived up to what everybody wanted it to. We saw old man Richard Jefferson fly once again like he used to even at 36 years old. His dark over Clay Thompson in the fourth quarter sparked a 14-3 run by the Cleveland Cavaliers and the Cavaliers did just what they did in the finals a year prior. They came back and got a clutch win. In the end, they completed a 14th point fourth quarter comeback against the Golden State Warriors with Kevin Durant, Steph and Kyrie Clay Thompson and Draymond Green, an insane team but an even better game. Kyrie hit a turnaround jumper over Clay Thompson's incredible defense with 3.4 seconds left as the Cleveland Cavaliers rallied just the way they did in Drew's NBA finals to defeat the Golden State Warriors 109-108 and it was even more high than Kevin Durant and we saw him get knocked down or tripped but he had the chance to take that game winner and he missed. He finished with a monster 36 points though but in the end, Cleveland got the win and it was one of the best games I have ever seen. So let me know what you think the best Christmas day game was in the last 20 years. If you enjoyed the video, I'd greatly appreciate it if you could drop a like to support the channel. Let's see if we reach a thousand likes for the next video. Subscribe if you're new for weekly NBA content and I really, really hope you have a wonderful and enjoyable Christmas. That said, it's been your brother Smith. I am out. Peace.


Sorry, good morning everyone. And welcome back to the class today. Up here at a good break and you're awake. So we're going to quickly respond to the questions in the chat. And then we will move forward. I have done the recording on for this lecture. Okay, so we say this question, we responded. Okay, the next question is from Kennedy. Are there things that Jesus did that are not written in the Bible? Yeah, Kennedy. So the answer is yes. And this is of course stated by John for us in John chapter 20 and also in John chapter 21. John 20 versus 1331 in John chapter 21 verse 25. John stated that there are things Jesus did, that there's so many miracles that he did. That's not possible to record all of those miracles. But remember, these are miracles that was in his earthly ministry, not things about his childhood, right? So when you have some people recording things about his childhood, that's just fiction because the Bible clearly states, he started his ministry after being baptized in the River Jordan. And when John says there are many other things Jesus did, he's referring to the healing's miracles during his actual time of ministry. That is after he began his ministry, not as a child. So we can't use John 20 and 21, the descriptors in John 20 and John 21 bring up so-called supposed miracles that Jesus did as a child and so on. So we can't use that, okay? Let's see the next question is, Kennedy can. Why are the Maccabees writing not recognized and yet the two books contain worthy values? Yeah, so Kennedy, like we were mentioning, in the intertestamental period, which is about 450 years, there were a lot of other writings. So like the book of the Maccabees and a lot of other things that were written, but these were not considered as part of the Hebrew Bible because the Hebrews recognized Malachi as the last prophet, Abdullatam, doesn't mean they were not expecting any others. But in fact, they were expecting the prophet, Moses spoke about to come. It was not that they were not open, they were open. But for them, first criteria is for something to be considered valid to be included as part of the scriptures, it had to come from a prophet of God. It had to be inspired. And so while a lot of writings did take place, which we refer to as the apocrypha, or some of them are in refer to as apocrypha, they are not from a prophet. They're not from somebody who's inspired by God. They are the works of man. So Maccabees and other books that form the apocrypha and other books have written the intertestament period. A lot of literary works happen. They're good, they're virtuous, they are stories of people, et cetera. But they're not from a inspired person. So that's what they're not included in the Hebrew Bible as scriptures. Okay, because that is an important criteria. Okay, next question, Samuel. Is there value in indulging in books such as these, say a book written by Apostle Thomas, may have seen India and that's never gotten to him. These books can choose or even derail the levers. You know, okay, so there are people who do read it or read whatever books are there outside of the scriptures. And just to try to understand what was happening historically, what was happening. So, you know, whether it's, there are a lot of other literature during that time, during the early church. And there are people who like to read it because they want to know the history, they want to know what else was happening going on. So from that perspective, if somebody has the time and the interest, yeah. But if you're looking for something to grow spiritually, to develop your faith, to nurture yourself, and I would say, you know, let's stay with the 66 books of the Bible. They are meant for our faith and nurturing our faith. But if somebody has the time and the interest to read outside, that's fine. It just has more of information. Some people do that. Some people do read in order to know, you know, what was going on during those times, both during the inter-testamental period and in the early church, the first 400 years thereafter. So, you know, if people have the time and interest, they're welcome to do it. But if it's about faith, about strengthening your faith, then I, you know, we stay with the 66 books. Is that okay? Any other questions? Pastor? Yes, go ahead. This question just came to my mind. What do you think was the busiest to allow songs or songs to enter the collection of the Old Testament? Hmm. Because I understand that, yes, it's like a figurative description of God's love to the church. But I just wondered in a way, all the other books, you know, they seem so serious. Then here you come to the songs and songs. It's more romantic, you know, and everything about, but what do you think must have been the busiest? Why the people, the early people, the community have chosen that to be part of the holy books. Right. That's interesting. So, again, we have to try to get into, you know, we are looking back in time, trying to get into the mind of the Jewish people at that time. And I can think of just two reasons. One is that it was given, I mean, it was Solomon, a man who they knew, inspired, I mean, given wisdom by God. Secondly, it spoke something about human love, which is not something, you know, that God's people are averse to. Now, it's part of who we are, it's part of what God has given to us and made us. And in the Jewish community, there is a respect for women. There is a respect for, there's an honoring of human love and there's a respect for women. So I can think of these two reasons. One, because of who was behind it. So Solomon, a man, endowed with wisdom from God. Second, because of the respect for both human love and for this human relationship, this dynamic, which is held sacred. And so, you know, it's not something to be disdained or held, you know, be averse to. No, this is honorable knowing that God designed all of this. So it was still considered as part of the Hebrew Bible. Thank you, Pastor. Welcome. Anybody else, any other question? Okay, so let's move on. I'm actually a little behind of what I wanted to do. I was hoping to finish everything in the first hour. I think I was a little too ambitious. Anyway, let's try to answer the second question here. The next question is about English versions of the English Bible, et cetera, okay? Now, some of this we dealt with in our course on Permanutics in our previous semester. Yeah, in our second semester. So you may recognize some of the things that I'm saying here that why are there so many, so the question what we are trying to answer is why, what is the different? Why are there many English versions of the Bible? So somebody, and we'll be able to look at it from an apologetics point of view.  And some of it may be even seemingly, contradict three, look at, you know, they can put two or three script versions aside and the same versus telling something quite different. So, you know, they can laugh at us and say, what's going on here? You know, which one is the authentic one? You know, so therefore they can work backwards and say therefore your original text is corrupt, but that's not the case. What we do know, like we already said last class and I'm not going to go over the details again, is that we have a substantial amount of manuscripts for us to be very confident about the original text. And also in the translation process are people, these scholars, the people are doing the translation, people who know the Hebrew and the Greek and the, the aramik that's needed and who are going to work with this, they, they refer to, you know, certain, they have categorized these manuscripts. One is referred to as the majority text, and then there is the division of text based on the date and also the region of the world that they come from. So because the texts were found in various parts of the world, right? And so then they choose to, which family of texts do they want to use?  And so, you know, some may do a comparison all of this and then they draw. So whichever Bible you buy, the Bible in the beginning of the Bible, they will tell you, hey, we have used these texts to translate or we have used a combination of these texts. And then we have indicated in the, in the, you know, in the footnote or in the margin or in the middle column, what, you know, what is found or what is not found in the texts that be used, et cetera. So, you know, usually every Bible will tell you what set of texts they're translating from. But the reason, the philosophy or the reason behind us having so many translations and versions of the English Bible is this, it's very basic. So, and this is something we did see last semester. I'm just quickly reviewing. So there are translations that are word for word. And that means if that word is found in the original text that they're using, they will put that, you know, equivalent word or sometimes it may require a few words in English to translate that. So that's called form equivalence, the word for word, in King James, New American standard, so on. Then there is a part for part. That means we will communicate the original thought into English thought, you know, in the same thought in English language. It's called functional equivalence. Now, when they're doing thought for thought, obviously they are doing a little bit of, not just translation, but they're also doing a little bit of interpretation for us, right? So they're saying, this is what we think the writer was thinking. And so this is how we should be thinking about it in the English language. So it's not just translation, but there's a little bit of interpretation also coming in, little bit. It's a thought for thought, right? Of course, the translator's not trying to fool anybody or translators are German people. They are trying to do their best, okay? Then there is a combination of word for word and thought for thought. That is referred to as an optimal equivalence, okay? So somebody say, let's try to find a balance between word for word and thought for thought. And so you have some versions like that. And then there is the essential equivalence, which is meaning for meaning. So we're going away from word for word, thought for thought, and now we're saying meaning for meaning. What we think he meant, we're going to tell you in the English language. So meaning for meaning. And this usually happens when you do interpretors, when you speak through interpreters. The interpreter's not doing a word for word, when you're speaking, let's say I'm speaking Hindi and I'm preaching to a crowd that understands Hindi and I'm preaching in Hindi and somebody's interpreting for me from English to Hindi. That person is not going to do a word for word. He's not going to do a thought for thought. Most likely he's going to be working meaning for meaning. He's going to take the meaning of what I said and put that into Hindi language and communicate it to the audience. Now I've had situations where, you know, this happened while I was preaching. The interpreter started telling his own story. He has created his own story because he felt he can communicate the meaning of what I'm saying by a story. So the story was nowhere in anything that I was saying, right? But he developed a own story and he was using that story to communicate the meaning of what I was saying. So it's like, it's not exactly what I'm saying, but the goal, his goal was, let me communicate the meaning. And so he's developing own story and he's telling the people. And I didn't understand until a long after I said, he's speaking a lot more than I'm speaking. Then I realized, oh, this is what he's doing. He's made up his own story and through his story, he's getting the meaning across. Anyway, his intent was good, he was sincere. So, you know, that's a big part. So there's a meaning for meaning translation, right? So they're trying to, again, so they're doing an interpretation of it, okay? So this is called an essential equivalent. So the passion translation, which is getting popular these days is that, right? And then there's a paraphrase. So paraphrase is, it's way beyond thought for thought or meaning for meaning. It's more like, okay, let's start to tell it to you as a story. Let's put it out to you in a way that you will enjoy reading it. We can't necessarily call it a translation, but it has, you know, in story form, in essence, what was communicated in text, but some people may at least start reading the paraphrase.  So if this is on the left-hand side, you're saying, okay, this is closest to the text. And then you have, you know, as they're moving forward, you're going from word for word, thought for thought, meaning for meaning, and then paraphrase. So you'll find the closest, of course, is the interlinear. That means it's a Bible that has the Hebrew words or the Greek words. And top of the each word is the English word. So that's an interlinear Bible. It's, of course, very difficult to read because it doesn't come out in proper English sentence. It's just exact word for word. But then you'll find, okay, see in a New American Standard Bible, the Amplified Bible, the English Standard Version, the Revised Standard Version. Then you have the King James and New King James, which are word for word. They kind of come in this category, and they are pretty close to the original, right?  And then you begin to transition into what is thought for thought, right? So you have the HCSB, the Holmen, the New Revised, the New American Jerusalem Bible, the NIV somewhere here. A lot of people use the NIV, but you're somewhere kind of quite away. They've done some interpretation for you already. And then you have the New Living Translation is kind of here, on the edge of thought for thought, getting ready to move into paraphrase. Then of course, when you go into the paraphrase, you have the Good News Translation of Good News Bible, Contemporary English Version, The Big Bible, Message Bible. So the Message Bible is like really on the other end of the spectrum, but it's close to the audience, meaning make it easy for people. So if somebody asks the question, hey, why do you have so many different versions of the Bible, you explain it like this, right? Look, if I'm speaking to you, and let's say you know Russian, I know English, I'm gonna use an interpreter to help me communicate to you. The interpreter can communicate what I'm saying to you in many different ways. The goal is for you to understand what I'm saying. So the interpreter can do a word for word, every word, he can write it and translate it and tell it to you, or he can communicate the part of what I'm saying, or he can do a meaning of what I'm saying, or he can paraphrase, summarize, give you a gist of what I'm saying. So the interpreter can do it. The goal is to help you understand and get you to help you get the most important things that are being said. And so that is why we have many of these different versions and translations of the Bible and they all serve a purpose. Ultimately, we have different kinds of readers. Not all the readers will be able to, of course, handle a King James or a new King James, or some readers may prefer a paraphrase. Some readers, depending on where they want to start, they may prefer something. And so the reason we have many different versions is to make the Bible more accessible to people. Now, of course, in the process, there's going to be a lot of difference, just like how an interpreter trying to explain something to somebody in Russian, if he's giving you a gist of what I'm saying, that what you read or what you hear in the gist of what I've said will be very different from an interpreter who is trying to communicate meaning for meaning or thought for thought or word for word. Now, so you might question the gist, but that was just a gist, just a paraphrase, just a summary of what was being said. They will not have all the details, they will not have all the specifics, but it's the essence of what was communicated. So yes, things may look very different. And also, when it's communicated in modern English, it may be very different from how it was communicated in, you know, let's say a King James version or old English format and so on. So we explain it that way to help people understand, okay? And there's just a list of versions and so on. Okay, let me just wrap this up, then we'll take questions and then if everybody's happy, we will move to the next lesson. Hopefully we'll get it started. So just to sum up, you know, what we've talked about the Bible was amazing is the unity of the scriptures. The unity of the scriptures is not something that is forced but by man, but something that is inspired by God. So although we understand that, you know, there was this, a community process in the assimilation of the Old Testament or the New Testament books, you can't force unity, you know? You can't force that coherence. It has to be inspired. The fact is, if it was just a natural human process, the likelihood is it's going to be very divergent.  There's going to be a lot of contradictions, a lot of distortions, a lot of their own parts. But because there has been one source of divine inspiration, it is consistent, it's coherent, and it's not forced by man. Man only played the role of collecting it and putting it all together and preserving it over time, but the unity was inspired by God. Second, we also find it's historical and archaeological accuracy that means you don't find things in the Bible that can be disproven by archaeology or history, secular history. No, it's there, it's valid. Then, of course, the scriptures have fulfilled prophecy, hundreds of prophecies have been fulfilled, which is very amazing because that again, cannot be forced. Nobody's going back and writing something, you know, 3,000 years, 2,000 years ahead, nobody's doing that. They've just been collecting it and then over time, you're seeing the prophecies being fulfilled. So that is another amazing part of the scripture. And some of the things we have mentioned is it's indestructibility. Many have attempted to destroy it, but it has survived through time. And interestingly, even the Old Testament is pointing to a Messiah. It's pointing to the coming of Jesus Christ. And we also see that the teachings are powerful and it may not always be what is popular, but yet it's timeless. And it has life-transforming, power lives of millions of people have been changed through the reading of the scripture. So the scriptures themselves are not just good philosophy or good content that you read and you like it, but it's something that changes lives, transforms lives. So it's powerful. All right, and so here's just a quote here. I think it's from, this is from the Gideon's Bible that you'll find that's really very, very well written here in the last paragraph. Okay, so I'm going to pause here. Let's take some questions and then we will move to the next. Okay, let's see now. Okay, there's a question from Christopher. Is thought for thought quite similar to meaning for meaning? The translation indicating the thought of the author which incense translates to meaning. Is there a different process in how these approaches are used? Yeah, so the thought for thought, so let me just put it like this. So in meaning, I am actually doing a little bit more interpretation than in just communicating the thoughts. I'm doing it for, of course, the benefit of the reader, right? So a thought is, okay, this is what is captured. Meaning also puts in or brings into bear, bear the context and the relevance to the author for the modern day reader. So what is stated must be understood in the context, but it also must be interpreted or made relevant for the modern day reader. So meaning has a lot more interpretive process around the translation as opposed to a thought for thought translation. So a lot more interpretation is being done for the benefit of the modern reader. Okay, go ahead, please. Samuel. Thank you, master. I don't know if we are going to cover this in this, but the whole process of how the 66 books were put together, so just a little bit on that, like meaning was it done by, we'd say like the church and some people did like, but like, did it happen over the course of time? Like, you know, was it like a 10 year project or a five year project or was it at like one shot? Like they said, and they put the 66 books together. So just a little bit on that, I've heard a couple of preachers saying that, you know, the 66 books were already being used by the churches, churches in that early period is just nobody had taken the time to put them together, but it's not that somebody sat and filtered and said like, okay, these books fit, but it was like the letters of Paul, most churches were already using it and it's just, it came together and it was like the Bible itself imposing itself on the church. So that there's that part of the argument, which to me changes my perspective a little bit, saying like, it was not people deciding the Bible, what Bible should be, but the Bible itself imposing. So that's a team of thought. And also if, you know, a little bit more specifics on who put it together and how long did it take if we know something around that? Yeah, so like what we have said, right? It was, I think part of what you've spoken basically is the answer, which is over time, you know, the 39 books were already recognized as scripture. The early church continued with that, you know, as we explained. And then by the time John wrote 8090, he wrote the book of Revelation. We had the New Testament scriptures at the writings of the apostles and so on, we had it. And so when we cross over into the second century, the church already recognized and used the Old Testament scriptures, 39 books that we have, and the 27 New Testament scriptures. So they were using it right from the beginning of the second century, as we explained, just that they never called it the Holy Bible or they didn't put it together the way we have it, right? So they continued using it. But it was only, like we mentioned, around 376, 80, around that time, 370, when a lot of the different councils of Christian leaders began to officially refer to the New Testament. And of course, the Old Testament was already there, but to officially recognize it and formally say, this is our scriptures. And then Jerome translated the Bible, meaning the scriptures, the Hebrew, the Old and the New Testament. He translated it into Latin for us. So by that time, they had recognized, this is the scriptures by which we live by. And I think, so it's safe to say that by 370, 80, we had the Bible, as we know it. But it was not in one single council that they sat down and said, okay, here we announce, this is the Bible. No, but I think like what you already stated, it happened over time and these councils, towards the end of the third century or the fourth century, they formally recognized what was already accepted by the church by that time. They formally recognized it. So it was more of a formal recognition as opposed to making an official document by that time. And it happened, the interesting thing is, it happened more or less simultaneously by different councils around that part of the world, the Mediterranean, who said, okay, these are the scriptures. We're formally going forward with it, but it had already been followed for about 250 years prior to that in an quote unquote, informal way. So yeah, Charles, as a farmer of the different versions, to the basis for the loss of verses in some versions that are put as footnotes. So Charles, yeah, the answer to your question is, the use of the manuscripts and also how the translators would go about doing the translation. So the translators decide how, okay, we're using these manuscripts and we will translate from here. And if we find something, you know, missing, we will put it as a footnote here. The King James says, we will put everything together. That means whatever we find, we'll put it together. And some will say, okay, we are using these set of manuscripts. If there's something missing, we will indicate it in a footnote. So that's how they go about it. When did the worst thing start from the scroll and does it affect to change the Bible meaning or wording in the Bible? Interesting. So we clifted his translation around 1300 something, 13, what's the date there? I forget, I know somewhere in 1331 or something. Now I don't know, Kennedy, exactly when the worst thing started, but I'm assuming it must have been around that time or maybe even from the time of Jerome, which was around 370. Yeah, I don't know exactly when it started, Kennedy. The worst thing, we'll have to find out. And does it change the meaning or wording of the Bible? I don't think it would change the meaning. They were trying to be, also keep the flow of thought. So that's what you'll find in the way it's translated. An indication of a start of a paragraph and so on. So even in doing the work, just they tried to follow the flow of thought. Okay, I just realized that Mangi was supposed to do a little presentation for us today. Sorry, I forgot about it in the very beginning. I just suddenly came to my mind. Is Mangi here on the call today? Oh, Mangi's there.  Hello, Mangi. I think he must have given up. So this is Mangi. Are you there? Oh, Mangi, do you want to do your presentation? I completely forgot. And then suddenly it just came back to my mind. Well, at this moment, that you are supposed to do your presentation. If you're ready, we'd love to hear from you. Okay, awesome. So I'll give the presentation now. Okay, go ahead. Okay, so to start, I did some research and yeah, it is, there are a lot of evidence that supports that Koran cannot be the way of God. To start with, Koran was only written 150 years after Muhammad was alive, was lived. So that means any of the people who wrote Koran they never met Muhammad. And some of them were lived a thousand kilometers away from where Muhammad lived. And each one of those people wrote his own version of Koran. So there are around 20 or 30 versions of Koran that I recognize as Koran. And each set of Islam and countries, they choose which one that they'll adopt to use for the unfaith. So that's the first evidence. Secondly, my not. If you want to share this screen or something, please feel free to do it. I wrote it down on paper. That's okay. Okay, so that was the first one. If we compare it to the Bible or the New Testament, we say most New Testament texts were written by people who either knew Jesus personally, like Matthew or Peter or people walk with apostles like Mark and Luke. So Koran, first of all, was only written 150 years after Muhammad was dead. And all those people with Muhammad, most of them died in power struggles because they wanted to satsit Muhammad. So after a year or two years, they'll be killed so that someone else can take their position. And there's no evidence that supports Muhammad's claim that he was inspired when he wrote Koran. Because it's only a story that he speaks himself if you compare it to the Bible, where God didn't only give the revelation to one person, the revelation of the Bible given to the Bible over 40 people. For example, the Old Testament was given in a period of more than 1,500 years. And all those, even though it was given to different people, all their topics and all their writing points to the same message and the same author. Compared to the Koran, it's only one person who claimed that the word was revealed to him by God, but it doesn't have evidence to show that God gave him the word. And those who came out of time, most of them, they just added their own words to what they believed that Muhammad said because they never met him. And it was words of the mouth they worked with him. Thank you so much. I'll share the text in the stream, the evidence. Okay. Good job. Thank you, Maggie, for making the effort to research and share with us, we really appreciate it. Thank you. Okay. All right, one last question, then we'll go for a break. Now, why does Kennedy say Maggie, my son-in-law? I don't understand that. Anyway, Avni, his question is, is the Ministry of Apologetics a particular calling a matter of one's interest? Or is it for everyone in ministry to be ready with these answers? How do we understand this? Because we do not see many apologetics around the world. I think it's, especially for us, who are engaged. And this is just my opinion. Especially those of us who are living in urban centers, where people are asking questions, thinking through on many of these things. We need to be ready to answer, at least provide an answer, may not get into all the technicalities of things, but provide a reasonably acceptable answer on various questions. If we are out in the village, areas where people are not, they don't necessarily think and ask these kinds of questions. For them, they just, you pray, you see a miracle, you'll believe, it's okay in those contexts, maybe we don't need to be prepared with such answers on these kinds of questions because the audience may not be thinking along those lines. So for them, it's okay. But for those of us, and many of us, will be engaged in cities and in a post-modern world where people are thinking on these lines, they're having a lot of thoughts going on, a lot of information coming. They will definitely ask these questions and so we need to be prepared. And my answer is, I think all of us, as believers, whether we are in quote unquote, standing up in front and preaching, just as believers we should know for our own benefit and for being able to help other people. All right, again, we've run our time. Sorry about that, but let's close in prayer and then we will dismiss. All right, so let me request somebody to close in prayer. Anybody, please jump in, take a moment to say thanks to the Lord. Let's pray. Go ahead Charles. Father God, we are really thankful that you are continuing to teach us. We are called for this, that we are supposed to learn your word and we are able to understand it and having such teachings, they will help us to understand on how to rightly divide the word of truth. Thank you, Lord, for our pastor. Thank you for all of us that were in this call. Lord, we pray that we'll be able to internalize them, understand them and be able to apply them for a fruitful living. Thank you. For in Jesus name we pray. Amen. Amen. Thank you. Thank you everyone for patient listening. Take a quick break. I'll see you in the other class. God bless. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.


Hey guys it's Tilly and I haven't done this in a long time because I haven't known reading very much but I'm really getting into the mood again so let's just give it another shot. You guys can pick my TBR, I've done this before and it's worked really really well but as a small recap basically what I'm going to do is show you the books that I have at the top of my TBR, I will then comment the titles individually down below and you can either like or dislike them to bump them further up or down on my list. So at the end of the month the top voted ones will be my next month's TBR and the lovest ones will either be at the bottom of the pile or not read at all. So let's get started, you guys can pick for me, I'm currently reading The Lies of Loc Lamora by Scott Lynch, I then have one workbook to read and the rest is up to you guys. First up we've got They Both Die At The End by Adam Silvera, I actually haven't read anything by Adam Silvera yet, I do own a couple of his books but this is his most recent one and I actually really really love the premises of this book.  Eleanor Oliphant is completely fine by Gayle Honeyman, this book has basically just like taken over, it is a bestseller and it's continuously selling at my work and everyone is basically raving about it and so I picked it up and thought hey maybe I should give it a shot. So Eleanor Oliphant leads a simple life, she wears the same clothes to work every day, eats the same meal deal for lunch every day and buys the same two bottles of vodka to drink every weekend. I hate vodka so I'm not sure how I feel about that. Eleanor Oliphant is happy, nothing is missing from her carefully timetabled existence except sometimes everything. Doesn't really give much away but everyone absolutely loves it so maybe I will. With all the craze of To All The Boys I've Loved Before by Jenny Han. I thought that maybe I should finish reading the trilogy with The Last Book Always and Forever Lara Jean. I have read the first two and I did really enjoy them but you know what it's like when like you wait so long for the third book that when it finally comes out you kind of like forget about the other books? Well that's kind of what I've done but I do really really want to read this. City of Lies by Sam Hawke. I actually really haven't read it for a long time but the size of it puts me off as well but it sounds like it's gonna be really really good. So this will get have a young man and he is basically the poison taster for the prince who is the next to be heir on the throne and when the king is killed he now has to step up his game to not only protect the new heir to the throne but also to find out who did originally kill the king because he was killed with poison that no one had ever seen before. Plus I've been really digging fantasy at the moment so it could be something that I would want to read. The Song of Achilles by Madeleine Miller. This one is like a ancient mythology based book following Achilles and it sounds like it's going to be one that's really really good. I've heard Madeleine Miller has fantastic writing skills. She also wrote Cersei which is also my TBR but I've heard a lot more better things about The Song of Achilles and it's probably everyone's favorite compared to Cersei although Cersei is still just as amazing apparently but yeah it sounds promising. Snow Falling by Jane Gloriano Villanueva. This is from Jane the Virgin and it's just going to be like a romance novel so I'm pretty keen to read that I guess. And lastly should I just reread The Book Thief by Marcus Zuzak. I really want to read a book that I know I'm going to love and of course I love The Book Thief so maybe I should just read that. So guys please go down below into the comments and pick my TBR for me and I really really appreciate it and um oh yeah I'll do a video telling you guys which ones I'm going to read if I have read them. Thank you guys for watching thank you guys for voting and hopefully you guys have a lovely bookish day and I'll see you guys again soon. Surprise surprise I bought more books. Did you guys really expect anything different from me?


A loyal audience is like a cheat code. It makes everything else you do easier. If you want to start a new business, you can go back to your existing audience and tell them more about that. And I'm sure a big portion of those people would want to sign up to your new thing. And if you want to start selling, let's say you have informational products or online courses, you want to start selling maybe merchandise. You can easily go to your audience and do that. So having an audience long-term is like a cheat code for anything that you want to do in your life or business.


Hello and welcome to the session in which we will review a CPA exam simulation that's part of the financial accounting and reporting exam. My strategy for CPA exam simulation is to take a look first at what type of a simulation is this. It take you five seconds. If I look at it, we're looking at journal entries because there are usually five types of simulation. Journal entries, computation, drop down, research and document review. Well, this looks like a journal entry, that's fine. Let's move on. Now, we want to know now, what is the topic of the simulation? Is it one topic or is it more than a topic? Because it could give you a simulation with many topics or just one topic. So let's go ahead and start this simulation. The JRM granted its employee 1,000 shares of stocks on January 1st. On the grand date, the fair value of each share was $36. Once you read the statement, your brain should be going toward share-based compensation. The shares cliff vested at the end of the three year and no forfeiture are expected. Well, we're gonna expense those shares over three years. Management expect that all shares will vest because the staff performance indicate a successful three-year period. Dirtelinas don't worry about any forfeiture, just they're all gonna vest. The fair value of the stock on the following dates were $39 a year, one 45 a year, two 48 a year, three. This is obviously estimated. For each of the following situation, prepare the information for the appropriate journal entry for year two. Okay, including the tax effect. Before we proceed any further, I have a public announcement about my company, farhatlectures.com. Farhat accounting lectures is a supplemental educational tool that's gonna help you with your CPA exam preparation as well as your accounting courses. My CPA material is aligned with your CPA review course such as Becker, Roger, Wiley, Gleam, Miles. My accounting courses are aligned with your accounting courses broken down by chapter and topics. My resources consist of lectures, multiple choice questions, true-false questions, as well as exercises. Go ahead, start your free trial today. Excellent. So here's what you are being asked. Prepare the journal entry to record the appropriate expense for the share-based compensation year two. It is a share-based compensation. Excellent. What am I dealing with here? I'm dealing with one million shares of stock. So the company granted one million shares of stock. Make sure to use the calculator on the exam day, one million shares. What is my expense? What's the expense of the company? Well, the fair value at the grand date is $36. I'm gonna multiply this by $36. The total compensation expense for this company is 36 million. Now, remember, expense will have to be spread over what period? Three-year period. They're telling us it's three-year period. Therefore, I'm gonna divide this by three and every year I'm going to expense $12 million. So year one, I will expense $12 million. Year two, I will expense $12 million. How do I expense this? I'm gonna debit compensation expense or compensation cost. Now, what I need to tell you here, if you are not familiar with share-based compensation, this is what I do at farhatlectures.com. I teach you share-based compensation. So you need to know how to do this. What do you credit? Well, what do you credit? Are you paying cash? Well, if you are paying cash, that's easy. You're not paying cash. All what the company did, think about it, they declared it. They declared the stock compensation. So you cannot credit cash yet. What do you credit? Well, what can you credit? You are going actually to credit additional paid and capital. So notice. Here's what I want you to notice as well. You are debiting an expense. You are crediting capital. So they might even ask, what is the effect on equity? The effect on equity is zero because compensation expense will do what? Compensation expense will increase your expenses which reduces your equity. Then you credited additional paid and capital which will increase your equity. Equity goes up, equity goes down. The net effect is zero. And I make sure I debit and credit 12 million. So this is the entry that I make year one, year two, and year three, okay? So that's the first entry. Now the second entry that they're asking us to do has prepared the journal entry to record the tax effect in year two, assuming a 20% tax rate. So notice now, as I told you, it was about shared-based compensation, which is true. But notice this question is not really about shared-based compensation. This question is really about the third taxes because they're asking us to record the tax effect. Now what is the tax effect? What is the tax effect? Let's see, here's what I want you to see. Year one, we're gonna debit an expense, credit APIC for 12 million. We did this for year one, we did this for year two. So this is year one and this is year two entry. So we're dealing with year two. So here's what happened in year two. In year two, for financial accounting purposes, for GAAP, what we did is we have an expense of 12 million. Right, we debited an expense of 12 million. For IRS, no expense now. We don't have an expense now because the IRS, if you did not pay for the expense, you cannot book this expense. You cannot book this expense. Eventually, the company will have to expense this stock option, but down the road. So what's gonna happen is this. We have a future expense of 12 million. This future expense will give us a the third tax asset of how much? Well, it's 12 million times, we are told the tax rate is 20%. So if we take 12 million times 20%, times 20%, we're gonna have a the third tax asset of 2.4 million. In other words, in the future, we are going to have an expense. And once we enjoy, once we recognize this expense for IRS, we're gonna have 12.4 million. So what do I do? Well, I debit my third tax asset. Now, again here, it doesn't matter. What the simulation is about is, do you know you're the third tax asset, the third tax liability? Because I can ask you, I can take this information and tell you, give me the third tax asset or the third tax liability for this transaction. Well, here they're giving it to you in a form of a journal entry. I will debit the third tax asset and I will credit what's the corresponding credit the third tax benefits. So I'm gonna have a benefit in the future and what's the amount? 2.4 million, okay? And that's that. And I'm done with this simulation. So notice, there is no exhibits here. Nothing's unusual. You can see the same information in a multiple choice except you are seeing it in a simulation. So let's review real quick. One, it's a journal entry simulation. Good, two, topics covered. The first thing is shared based compensation plus the tax effect. Well, really the third tax asset, the third tax liability. You know those two topics inside out and how do you know it? Far have lectures. This is what I pride myself on. I pride myself on teaching you the material.  Because really, you may not see the same simulation but you might see the same concept. If you know the topics, you can take care of it. Once again, I'm gonna ask you to check out Farhad Lectures for additional resources, study hard for your exam. Good luck and of course, stay safe.