Michael Rood ~ A Rood Awakening

[Sephania]

Did Yeshua not himself say that in the end would come there would arise false Messiahs, and false prophets and shall show great signs and wonders so much that if it where possible the elect ( chosen) would be fooled?



I would love to see the Shem Tov Matthew 24 on that.

 

[Shimshon]

I saw him today at a conference in California and asked someone to tell me about him.

If you saw him why did you have to ask someone to tell you about him? Are the opinions in your post then based on second hand word of mouth, or actual on hand experiences? I would say my experiences are quite the opposite. I saw him just last week and witnessed nothing like what you claim here. And note, i'm not trying to defend this man. Anyone steps out on a limb foolishly when claiming things about scripture they know not. Like times and dates, and saying you have a NOW word of Elohim, or claiming things about someone that is not true. THAT is my reason for responding.

He's not jewish...but dresses like the High Priest everywhere he goes.

When I witnessed him last week he stated in the begining of the event quite openly that he did 'not' dress like this everywhere but only on his tours and during his events.

He does not believe in the deity of Yeshua.

From what I have learned he exposes the difference between the 'Greek' "Jesus" and the 'Hebrew' "Yeshua". Denying the validity of the commonly known "Jesus". And seems to witness the testimony from a Hebrew context. How is this is denying the deity of Yeshua? It's denying the understanding of the Christian "Jesus". Not Yeshua. When I saw him he quite openly and often proclaimed Yeshua. Just not in the typical Christian way.

 

[Shimshon]

What city did you see him in and how many people were there?

Portland Or. Double Tree Hotel Banquet Hall, standing room only, did not count would estimate 300 to 400? (ten chairs each side about 20 rows back would equal about 400.

 

[Child of the Most High]

I remember reading in one of Michael Rood's newsletters, a statement that went something like 'remember the Levite in your tithes'. Since Levitic heritage is passed on through the patrilineal line, and his name is Rood, not Levine, Levin, Lewan, Cohen, Kahan, etc, it is highly unlikely that he is a Levite or a Cohen. This coupled with the fact that he stated that he was not Jewish at one time. So when he dons 'the priestly garments' as stated in one article, what is he trying to imply? I believe that many Jews would be insulted by this behavior.

 

[Shimshon]

One does well to understand the difference between rabbinical, messianic, karaite, zionist Judaism. (if i've left out a sect please forgive)

Being from a certain tribe by heritage means nothing today. This would only be of consequence today for "Rabbinical" Jews who still see the blessing as coming through "physical" bloodlines. And still see the house of Levi as the qualified cohanim that Elohim works through. And if M. Rood is claiming to be from the tribe of Levi falsely expecting it to make him more 'righteous' in the sight of Elohim then he will have to deal with Elohim for that.

Yet, I do not understand it this way. The way of thinking is more along the lines that we are all cohanim now, all who are children of Elohim are a faithful cohanim to him. A KINGDOM of cohanim to the glory of Elohim. If you need Scriptural context I will provide it.

And YES this message IS an insult to most "Rabbinical" Jews, and Christians. It is foolishness to those who are perishing. He places the low in high places and brings the lofty down to the ground. Rabbinical Jews for the most part find Yeshua an insult, why would they find the True message any less insulting?

 

[Child of the Most High]

One does well to understand the difference between rabbinical, messianic, karaite, zionist Judaism. (if i've left out a sect please forgive)

I was referring to lineage as prescribed in the Torah, and not by the rules of any sect.

Being from a certain tribe by heritage means nothing today.

I agree, but if someone is trying to give themselves 'special' status as a Levite, then they had better follow the rules as stated by the Almighty.

This would only be of consequence today for "Rabbinical" Jews who still see the blessing as coming through "physical" bloodlines. And still see the house of Levi as the qualified cohanim that Elohim works through. And if M. Rood is claiming to be from the tribe of Levi falsely expecting it to make him more 'righteous' in the sight of Elohim then he will have to deal with Elohim for that.

Yet, I do not understand it this way. The way of thinking is more along the lines that we are all cohanim now, all who are children of Elohim are a faithful cohanim to him. A KINGDOM of cohanim to the glory of Elohim. If you need Scriptural context I will provide it.

And YES this message IS an insult to most "Rabbinical" Jews, and Christians. It is foolishness to those who are perishing. He places the low in high places and brings the lofty down to the ground. Rabbinical Jews for the most part find Yeshua an insult, why would they find the True message any less insulting?

I am not sure how this message would be insulting to Christians, but if a man speaks falsely about his heritage and status, why would he be trusted to deliver the truth in other areas? Was Michael Rood clear about the fact that he was displaying a middle ages Matthew, or was he promoting it as an original or a copy from a Hebrew original?

 

[Sephania]

Yod, was he dressed as the High Priest or just a Levitical Priest, because to me if it was the Cohen HaGadol, and it was not for a teaching on the Mishkan and Levitical priesthood, from that I would have to conclude that not only is he taking the place of one whose ancestry he doesn't have, but over Yeshua himself, for it is He and He alone who is standing in the Temple in Heaven and is our Cohen HaGadol, him alone who makes supplication before the throne for us.

We are priests in that we serve him, not out of lineage, but out of love.

 

[Shimshon]

I was referring to lineage as prescribed in the Torah, and not by the rules of any sect.

As was I;

The scepter will not pass from Y'hudah, nor the ruler's staff from between his legs, until he comes to whom [obedience] belongs; and it is he whom the peoples will obey.

35 I will raise up for myself a faithful cohen who will do what I want and what I intend. I will make his family faithful, and he will serve in the presence of my anointed one (HaMoshiach) forever. 36 Everyone left in your family (Mosaic covenant cohenim) will come, prostrate himself before him for a silver coin or a loaf of bread, and say, "Please, won't you give me some work as a cohen, so I can have a scrap of bread to eat?"

:68 he chose the tribe of Y'hudah, Mount Tziyon, which he loved. 69 He built his sanctuary like the heights; like the earth, he made it to last forever. 70 He chose David to be his servant, taking him from the sheep-yards; 71 from tending nursing ewes he brought him to shepherd Ya'akov his people, Isra'el his heritage. 72 With upright heart he shepherded them and guided them with skillful hands.

11

But when the Messiah appeared as cohen gadol of the good things that are happening already, then, through the greater and more perfect Tent which is not man-made (that is, it is not of this created world), 12 he entered the Holiest Place once and for all.

23Now this is how the copies of the heavenly things had to be purified, but the heavenly things themselves require better sacrifices than these. 24 For the Messiah has entered a Holiest Place which is not man-made and merely a copy of the true one, but into heaven itself, in order to appear now on our behalf in the very presence of God. 25 Further, he did not enter heaven to offer himself over and over again, like the cohen hagadol who enters the Holiest Place year after year with blood that is not his own; 26 for then he would have had to suffer death many times - from the founding of the universe on. But as it is, he has appeared once at the end of the ages in order to do away with sin through the sacrifice of himself. 27 Just as human beings have to die once, but after this comes judgment, 28 so also the Messiah, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, i will appear a second time, not to deal with sin, but to deliver those who are eagerly waiting for him.

Yeshua is our Cohen HaGadol. Why would we need men (Levi'im) to continue in this way when Elohim has provided the True way, the fulfilled way, the way it was ment to be. How can we live in the shadows when the light is upon us?

 

[Shimshon]

We are priests in that we serve him, not out of lineage, but out of love.

Bingo! Omein achoti

 

[Talmidah]

He's not jewish...but dresses like the High Priest everywhere he goes.

Dresses like the high priest? As in Temple days?

 

[Child of the Most High]

Shimshon,

What translation are you quoting from?

 

[Shimshon]

Shimshon,

What translation are you quoting from?

David Sterns "Complete Jewish Bible".

 

[Child of the Most High]

Yeshua is our Cohen HaGadol. Why would we need men (Levi'im) to continue in this way when Elohim has provided the True way, the fulfilled way, the way it was ment to be. How can we live in the shadows when the light is upon us?

You are preaching to the choir on this one. So, what was taught about the Hebrew Matthew?

 

[Shimshon]

So, what was taught about the Hebrew Matthew?

He seems to be a proponent of an original Hebrew Matthew. Yes, he claims the greek is mistranslated. Something I have come to believe within my own studies LONG before I ever even heard of this man. Probably long before this man started his ministry.

Here one teaching he gave that night.


1 This is the genealogy of Yeshua the Messiah, son of David, son of Avraham: 2

1) Avraham was the father of Yitz'chak,
2) Yitz'chak was the father of Ya`akov,
3) Ya`akov was the father of Y'hudah and his brothers,
4) Y'hudah was the father of Peretz and Zerach (their mother was Tamar),
5) Peretz was the father of Hetzron,
6) Hetzron was the father of Ram, 4
7) Ram was the father of `Amminadav,
8) `Amminadav was the father of Nachshon,
9) Nachshon was the father of Salmon, 5
10) Salmon was the father of Bo`az (his mother was Rachav),
11) Bo`az was the father of `Oved (his mother was Rut), 12) `Oved was the father of Yishai, 6
13) Yishai was the father of David the king.
14) David was the father of Shlomo (his mother was the wife of Uriyah), 7

1) David was the father of Shlomo 7
2) Shlomo was the father of Rechav`am,
3) Rechav`am was the father of Aviyah,
4) Aviyah was the father of Asa, 8
5) Asa was the father of Y'hoshafat,
6) Y'hoshafat was the father of Yoram,
7) Yoram was the father of `Uziyahu, 9
8) `Uziyahu was the father of Yotam,
9) Yotam was the father of Achaz,
10) Achaz was the father of Hizkiyahu, 10
11) Hizkiyahu was the father of M'nasheh,
12) M'nasheh was the father of Amon,
13) Amon was the father of Yoshiyahu, 11
14) Yoshiyahu was the father of Y'khanyahu and his brothers at the time of the Exile to Bavel.


12 After the Babylonian Exile,

1) Y'khanyahu was the father of Sh'altiel,
2) Sh'altiel was the father of Z'rubavel, 13
3) Z'rubavel was the father of Avihud,
4) Avihud was the father of Elyakim,
5) Elyakim was the father of `Azur, 14
6) Azur was the father of Tzadok,
7) Tzadok was the father of Yakhin,
8) Yakhin was the father of El'ichud, 15
9) El'ichud was the father of El`azar,
10) El`azar was the father of Mattan,
11) Mattan was the father of Ya`akov, 16
12) Ya`akov was the father of Yosef
13) (Yosef) the husband (Father) of Miryam,
(14) Miryam) from whom was born the Yeshua who was called the Messiah.

17 Thus there were fourteen generations from Avraham to David, fourteen generations from David to the Babylonian Exile, and fourteen generations from the Babylonian Exile to the Messiah.

The implication is the way the prior generations add up leaves the last group of 14 actually at 13. The red indicates the suposition. That Miryam was betrothed to a person with the same name has her father. Claiming that Yosef and Miryam can not be counted a "two" generations worth if Yosef was the "husband" of Miryam. And that the greek eroneously entered in "husband" because it made more sense to them. I've not heard this one before. On the front is seems plausible knowing the other misundestandings the greeks laid ontop of the Jewishness of the writings. Threading the eye of a needle with a camle is another. Quite understandable if you knew the context. Completely misunderstood by Grecko/Roman based Christianity.

This claim is based on the thought that if Yosef was Miryams husband, they would be from the same generation. Now look back at the geneology list. Every one but Yosef and Miryam are Father to Son. Yet this one is Father to Wife. No biggy, not fixating on the fact Yeshua came from a virgin woman. But on the fact that a Father to a Son is a generation, I understand that. But a Father to his Wife is not a generational differance. It's the same genation. Yosef 13 Miryam 13, had a 14th generation son? While all the rest show the Father having a Son (one gen) over and over till this one. This one is the Father having a wife (same gen) and then having a Son.

So if you play that out in context it would be

13) Yosef Father of Yeshua.
And the 14th generation is where?

What is proposed is

13)Yosef Father of Miryam
14)Miryam Mother of Yeshua

Again, I am not promoting this as FACT. I am witnessing the information given to me and others at the conference by M. Rood in regard to HIS belief. Do I agree? I have not studied this out fully and STILL reserve my opinion till I have. I sense it has merit, I also know it is to be discerned by the Ruach.

 

[Sephania]

makes sense that the one in Matthew would be Miriams as the one in Lukes says:

23 Yeshua was about thirty years old when he began his public ministry. It was supposed that he was a son of Yosef who was of Eli, 24 of Mattat, of Levi, of Malki, of Yannai, of Yosef, 25 of Mattityahu, of Amotz, of Nachum, of Hesli, of Naggai, 26 of Machat, of Mattityahu, of Shim`i, of Yosef, of Yodah, 27 of Yochanan, of Reisha, of Z'rubavel, of Sh'altiel, of Neri, 28 of Malki, of Addi, of Kosam, of Elmadan, of Er, 29 of Yeshua, of Eli`ezer, of Yoram, of Mattat, of Levi, 30 of Shim`on, of Y'hudah, of Yosef, of Yonam, of Elyakim, 31 of Mal'ah, of Manah, of Mattatah, of Natan, of David, 32 of Yishai, of `Oved, of Bo`az, of Salmon, of Nachshon, 33 of Amminadav, of Admin, of Arni, of Hetzron, of Peretz, of Y'hudah, 34 of Ya`akov, of Yitz'chak, of Avraham, of Terach, of Nachor, 35 of S'rug, of Re`u, of Peleg, of `Ever, of Shelah, 36 of Keinan, of Arpakhshad, of Shem, of Noach, of Lemekh, 37 of Metushelach, of Hanokh, of Yered, of Mahalal'el, of Keinan, 38 of Enosh, of Shet, of Adam, of God.

Son of David through Nathan, not Shlomo

 

[Shimshon]

Son of David through Nathan, not Shlomo

Exactly Zayit This was my understanding as well. And one I hold to. I was taken back by this supposed 'mistranslation' of "Father/Husband" but that is because it never occured to me nor had I ever heard of it. But the accounting of the generations does seem askew Scripturally when in reference to Yeshua's birth. I agree that it appears to only add up to 13. I've noticed this before. But I had not come to this conclusion. Probably because I've not studied Hebrew Matthew till recently. Though i've been learning something was askew in the greek translations for some time.

 

[Child of the Most High]

He seems to be a proponent of an original Hebrew Matthew. Yes, he claims the greek is mistranslated. Something I have come to believe within my own studies LONG before I ever even heard of this man. Probably long before this man started his ministry.

First observation, is Michael Rood a Greek scholar? The answer is no, nor is he a Hebrew scholar, so what does he base his understanding on? Nehemiah is a Hebrew scholar, but knows little about the NT and is not a believer. Credentialed scholars emphatically state that the Shem Tob Matthew is copied from a Latin vorlage. This Latin was copied from the Greek, making it a third or fourth generation copy.

And that the greek eroneously entered in "husband" because it made more sense to them. I've not heard this one before. On the front is seems plausible knowing the other misundestandings the greeks laid ontop of the Jewishness of the writings. Threading the eye of a needle with a camle is another. Quite understandable if you knew the context. Completely misunderstood by Grecko/Roman based Christianity.

The eye of the needle theory is quite easy to disprove using the Peshitta's other renderings as as a proof example.

Again, I am not promoting this as FACT. I am witnessing the information given to me and others at the conference by M. Rood in regard to HIS belief. Do I agree? I have not studied this out fully and STILL reserve my opinion till I have. I sense it has merit, I also know it is to be discerned by the Ruach.

Let me say this Shimshon. The Jehovah's witnesses, the Way International, and other fringe groups hold the same beliefs on texts that Michael Rood is presenting. This is really nothing new. I would recommend that you study this one out before making a decision.

There was an interesting discussion about the Shem Tob Matthew and the Michael Rood tour and teachings on another forum. I will try and get you the links.

 

[Child of the Most High]

There are two or three messianic forums that are discussing this. Here is one, and I will try to post the others. The discussion starts about half way down the page.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Messianic_Apologetic/messages/9071

 

[Shimshon]

First observation, is Michael Rood a Greek scholar? The answer is no, nor is he a Hebrew scholar, so what does he base his understanding on?

Ruach HaKodesh maybe? I notice you place the opinion of men "scholars" over a persons inward conviction by the Ruach. I do not hold to doctrines of men over the Ruach that has been given me by Elohim to teach me and lead me in all Truth in anyway. If scholars agree with the Ruach in me, all well and good. If not, it is between THEM and Elohim and Me and Elohim, not between Them and Me.

Nehemiah is a Hebrew scholar, but knows little about the NT and is not a believer.

What he knows of the NT is not for me to say. Yes, I know he is a Karaite. Yet it was clarified that his place in Michaels events is to bring a 'rabbinical' side to the table. He claims to be from a LONG line of Levi'im. So i would imagine he knows the "Rabbinical" way of his fathers. And what a testimony for this Jew to work with a Messianic in his endevors, no? Are we not striving for unity among "bretheren" here ? Or is this only for certain bretheren?

Credentialed scholars emphatically state that the Shem Tob Matthew is copied from a Latin vorlage. This Latin was copied from the Greek, making it a third or fourth generation copy.

Again, Credible to whom? Those to who he paid to get his credentials? And those who agree with said institutions? The only Credible source I know is Adonai Elohim Tzvaot and the Ruach HaKodesh he gave his followers. Many claim to espouse his will and words, but few seem to live up to them.

The eye of the needle theory is quite easy to disprove using the Peshitta's other renderings as as a proof example.

You can find numerous takes on everything imaginable today. What does that prove?

Let me say this Shimshon. The Jehovah's witnesses, the Way International, and other fringe groups hold the same beliefs on texts that Michael Rood is presenting. This is really nothing new.

Yes, and these sects hold similar views to Western Christianity also. Nothing new....agreed.

I would recommend that you study this one out before making a decision.

Agreed and has been mentioned numerous times by me in this thread.

There was an interesting discussion about the Shem Tob Matthew and the Michael Rood tour and teachings on another forum. I will try and get you the links.

Always enjoy adding another comentary to the pile. No person should go unheard. Till they prove they are not caring if you hear.

 

[yod]

If you saw him why did you have to ask someone to tell you about him? Are the opinions in your post then based on second hand word of mouth, or actual on hand experiences?

He was set up right next to the (real) Israelis booth and I didn't want to give any appearance of being associated with him...so I talked to someone that I know and trust who has had first hand experience with him.

The conversation Mr Rood had with him was of such a base and vulgar nature that I can not post the words he used in a public forum.

When I witnessed him last week he stated in the begining of the event quite openly that he did 'not' dress like this everywhere but only on his tours and during his events.

He probably doesn't go to Wal-Mart like that...but every time he goes in public representing "believers", he is dressed like that. It was weirdness to me...and an affront to the Israeli delegation he was stationed next to.

How is this is denying the deity of Yeshua?

He acts like the High Priest and denies the deity of (the hebrew) Yeshua. He doesn't talk about Jesus.

What else need I say?