Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
yod said: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.
yod said:It was weirdness to me...
yod said:and an affront to the Israeli delegation he was stationed next to.
yod said:He acts like the High Priest and denies the deity of (the hebrew) Yeshua.
yod said:He doesn't talk about Jesus.
yod said:What else need I say?
Conqueror12 said:I've finished reading Nehemia Gordon's The Hebrew Yeshua vs. The Greek Jesus, and I am no scholar of Greek or Hebrew, so I can't comment from that viewpoint. But the way he explained why he thinks at least parts of Shem-Tov's Hebrew Matthew may possibly be from the original Hebrew and not translated from Greek or Latin made sense to me, especially when he explains the purpose of the main document to which it was appended.
Child of the Most High said: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.
Child of the Most High said:From Michael Rood's website.
Michael had me remove my kippa and tassels (which I would not otherwise have done), and we proceeded to the Pool. We had to pay the Palestinian gatekeeper to unlock the gate,
Child of the Most High said:At that same site that you referenced, there was an updated article about his tour.
If even half of the stuff reported is accurate, why would anyone go and see this guy?
Child of the Most High said: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 said: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.
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.
Child of the Most High said:It appears that Michael Rood is a shape shifter. First he was a Baptist minister, then he was Way International leadership, then he was born a gentile, then he was a rabbi, then he was a messianic karaite, then he was a Levite, then he was billed on his website as a Jewish theologian, while Sky Angel billed him as a Christian teacher and a biblical historian. WHEW. Now he is a textual scholar. Okee dokee.
Mikhail said:I have been a beleiver for nearly 19 years in 2 weeks actually, and just because others bill him differently does not mean anything. I have seen local churches say lot's of different things to promote a visiting speaker that at times makes the speakers blush with embarassment.
Mikhail said:The issue is; What does Michael beleive and preach now that site you mentioned has what the Reveleation calls spirit of the Akel Katzer a term for HaSatan that accuses the brethren.
Posted on his website in August 2002 was a description by him of an incident some time earlier when he had a sudden revelation from God of a "mistranslation" of a portion of the book of Zechariah. He goes to great pains in this article to explain the events surrounding this revelation
Now, I must remind you of the scenario. I am laying in bed on the Sabbath during the Feast of Tabernacles in Jerusalem. I am scribbling in the oversized margins of my freshly printed 8.5 X 11 inch paper, as I am translating this text without so much as a dictionary with me. I am seeing a picture develop that I had never entertained in the thirty years that I have been studying the prophet. I came to this verse, sat up in bed and shouted out, "This is not a woman this is a fire. This is not a woman in a basket this is a fire in a container." Going down a couple verses I said, "These are not two women, these are two fires."
Now, I know what a hare-brained idea is. I have had more than my share. But I saw something that did not come from my mind at that moment. I have had a few experiences in my life when I was given a revelation so clear that I can still tell you the day, hour and moment that it occurred. It is infrequent enough that each incident changed my life. This was one of those moments.
I took you through this chain of events so that you can judge for yourself the validity of what I am about to show you. The Word still goes forth from Zion.
There is no question that he is offering this material as validation that he has unique insight from God into matters separate from just "diligent Bible study."
The bottom line of this article was to "prove" that the passage regarding a "woman in a basket" in Zechariah had been mistranslated for centuries, and it really meant a "fire" in a "projectile." And he further interprets this to mean nuclear missiles being fired from Iraq on the modern nation of Israel an event which, at the time, he was predicting to occur soon
shmuel said:Many thanks to Child of the Most High for the excellent reseach. Thanks to one of the links provided, I found the references to Rood' Zecharyah prediction of which I previously wrote.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?