A REVIEW OF “A ROOD
AWAKENING” AND “RAIDERS OF THE LOST BOOK” BY MICHAEL ROOD
Written by Dr. John P. Juedes
Michael Rood
completed his “A Rood Awakening” teaching tour in many cities of
the United States in summer 2005. The five and a half hour
seminars were based on an extensive PowerPoint slide show, with
live narration by Rood and his companion Nehemia Gordon. The
seminar closely follows the material found on Rood’s DVD
Raiders of
the Lost Book. Rood is clearly thrilled that
Sky Angel
aired some of his programs since 2004, and he credits this for
greatly increasing his following and attendance at seminars.
This review
outlines the content of the seminar as presented in August 2005
in California and evaluates parts of it. About 70 attended this
seminar at a hotel, which Rood called a small crowd.
The core themes of
the seminar are: 1) Michael Rood has information on the Biblical
texts which cannot be found anywhere except in him, 2) Jesus
Christ (Y’shua Messiah) commanded his followers to obey the
Torah (the written law of Moses) but not the traditions of the
Pharisees (the oral law), 3) Christians who follow Y’shua must
absolutely obey all the laws of the Torah, and 4) the Christian
church at large does not follow Rood’s teachings or command
people to obey the Torah so does not know the Gospel or do God’s
will.
The bulk of the
seminar is a detailed explanation of how the traditions of the
Pharisees (also called the oral law or the Talmud, as practiced
by Orthodox Jews today) differ from the written law of Moses.
Rood cajoles people to stay for the “punch line” at the very end
(around midnight, a very long five hours after the start)-- the
command that all believers in Y’shua (Jesus) obey all the laws
of Moses. He doesn’t have time at that late hour to detail how
or what laws to obey, but sells books by other publishers that
detail how to obey the Sabbath, kosher dietary laws, and Hebrew
festivals such as Passover.
Oddly, most
participants seem pretty excited about giving up the freedom of
the Christian faith and pledging to obey a complex package of
very restrictive laws.
WHAT’S MISSING?
Before describing
what is included in the seminar, it may be helpful to note what
is NOT in the seminar, because this is very revealing. Three
things are virtually nonexistent in A Rood Awakening (ARA)/
Raiders of the Lost Book: 1) Y’shua (Jesus) as Savior and Lord,
2) Redemption of Y’shua (Jesus) as the completely effective
means of salvation, and 3) all the epistles of the New
Testament. Since most all the participants of ARA would describe
themselves as Christians, it is shocking to see how little they
realize this huge gap.
Y’shua (Jesus) is
mentioned frequently enough. But most of the time it is
in the context of novelties rather than of substance and
core beliefs. The things Rood says about substantial
beliefs about Y’shua are very troubling.
Y’shua/Jesus is
often mentioned in the long segment on the genealogies recorded
in Matthew and Luke. Rood takes this teaching page by page from
V.P. Wierwille’s book Jesus Christ our Promised Seed,
though he never acknowledges his source and leaves listeners
with the impression he personally “discovered” that Matthew
lists Mary’s genealogy. This is not surprising, since Rood was a
top level leader for over 15 years in the cult Wierwille founded
called The Way International. This is a novelty because it is
not a core teaching that has a bearing on salvation (and in the
end it is unprovable).
Another novelty is
Gordon’s lengthy criticism of all who pronounce the Savior’s
name as “Jesus” rather than the more Hebrew pronunciation “Y’shua.”
While some variation of “Y’shua” is closer to Hebrew than to
Greek it again is not a core faith issue. Plus, there aren’t any
recordings of how “Y’shua” was pronounced in the first century
and it is likely that it was pronounced various ways in Israel
in the first century, since people in the high priest’s
courtyard in Jerusalem had no trouble noticing Peter’s Galilean
accent.
“Y’shua” is
pronounced slightly differently all over the world, and over the
35 centuries it has been in use as a name. Rood’s insistence on
spelling “Jesus” with a Y instead of a J doesn’t translate well
to other languages. The letter J is pronounced like a Y in
languages such as German and Spanish, while other languages
don’t have a letter Y, nor a “Y” sound. nor even a phonetic
alphabet at all.
MESSIAH OR CHRIST?
Gordon and Rood
also condemn calling Y’shua “Christ.” Rood declared, “Greeks
called all their gods christos,” so Christ must not be used as a
title for the Messiah. This is completely false, both from the
standpoint of language and from Biblical usage. First, the
Apostle John himself used both words when he wrote, “(Andrew
said,) we have found the Messiah, that is the Christ” (John
1:42), and “The woman said, ‘I know that Messiah, called Christ,
is coming” (John 4:24). John considered “Christ” and “Messiah”
to be synonymous.
Furthermore, the
Greeks never used the word “Christ” for their gods, or in any
sacred context, or as any kind of title of honor at all. The
verb form of the word meant “to rub lightly, spread.” It was
used for spreading oil after a bath, poison on arrows,
whitewash, paint or cosmetics. The Dictionary of New
Testament Theology Vol. 2 (from which this information is
taken) adds, “It is anything but an expression of honor. Where
it refers to people, it even tends towards the disrespectful”
(pp. 334-335). For example, the compound word neochristos
meant “newly whitewashed.” The Greeks certainly did not choose
to use the word for the Hebrew Messiah– nor did the Christians.
It was the Hebrews
who chose to use the word “Christ(os)” and “Messiah”
interchangeably. The Hebrews themselves translated the Old
Testament into Greek in about 150 B.C. in what is now called the
Septuagint, or LXX for short. (LXX is the Roman numerals for
“70,” which indicates their belief that 70 men translated the
Torah, Writings and Prophets into Greek.) The Hebrews say that
the High Priest himself chose 72 elders from Judea who were
experienced in the law, beliefs and customs of the Torah and
were able to translate from Hebrew to Greek (which means they
were fluent in both languages). Throughout the LXX, “Christ” is
used for the Anointed One, such as in Psalm 2:2.
Adding “s” to the
end of Christ (or Messiah) was necessary when the words were
used by Greek speakers. Nouns in Greek (and some other
languages, but not English) must be “declinable.” That means
that the last couple letters of the noun change with how they
are used in the sentence. When “Christ” or “Messiah” is used as
the subject, it is spelled with an “s” at the end (e.g.:
Messias). When the noun is used as a genitive (as in
“followers of Messiah”) it is spelled with a “u” at the end
(e.g.: Christou). English shortens it to the root,
“Christ,” because English doesn’t decline nouns. Regardless of
exactly how different languages spell it- as Messias, Messiah,
Mashiyach, Christ, Christos, Y’shua, Yeshua, Jesus,” etc, it is
the same name or title. (Rood himself has used a variety of
spellings of names for Messiah and YHWH, some not matching the
spellings Gordon uses.)
The Hebrew world
chose to use the word “Christ,” not the Greeks This translation
was widely in use among Hebrews in the first century, so many
Jews called the Messiah “Christ.” Both Hebrew and Gentile
followers of Y’shua drew their faith vocabulary and thought from
the bilingual Hebrew world, not from the Gentile Greek world.
Gordon and Rood
also condemn using the word “Lord” for YHWH (often spelled
Yahweh). But the Hebrews, not Christians, introduced this word
in the LXX just as it did “Christ.” The LXX uses “Lord” (Greek-
kurios) for YHWH and “God” for Elohim (eg: Genesis 3:14,
Exodus 3:14)..
But in the end, it
is not an important issue whether people pronounce his name
Y’shua Messiah or Jesus Christ, because He answers to either
when spoken in faith. (This article uses both spellings
interchangeably.)
However, since
Gordon continually contrasts what he calls “the Greek Jesus”
from “the Hebrew Y’shua,” this suggests that Gordon and Rood are
probably hiding something– that in all likelihood their idea of
who Jesus Christ (Y’shua Messiah) is, is radically different
than Christianity and at odds with the New Testament.
“MISSING IN ACTION”– REDEMPTION
AND THE EPISTLES
The few times Rood
touches on core beliefs about Jesus Christ, he says disturbing
things. At the end of the seminar he briefly shows one slide
that states that part of Y’shua’s work is finished, that of
being a suffering servant (Isaiah predicts Jesus’s death on the
cross using the imagery of the suffering servant). That five
second mention is tucked in a long segment that declares that
Jesus’ important work is to convince the world to obey the
Torah. The message is clear– the Savior’s only real work is to
“subdue” the world by commanding everyone to obey the law, by
which you save yourselves.
The cross is
mentioned only once, again in a brief three or four seconds.
Rood tried to defend his proposition that everyone is required
to obey all the laws of the Torah by alluding to Colossians 2.
He said that only the enmity of the law was nailed to the
cross, not the law itself. He didn’t- and couldn’t have-
actually quoted the verse itself and displayed it on the screen,
because the verse plainly contradicts him. Colossians 2 reads,
“having canceled the written code with its regulations, that was
against us and stood opposed to us, he took it away, nailing it
to the cross” (Colossians 2:14). The law was nailed to the
cross, not just the enmity as Rood claimed.
This misquote of
Colossians is virtually the only reference to an epistle in the
entire five and a half hour seminar. Rood frequently quotes the
Old Testament, often quotes the Gospels and sometimes quotes
Revelation. But it is as though the epistles don’t exist in his
Bible. And for good reason, because it is impossible to read the
epistles, especially those of Paul, without seeing how the law
of Moses ended with the redemption won by Y’shua on the cross.
But according to Rood and Gordon, the redemption of Jesus really
isn’t a fully effective means of salvation unless believers
fulfill the requirements and commands of the law.
According to Rood,
the Savior/Messiah only saves us from obeying the oral law, not
the written law. Y’shua is reduced to being only a rabbi or
prophet like those sent to Judah and Israel who called people
back to obey the Torah. The function of the “Savior” is simply
to set the “rules” of the Kingdom of heaven. The Savior doesn’t
save anyone from anything, he just enforces the Torah while
releasing people from the man-made obligations of the oral law.
What Rood calls “Gospel” is just the law, which cannot save
anyone because of human weakness.
THE CULTIC STRUCTURE OF A ROOD
AWAKENING
Michael Rood never
openly admits to being a leader in a cult called
The Way International
for over 15 years. But he alludes to it by admitting he was a
“paid professional false prophet” for 20 years, a “rapturist”
who taught the error of “ultradispensationalism.” In fact, Rood
still teaches
some of the things he learned in TWI, such as the time of Jesus’
birth, his genealogy (mentioned above), his nature, speculation
that most of the NT was authored in Aramaic or Hebrew, complete
condemnation of the entire Christian church, rejection of water
baptism in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of sins,
certain lingo, and other things. But he has to reject
ultradispensationalism in particular in order to require
believers today to obey the laws of Moses.
Although he
superficially rejects TWI, Rood reproduces many of the cultic
methods TWI used to gain converts. Most of the colors are
different, but the pattern is the same. These methods include:
+ using novel
interpretations of a handful of Scripture passages to establish
Rood himself as having information available nowhere but from
him
+ wholesale
condemnations of all Christian churches because they either
condemn or do not teach what he does. This includes contrasting
his “truth” from the errors of “religion” practiced by everyone
else. Rood’s message is, “I know what no one else does; every
other Bible teacher is dumb. Are you going to be smart and
believe me, or dumb and believe them?”
+ using exotic
(and unreliable) Hebrew or Greek manuscripts to “prove” his
unique points
+ replacing the
Gospel which revolves around Y’shua/ Jesus with obedience to the
laws and principles he teaches
ROOD’S “UNIQUE” KNOWLEDGE
When Rood was in
TWI, he used the 36 hour Power For Abundant Living class to
indoctrinate potential new followers. While the class appeared
to teach basic rules of interpreting the Bible, it used a series
of novel interpretations of Bible passages to subtly lead
listeners to think that TWI had knowledge no one else had. Rood
uses this technique, too. His “unique” knowledge is sometimes
just rehashed TWI teachings, such as the birth date of Jesus,
his genealogy, and the length of his ministry.
But Rood’s
favorite “new” knowledge is his “discovery” of a Hebrew version
of the Gospel of Matthew. This is what the title “Raiders of the
Lost Book” refers to. His unproven assertion that this
Hebrew version was the original version (not Greek or Aramaic)
is his carte blanc to rewrite any Bible verses he wishes.
Rood also makes much of his “corrected” Rabbinical Calendar of
Jewish holy days, which no Rabbi before Rood and his colleagues
was smart enough to compose..
Another of Rood’s
favorite novelties is his claim that the woman in a lead-covered
basket mentioned in Zechariah 5 must be a SCUD missile which
flew over Syria in 2001 (this is part of a false prophecy Rood
made at that time). Rood’s central claim that all believers must
keep all the commands of the Torah is another “new” teaching.
Claiming unique
knowledge is essential to all cult-like groups. They must use
this ploy in order to motivate people to give up their current
beliefs, teachers and fellowship in order to devote themselves
to the exceptional new leader (in this case Rood).
Unfortunately,
people are attracted to what is “new” and “different” even when
it is patently false. This is why the Apostle warned Timothy
that “the time will come when men will not put up with sound
doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather
around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching
ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from the truth
and turn aside to myths” (2 Timothy 4:3-4).
CONDEMNING CHRISTIANITY
Periodically
throughout the seminar Rood takes pot shots at Christian
churches, teachers, and especially pastors, who he says write
SkyAngel broadcasting to ask that Rood be taken off the air
because of his heretical teachings. This is the same kind of
constant ridicule that Rood and other leaders heaped on the
Church during his years in TWI.
Rood and Gordon
criticize the Church for thinking Zechariah’s woman was in a
basket, for not requiring believers to obey the Torah, for using
the name “Jesus Christ,” and for believing in “the Greek
Jesus.”
Rood also criticized the Church for the same things
that he criticized the Church for when he was in TWI:
for saying that Christ was
crucified on a Friday, for celebrating Jesus’ birth on December
25 (both were TWI novelties). “The religious system can’t count
to three” Rood says about evangelical Bible teachers. (See our
article on this which describes how “three days and three
nights” is a figure of speech which the Bible uses as a synonym
for “on the third day.” This is clear both in the NT and in the
book of Esther. “Three days and three nights” is an idiom for
any parts of three days, and does not refer to a strict 72 hour
period.)
Rood referred to
evangelical churches when he said that we “inherited nothing but
lies from our fathers” (Jeremiah 16:19). Rood closes the seminar
by condemning all who do not require people to obey the Torah
(such as the Christian Church) saying they do not have the truth
and are not in the kingdom of God. According to Rood, Christian
churches and ministers are those who say “Lord, Lord” but do not
obey the Torah as Y’shua says, and so “miss the whole
thing.”
REWRITING THE BIBLE
Rood uses his
novel “discovery” of the Hebrew Gospel of Matthew and similar
methods to rewrite portions of the Bible. TWI used what they
called “literal translations according to usage” (which
sometimes contradicted themselves) and any Greek manuscript they
could find– no matter how late and unreliable– to force their
desired readings on particular verses. When there was no
manuscript that said what they wanted, they made one up,
claiming that the original Greek “must have” said this (as with
Matthew 28:19, a troublesome verse for TWI).
Rood uses his
novel Hebrew Gospel of Matthew the same way. He uses it to
rewrite Matthew 23, portions of the sermon on the mount in
Matthew 5, and Matthew 23:16 (“you blind chairs”). Rood, like
his mentor V. P. Wierwille who founded TWI, doesn’t seem strong
on Hebrew and Greek. So he uses Gordon to serve as his language
“authority” in much the same way Wierwille used Walter Cummins.
Gordon knows
enough about Hebrew and textual criticism (the use of ancient
manuscripts) to sound authoritative and not make obvious
mistakes. However, his bias against evangelical faith is
apparent when he tries to defend the age of the Hebrew Matthew
manuscripts. He admits that the earliest manuscript is from 1380
AD (assuming Gordon isn’t exaggerating even this date). That
sounds old to many American listeners (actually it’s not much
older than the printed Gutenberg Bible). In an effort to make
the Hebrew manuscript sound older than it is, he mentions that
many Greek manuscripts date from about the same time. But he
utterly avoids stating that there are a very large number of
manuscripts that are over 1,000 years older than his Hebrew
copy.
We now have over
40 excellent Greek manuscripts of Matthew and other parts of the
New Testament that are a full 1,100 years older than his Hebrew
Matthew. We even have a very small portion of Matthew in Greek
that dates to 62 AD, which is just about the time Matthew wrote
it. He avoids mentioning the existence of these old Greek
manuscripts and the implications of this huge age difference
(which indicates the unreliability of Hebrew Matthew). Like Rood
and TWI, he doesn’t let the lack of reliable evidence damage his
belief in his pet theory.
Besides the Greek
copies, we also have manuscripts of the New Testament in other
languages that are much older than Gordon’s Hebrew manuscript.
Here are a list of some of them, along with the date of the
oldest manuscript now available (note: “IV” means the 4th
century, which is the AD 300s): Old Latin (III), Old Syriac
(IV), Coptic (Egyptian) (IV), Aramaic (Palestinian Syriac, V),
Gothic (V), Armenian (IX), Georgian (IX), Arabic (XI), Ethiopic
(XI). All these have more evidence to show they are very ancient
than any Hebrew texts.
EVIDENCE THAT THE NEW TESTAMENT
WAS AUTHORED IN GREEK
Gordon and Rood
claim that Hebraisms (also called Aramaisms, since Aramaic was
the common speech among Jews in Israel in the first century) are
proof that the Gospels were originally authored in Hebrew.
However, the evidence shows that the New Testament was authored
in Greek (perhaps Matthew being produced in both Aramaic and
Greek).
The Hebraisms are
due mainly to two other factors. First, the authors were likely
bilingual (a common thing among Jews in Galilee, which was
called “Galilee of the Gentiles”). Some of them thought in
Hebrew even as they wrote for a larger audience in Greek. As
they wrote, they translated their Hebrew thought patterns and
syntax into Greek words without converting them into Greek
thought patterns and syntax. Second, the Gospels often quote
conversations which took place in Aramaic, so Hebraic idiom was
carried over into Greek that way. Hebraisms have been studied
for centuries and are well understood among Bible teachers.
We see this kind
of crossover of the thought patterns of one language into
another all the time on the news. For instance, when bilingual
political leaders from other countries are interviewed by
English-speaking reporters, it is obvious to hearers that they
are thinking in their native tongue, translating it into English
on the fly, and carrying over their native syntax and idiom.
This is also obvious when hearing some immigrants speak English.
It is often amusing to hear them using foreign idiom, syntax and
vocabulary such as “turn the corner around.”
Greek was used
universally around the Mediterranean and was known as a second
language even by farmers of less hellenized areas. More than
half of the Old Testament passages found in the NT are quoted
from the Greek Septuagint (a Greek translation of the OT,
usually called the “LXX), not from an Aramaic Targum or Hebrew
text. Even the Gospel of Matthew quotes more than half of its OT
passages from the LXX. Of 29 inscriptions from the first century
found on ossuaries on Mt Olive, 11 are in Greek, 11 are Aramaic
and 7 are Hebrew. (These and more details can be found in Edwin
Yamanchi, “Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic or Syriac?” Bibliotheca
Sacra, Oct 1974, pp. 320-331 and The Interpreter’s
Dictionary of the Bible, 1:188-9, 4:754.) By the time
Matthew and most of the Gospels were written, the faith had
spread around the Mediterranean world and there were more
Gentile than Hebrew believers. There is no reason for the NT
writers to have written in Hebrew when universally known Greek
existed.
Hebrew was not
used as a day to day language among most Jews in the first
century, especially those who lived outside Judea. Women were
not schooled in Hebrew as men were, so had no hope of
understanding Hebrew Scriptures read in synagogue. After the
Assyrians destroyed the northern kingdom of Israel in the 8th
century BC, they deported Hebrews and settled Assyrians in their
place. A century later the Babylonians destroyed the southern
kingdom of Judah, deported Hebrews, and settled Babylonians
there. Later many Hebrews returned to Judah, but only after two
generations of forgetting Hebrew and learning Aramaic. Then
Alexander the Great and his descendants ruled the area of Israel
and forced Greek language and customs on the inhabitants.
The result of
those six centuries of replacing Hebrew with other world
languages was that Hebrews hardly understood Hebrew anymore.
This is likely the reason Nehemiah records that as Levites were
reading the Torah to those who returned from Babylon they were
“making it clear and giving the meaning so that the people could
understand what was being read” (Nehemiah 8:8). This led to the
practice of making Aramaic “Targums” (which means
“translations”). As Hebrews read Scriptures in Hebrew, they
translated them line by line into Aramaic so people could
understand them. (We have manuscripts of Targums which are
bilingual, alternating Hebrew text with Aramaic translations,
verse by verse.)
The Targums were
developed first in Palestine, not just in foreign lands. From
the 6th century BC to the present day, there have
always been more Hebrews outside of Israel than in it. (For the
first time in history there will be more Hebrews in Israel than
in New York City in 2006, but this is still just a fraction of
world Hebrew population.) This “diaspora” of the Hebrews and the
dominant use of world languages in Israel over the centuries
forced Hebrews to name the Messiah in Greek, Aramaic (and other)
languages and use Greek and Aramaic translations in study and
worship.
ACTS WRITTEN IN HEBREW?
Rood said during a
question and answer time in the seminar that he thinks that all
four Gospels, Acts and Revelation may have been authored in
Hebrew. There is absolutely no evidence for this, and Rood
admits that no ancient Hebrew manuscripts exist. This is only
imagination and speculation on his part.
For example, the
speculation that Acts was authored in Hebrew makes no sense at
all. The great majority of conversations recorded in Acts had to
have taken place in Greek, not Hebrew. (Even those which weren’t
in Greek were likely in Aramaic, the daily language of people,
not in the Hebrew language which was relegated primarily to the
temple and synagogue.) This is not surprising since Luke, the
author of Acts, was a Greek and he addressed it to another
Greek, Theophilos (whose Greek name means “one who loves God”).
Acts 6 mentions
the large body of Greek-speaking Hebrews in Jerusalem, the heart
of Hebrew country (6:1). Phillip preached to the Samaritans, who
hated Hebrews, their language, religion and temple, and surely
used Greek or Aramaic (Acts 8). The Gentile centurion Cornelius,
some of his soldiers, and his whole household could not have
understood Hebrew, yet understood Peter preaching– no doubt in
Greek (Acts 10).
Paul, Barnabas and
others taught the many Greeks who came to faith at Antioch (Acts
11,13). Paul persuaded the Roman proconsul on Cyprus, Sergius
Paulus to believe (Acts 13:6-12). Many Gentiles at Iconium
believed Paul, but he barely persuaded the crowds in Lystra
(who spoke Lycaonian) not to sacrifice to them as gods (Acts
14). Acts never mentions a synagogue in most of the cities Paul
visited. Paul could not have communicated in Hebrew to his own
coworkers such as Timothy and Titus, who were raised as Greeks.
Paul spoke with the judges and jailer at Philippi, a Roman
colony, though they surely did not know Hebrew. Paul’s message
to the Areopagus in Athens (Acts 17), and his defense when on
trial before the Roman proconsul Gallio (Acts 18) were in Greek.
The idolmakers in Ephesus (Acts 19) surely didn’t riot in
Hebrew. Paul spoke Greek to the Roman commander and centurion
who arrested him in the temple (Acts 21:37, 22:25), as did
Paul’s nephew (23:19-21). Paul didn’t need a translator. Paul
made his own defense when on trial before Governors Felix (Acts
24) and Festus (Acts 25-26). Paul surely spoke Greek to the
captain and everyone on the ship on his voyage to Rome (Acts 27)
and to the superstitious islanders on Malta (Acts 28).
The great majority
of conversations and events in Acts took place in Greek, between
Gentiles, in lands hundreds of miles from Israel. No ancient
sources even hint at any book besides Matthew being authored in
Aramaic or Hebrew, and the author and recipient of Acts were
Greeks. For Michael Rood to speculate that Acts was written in
Hebrew shows either extreme ignorance or extreme disregard for
historical facts and Biblical content.
Rood’s claim that
Revelation was also authored in Hebrew does not make any sense,
either. The Apostle John wrote Revelation on Patmos about 95
A.D. after living in Ephesus (in what is now western coastal
Turkey) for decades. (A church in Ephesus marks the spot where
it is believed Mary the mother of Jesus was buried.) This was a
full generation after Jerusalem, the temple, and much of Judea
had been destroyed by Rome after the Hebrews rebelled in 67 A.D.
The world Hebrew population had been about 2 million, yet about
1.1 million of them were killed in this war (see Bo Reicke,
New Testament World), including the most devout Hebrews–
those most likely to have a working knowledge of Hebrew. The
scattered 1 million Hebrews who remained in 95 A.D. would not
have been much of an audience for John.
John wrote a
generation after the followers of Y’shua became radically
separated from the Torah observant Hebrews. The division
happened because Hebrews drove off followers of Y’shua, as we
see in the book of Acts, because believers realized they had no
foundation basis for fellowship with those who rejected the
Messiah, and because the Roman government declared followers to
Messiah to be an illegal religion separate from Judaism. All the
writings of John (his Gospel, Revelation and three letters) were
written to followers of Jesus the Christ (Y’shua the Messiah)
spread around the world. John and his readers knew Greek, but
very few people in the world were competent Hebrew speakers.
REPLACING THE GOSPEL OF Y’SHUA
WITH OBEDIENCE TO LAW
Rood’s primary
message is that all believers in Y’shua Messiah must obey the
law of Moses. While TWI rejected this law, it did promote
“universal” laws such as the law of believing and the law of
tithing. For example the “law of believing” stated that when
anyone, whether believer or atheist, had strong confidence that
something would happen, that thing would occur.
Both Rood and TWI
ended up making Jesus Christ an afterthought, not at all central
to their message.
WHY PARTNER
WITH NEHEMIA GORDON?
Half of the ARA/
ROTLB seminar is presented by Michael Rood and half by Nehemia
Gordon. It is obvious that Rood feels a close partnership with
him. Why does Rood partner with Gordon, and what does this mean?
Michael Rood goes
out of his way to state that Gordon is not a believer in
Y’shua Messiah. Rood speaks pridefully of Gordon’s beliefs, as
though it is a special mark of honor and credibility that Gordon
does not follow Y’shua as Messiah or Lord.
Gordon describes
himself as a “Hebrew Scripturalist” who does not follow Jesus
Christ (“Y’shua Messiah”) and does not follow the traditions of
the Pharisees as detailed in the Jewish Talmud. He claims to
have been trained as a Hebrew text scholar at the Hebrew
University of Jerusalem and was a translator of a published
edition of part of the Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS). Rood claims that
Gordon’s translation of part of the DSS sells for $5,000 a copy.
Gordon says his
view of Y’shua has changed, and that he now thinks Jesus had one
message– to persuade people to obey the commands of Torah and to
consider themselves free from the oral law.
In other words,
according to Gordon, Jesus was at best a teacher (evidently not
even a prophet) who called people to obey the Law in much the
same way that rabbis called people to obey the Law. But to
Gordon, Y’shua is far below the status of Moses the Lawgiver,
because Moses met God on Sinai and delivered the Law. Moses
gave the law, Y’shua only directed people to obey Moses. Y’shua
serves Moses, not the other way around.
Evangelical
Christians would not create a close teaching partnership with
Gordon, because he rejects the very core of the New Testament
Gospel– that Jesus (Y’shua) is Messiah and Lord, the fulness of
the Godhead in bodily form, the only name under heaven by which
we must be saved (Acts 2:28, Colossians 2:9, Acts 4:12). From
the New Testament perspective, he does not have the
enlightenment of the Holy Spirit, the forgiveness of sins or
eternal life.
But Michael Rood
apparently enjoys full teaching partnership and fellowship with
Nehemia Gordon. Why?
Because the core
of both Rood’s and Nehemia’s message is the same– their “Gospel”
is that people must carry the burden of obeying the commands of
the Law. Jesus only saved people from the oral law, not the
written Law. To both of them, the person and work of Y’shua
Messiah, Jesus Christ, is not the essential core.
Whenever the
Apostles preached, the “punch line” at the end was always
Christ-centered: “(Jesus is) both Lord and Christ....Repent and
be baptized, everyone of you, in the name of Jesus Christ so
that your sins may be forgiven” (Acts 2:36, 38). “There is no
other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved”
(Acts 4:12). “the good news of peace through Jesus Christ, who
is Lord of all.... All the prophets testify about him that
everyone who believes in him receives forgiveness of sins
through His name” (Acts 10: 36, 43). “Through Jesus the
forgiveness of sins is proclaimed to you. Through Him
everyone who believes is justified from everything you could not
be justified from by the law of Moses” (Acts 13:38, 39).
Rood’s “punch
line” is the very opposite from that of the apostles. Rood
consciously does not emphasize- or even mention– Christ’s
redemption, believing in him as Lord and Christ, forgiveness,
being justified by faith, or being baptized in water. Rood even
consciously leaves out Scriptural references to Jesus Christ.
For instance, Rood paraphrased part of 1 John, “this is love for
God, to obey His commands.” In context, He was using John to
“prove” that believers in Y’shua must obey all the commands of
the law of Moses. However, Rood conveniently neglects to quote
what the Apostle John says those commands are: “And this is His
command: to believe in the name of His Son, Jesus Christ, and to
love one another as He commanded us” (1 John 3:23).
Rood ignores parts
of other passages which point to Jesus also. He cites the part
of Revelation 12:17 which says, “keep the commandments of God,”
but ignores the rest of the verse, “and hold to the testimony of
Jesus.” He systematically avoids references to Jesus Christ and
redemption. In contrast, the writings of John constantly
emphasize faith in Jesus Christ, redemption and loving others,
not obeying the law of Moses, though you’d never know this by
listening to Michael Rood.
Rood directs
people away from Y’shua the Christ and his cross and
resurrection, and commands people to do the impossible and the
unnecessary– obey the law of Moses. By doing this, he opposes
the Apostles and the New Testament.
Rood also
oversells the Torah by repeatedly stating that it is “easy” to
follow all its commands. The apostle Peter says the opposite–
that circumcision and the law of Moses are “a yoke that neither
we nor our father have been able to bear” (Acts 15:10). He was
clearly speaking of circumcision and the written law (15:1,5),
since these are named, but the oral law is not.
No one who
understands Y’shua’s sermon on the mount (Matthew 5-7) can think
the law is easy. Y’shua says that lust is adultery, anger is
murder, adultery is the only reason for divorce (Rood apparently
has not publicly disclosed the reason for his divorce) and
loving your neighbor includes loving your enemies. No one who
takes Y’shua’s teaching seriously thinks the law is easy to
fulfill.
Rood also doesn’t
seem to realize that whenever people try to obey a legalistic
system of laws like those in Torah, it breeds disagreements
about how to fully obey them. His followers will end up making
up contradictory sets of oral laws about how to fulfill the
Torah laws, just as the Pharisees and rabbis have done for
centuries.
TWO KINDS OF RIGHTEOUSNESS
Rood thinks
righteousness is important, for he quotes Matthew 5:20, “unless
your righteousness exceeds that of the Pharisees and the
teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of
heaven.” But he avoids detailing the important NT teaching that
there are two kinds of righteousness– righteousness that people
earn by obeying the law, and righteousness that is given
to those who have faith in Y’shua the Christ.
The Apostle Paul
states, “No one will be declared righteous in (God’s) sight by
observing the law; rather, through the law we become conscious
of sin. But now a righteousness from God, apart from law, has
been made known, to which the Law and the prophets testify. This
righteousness from God comes through faith in Christ Jesus to
all who believe” (Romans 3:20-22). No one can perfectly keep the
Law (not even the written law), so no one can become righteous
by trying to observe it. The law only shows us our sin. The only
way to become righteous is to receive it as a gift from God.
(For more on the
purpose of the Law, see “Does
Obeying the Laws and Commands of the Old Testament Please God?”
by John Juedes.)
A Rood Awakening/
Raiders of the Lost Book is an entertaining presentation that
claims to be about discovering a Hebrew version of the Gospel of
Matthew. Actually, it is about a lost Gospel. Those who fall
prey to the cultic methods and teachings will likely lose the
gospel assurance that righteousness is not earned by obedience
to the law, but rather is received by faith as a gift of God in
Jesus Christ (Y’shua the Messiah). There are some positive
aspects of recognizing the Hebrew roots of the faith. But
Michael Rood and Nehemia Gordon go beyond deepening faith in
Y’shua to the error of reducing faith and salvation in the
Messiah to just another worthless form of works righteousness
and bondage to the Law.
Dr. John Juedes, 2005
