Yeshua’s Famous Last Words Amen, Emet, Truth

Michael Rood's Sabbat NIght Live Via Youtube ^ | 28 February 2014 | Michael Rood

[Errant]

As the book of the Revelation comes to a close, we are left with some very important words. Keep his commandments, know his Torah, and make yourself ready to be the bride of the King. He is coming quickly. Join Michael Rood for the final episode in the series From Here to Eternity – Yeshua’s Famous Last Words: Amen, Emet, Truth.

[Errant]

I think it's you that has some 'splaining to do... ;)

[Iscool]

Why not? I mean seriously, let's see your argument why an unbiased Karaite Jew wouldn't actually be the best choice for researching if the first texts of the New Testament were Hebrew/Aramaic/Greek.

How about because there are no original Hebrew or Aramaic original texts...No evidence that there ever was...

[Errant]

How about because there are no original Hebrew or Aramaic original texts...No evidence that there ever was...

Testimony Of The Church Fathers

All of the "Church Fathers", both East and West, testified to the Semitic origin of at least the Book of Matthew, as the following quotes demonstrate:

Papias (150-170 C.E.) Matthew composed the words in the Hebrew dialect, and each translated as he was able. (quoted by Eusebius Eccl. Hist. 3:39)

Ireneus (170 C.E.) Matthew also issued a written Gospel among the Hebrews in their own dialect. (Irenaeus; Against Heresies 3:1)

Origen (c. 210 C.E.) The first [Gospel] is written according to Matthew, the same that was once a tax collector, but afterwards an emissary of Yeshua the Messiah, who having published it for the Jewish believers, wrote it in Hebrew. (quoted by Eusebius; Eccl. Hist. 6:25)

Eusebius (c. 315 C.E.) Matthew also, having first proclaimed the Gospel in Hebrew, when on the point of going also to the other nations, committed it to writing in his native tongue, and thus supplied the want of his presence to them by his writings. (Eusebius; Eccl. Hist. 3:24)

Pantaenus... penetrated as far as India, where it is reported that he found the Gospel according to Matthew, which had been delivered before his arrival to some who had the knowledge of Messiah, to whom Bartholomew, one of the emissaries, as it is said, had proclaimed, and left them the writing of Matthew in Hebrew letters.

(Eusebius; Eccl. Hist. 5:10)

Epiphanius (370 C.E.) They [the Nazarenes] have the Gospel according to Matthew quite complete in Hebrew, for this Gospel is certainly still preserved among them as it was first written, in Hebrew letters. (Epiphanius; Panarion 29:9:4)

Jerome (382 C.E.) “Matthew, who is also Levi, and from a tax collector came to be an emissary first of all evangelists composed a Gospel of Messiah in Judea in the Hebrew language and letters, for the benefit of those of the circumcision who had believed, who translated it into Greek is not sufficiently ascertained. Furthermore, the Hebrew itself is preserved to this day in the library at Caesarea, which the martyr Pamphilus so diligently collected. I also was allowed by the Nazarenes who use this volume in the Syrian city of Borea to copy it. In which is to be remarked that, wherever the evangelist... makes use of the testimonies

of the Old Scripture, he does not follow the authority of the seventy translators [the Greek Septuagint], but that of the Hebrew." (Lives of Illustrious Men 3)

"Pantaenus found that Bartholomew, one of the twelve emissaries, had there [India] preached the advent of our Lord Yeshua the Messiah according to the Gospel of Matthew, which was written in Hebrew letters, and which, on returning to Alexandria, he brought with him." (De Vir. 3:36)

Isho'dad (850 C.E.) His [Matthew's] book was in existence in Caesarea of Palestine, and everyone acknowledges that he wrote it with his hands in Hebrew…(Isho'dad Commentary on the Gospels)

Other "church fathers" have testified to the Semitic origin of at least one of Paul's epistles. These "church fathers" claim that Paul's Epistle to the Hebrews was translated into Greek from a Hebrew original, as the following quotes demonstrate:

Clement of Alexandria (150 - 212 C.E.) In the work called Hypotyposes, to sum up the matter briefly he [Clement of Alexandria] has given us abridged accounts of all the canonical Scriptures,... the Epistle to the Hebrews he asserts was written by Paul, to the Hebrews, in the Hebrew tongue; but that it was carefully translated

by Luke, and published among the Greeks. (Clement of Alexandria; Hypotyposes; referred to by Eusebius in Eccl. Hist. 6:14:2)

Eusebius (315 C.E.) For as Paul had addressed the Hebrews in the language of his country; some say that the evangelist Luke, others that Clement, translated the epistle. (Eusebius; Eccl. Hist. 3:38:2-3)

Jerome (382) “He (Paul) being a Hebrew wrote in Hebrew, that is, his own tongue and most fluently while things which were eloquently written in Hebrew were more eloquently turned into Greek (Lives of Illustrious Men, Book 5)

It should be noted that these church fathers did not always agree that the other books of the New Testament were written in Hebrew. Epiphanius for example, believed "that only Matthew put the setting forth of the preaching of the Gospel into the New Testament in the Hebrew language and letters." (Epiphanius; Pan. 30:3) Epiphanius does, however, tell us that the Jewish believers would disagree with him, and point out the existence of Hebrew copies of John and Acts in a "Gaza" or "treasury" [Genizah?] in Tiberius, Israel. (Epipnanius; Pan. 30:3, 6) Epiphanius believed these versions to be mere "translations" (Epiphanius; Pan. 30:3, 6, 12) but admitted that the Jewish believers would disagree with him. The truth in this matter is clear, if Greek had replaced Hebrew as the language of Jews as early as the first century, then why would fourth century Jews have any need for Hebrew translations. The very existence of Hebrew manuscripts of these books in fourth century Israel testifies to their originality, not to mention the fact that the Jewish believers regarded them as authentic.

Testimony Of The Talmudic Rabbis

In addition to the statements made by the early Christian church fathers, the ancient Jewish Rabbis also hint of a Hebrew original for the Gospels. Both the Jerusalem and Babylonian Talmuds and the Tosefta relate a debate among Rabbinic Jews over the method of destruction of manuscripts of New Testament books (t.Shab. 13:5; b.Shab. 116a; j.Shab. 15c) . Specifically mentioned is a book called by them as ALEF-VAV-NUN-GIMEL-LAMED-YUD-VAV-NUN (see end note) (or "Gospels"). The question which arose was how to handle the destruction of these manuscripts since they contained the actual name of God. It is of course, well known that the Greek New Testament manuscripts do not contain the Name but use the Greek titles "God" and "Lord" as substitutes. This is because the Name is not traditionally translated into other languages, but instead is (unfortunately) translated "Lord", just as we have it in most English Bibles today, and just as we find in our late manuscripts of the Septuagint. The manuscripts these Rabbi's were discussing must have represented the original Hebrew text from which the Greek was translated.

[editor-surveyor]

You are definitely a servant of the adversary.

[RansomOttawa]

Maybe you think so, but that doesn't mean millions of others agree with you.

This appeal of yours to the bandwagon is self-defeating. I'm already in the majority.

[Errant]

I'm already in the majority.

Maybe for now. Time will tell. :)

[redleghunter]

Then by ALL means enlighten us on how you see that possibility.

Are you familiar with the 19th Century liberal Christian theology methods and centers? For example the Tubingen university? Right there within the gates of what used to be orthodox Christian schools developed a theology denying the OT and NT were inspired Holy Scriptures. The JEDP formed from these schools of thought for the OT. Take a look at that era and let me know if you trust a non-believer being your primary theologian for NT scriptures.

[Errant]

Are you familiar with the 19th Century liberal Christian theology methods and centers? For example the Tubingen university?

You have GOT to be kidding me... LOLOL!!!

I has a simple question: [Then by ALL means enlighten us on how you see that possibility.]

And you want me to sign up for a doctorate at Tubingen university... lol

[boatbums]

The writers of the NT wrote in Greek. It is undeniable.

Sure it is. Until you can 'splain to me how those meaningful little Hebrew puns got in there, I will deny it all day long, despite your declarations. It isn't the strength of the proofs that prove a thing - but rather, the lack of errata.

But I already DID, dear roamer_1. Imagine this scenario...Jesus preaches and teaches for three years to a populace that more than likely spoke Aramaic. He also taught in Hebrew to certain people as well as Greeks. Now, some years later, the Holy Spirit leads and inspires the writers of the sacred Scriptures to write down what Jesus said and did. In what language would they have done that? The one that most all the people spoke throughout the region of His influence - GREEK. That very well explains why some Hebrew "puns" were there. It also explains why certain words were "translated" right there in the passages. Go ahead and deny it all day long if you want it won't change the facts.

[redleghunter]

Eh, I guess you did not understand my post.

[redleghunter]

That very well explains why some Hebrew "puns" were there.

That also explains why there was an LXX before the First Advent of Christ. If all the Jews/Hebrews spoke Hebrew and Aramaic then why commission the "70" to translate the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek?

[boatbums]

I think you are right, that does seem to be the problem. I don't know, maybe they hope that by making us watch the vids, we'll become captivated by Rood like they are. I also suspect that even if we do watch a vid and post his words from it, commenting on what he states, we will be accuse of “taking him out of context” or misunderstanding what he says. Either way, they can skip out on having to defend his teachings when faced with superior exegeses. It shows why trying to has been a lost cause. A good thing, though, is people are warned of the false prophet, Michael Rood, so it hasn't been unfruitful.

[Iscool]

Clearly to me none of the moral laws are set aside. We are to live holy lives in obedience

As Paul says, those moral laws were our schoolmaster...If it wasn't for those laws we wouldn't (officially) know we were sinning against God...

But contrary to the Torah, instead of coming up with a blood sacrifice to atone for the sin when we violate those laws, Jesus became that one sacrifice so that the penalty for violating those laws is already paid for us in advance...

Perhaps I don't understand what your position it is about the Torah that puts us at odds...

[Errant]

Eh, I guess you did not understand my post.

Perhaps it's you who didn't understand my question. Allow me to resubmit:

We're talking researching whether the original New Testament texts were Hebrew/Aramaic or Greek. That means someone like Gordon, who would logically have no reason to be bias, would be the perfect candidate.

If you disagree with the above statement, simply explain why...

[CynicalBear]

>> If all the Jews/Hebrews spoke Hebrew and Aramaic then why commission the "70" to translate the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek?<<

And that in the 2nd century BCE.

[boatbums]

Jesus said, “For God so loved the world...”

[Errant]

That also explains why there was an LXX before the First Advent of Christ. If all the Jews/Hebrews spoke Hebrew and Aramaic then why commission the "70" to translate the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek?

"The traditional story is that Ptolemy II sponsored the translation for use by the many Alexandrian Jews who were not fluent in Hebrew but fluent in Koine Greek, which was the lingua franca of Alexandria, Egypt and the Eastern Mediterranean from the death of Alexander the Great in 323 BCE until the development of Byzantine Greek around 600 CE."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Septuagint

[CynicalBear]

>>You are definitely a servant of the adversary.<<

I am a servant of Jesus Christ so I suppose that does make me one of your adversaries.

[Iscool]

You can be amazingly dense when you want to be!

Me??? You still refuse to answer the question I posed to you...

Israel has most definitely NOT been set aside, they are his elect, his bride, they are who he is coming for, and who he came to send his apostles to.

Well someone has certainly been set aside...

Rom 11:5 Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace.
Rom 11:6 And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.
Rom 11:7 What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded
Rom 11:8 (According as it is written, God hath given them the spirit of slumber, eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear;) unto this day.
Rom 11:9 And David saith, Let their table be made a snare, and a trap, and a stumblingblock, and a recompence unto them:
Rom 11:10 Let their eyes be darkened, that they may not see, and bow down their back alway.

A small remnant was saved but the scripture here says Israel was blinded (set aside) unto this day...

So if you don't want to believe the scriptures, from where are you getting your information, Michael Rood???

Read the last chapter of Hosea.

OK...I'll see if I can find Hosea and read the last chapter...

Read it...And I see where it fits in...It fits in between the verses in the color of teal...

Rom 11:25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.

Hos 14:1 O Israel, return unto the LORD thy God; for thou hast fallen by thine iniquity.
Hos 14:2 Take with you words, and turn to the LORD: say unto him, Take away all iniquity, and receive us graciously: so will we render the calves of our lips.
Hos 14:3 Asshur shall not save us; we will not ride upon horses: neither will we say any more to the work of our hands, Ye are our gods: for in thee the fatherless findeth mercy.
Hos 14:4 I will heal their backsliding, I will love them freely: for mine anger is turned away from him.
Hos 14:5 I will be as the dew unto Israel: he shall grow as the lily, and cast forth his roots as Lebanon.
Hos 14:6 His branches shall spread, and his beauty shall be as the olive tree, and his smell as Lebanon.
Hos 14:7 They that dwell under his shadow shall return; they shall revive as the corn, and grow as the vine: the scent thereof shall be as the wine of Lebanon.
Hos 14:8 Ephraim shall say, What have I to do any more with idols? I have heard him, and observed him: I am like a green fir tree. From me is thy fruit found.
Hos 14:9 Who is wise, and he shall understand these things? prudent, and he shall know them? for the ways of the LORD are right, and the just shall walk in them: but the transgressors shall fall therein.

Rom 11:26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: Rom 11:27 For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.

You and Michael Rood need to go to a real bible study...

[Iscool]

Yes, te first couple of hundred years of the church was totally Jewish. When Paul went to a town he went to the synagogue first. All the disciples did.

Until he was commissioned to go to the Gentiles only which was well befor 70 AD...Then churches were in houses...And no doubt they were in fields, city parks and garages, but no longer synagogues...

I see you don't waste your valuable time reading scripture either...