Month 6:6, Week 1:5 (Chamashee/Teruah), Year:Day 5941:149 AM|
Gregorian Calendar: Sunday 27 August 2017
The Hebraic Roots Bible
A Preliminary Assessment
I. The Footnotes
Don Esposito, the author of the Hebraic Roots Bible: A Literal Translation (HRB, 2012) - not to be confused with the very different but similarly named:
is a Messianic Jewish writer, pastor (senior elder) and part-time resident in Jerusalem, so this latest messianic version of the Bible (Protestant canon) is certainly a welcome addition to the corpus generally, notwithstanding the rather grandiose and unbelievable claim made on his website for the second edition:
- (1) Hebraic-Roots Version (HRV, 2004) by James Trimm - the New Testament portion is a serious translation of Aramaic ground texts; or
- (2) Hebrew Roots Bible - Qodesh Cepher (HRBQS, 2012) or simply 'The Cepher' - by 'Ditoplex LLC' (unnamed, and therefore unaccountable, authors - this is not a translation but a transliteration by non-experts) which also includes Jubillees, Jasher, Enoch and 10 other Pseudepigrapha and Apocrypha, and (like the RSTNE) the missing 29th chapter of Acts,
After almost 2,000 years,
the Original Bible restored!
Now where have I heard that said before? He is not the first to make such a claim and needless to say none of the translations of the claimants agree with one another.
Strong Gabriel Roth Influence
The influence of Gabriel Roth, translator of the Aramaic English New Testament (AENT), is strongly evident (for good and for ill) in his New Testament translation and in the doctrinal footnotes which have clearly borrowed much from his book, Ruach Qadim.
One thing we like about Don Esposito is that, like us, he does not believe in commercialising his work and ensures it is made available free online (see p.496, fn #2). We fully endorse and identify with this attitude and are glad to see more translators and preachers starting to make their work available online without charge.
A Revision as Opposed to a New Translation
"Freely you have received, freely give" (Matt.10:8, NKJV).
Off the bat - and this is made clear in the introduction - Esposito admits that he is not a scholar and that the HRB is not a new translation but a revision along the lines of the ISRV, HS, RSTNE, HRV-Tanakh, CJB-Tanakh and others. Nevertheless a great deal of hard work and useful research has gone into this work. Unlike the aforementioned versions, though (with the exception of the Messianic Scriptures (New Testament) part of the HRV, and like the Aramaic English New Testament (AENT) of Gabriel Roth), the HRB makes the claim to being a Hebraic version, meaning that emphasis is placed on the Aramaic texts of the Messianic Scriptures (New Testament). Having another author willing to do this is very welcome. We need more versions like this that will hopefully improve upon earlier ones.
A Messianised English Version of the Septuagint
Additionally, if my information source and observations of the translation are accurate, the Tanakh (Old Testament) portion is based, at least in part, on the Septuagint (LXX) and not the later, Masoretic Text which was corrupted by anti-Christian/Messianic Talmudists. If this is the case (it is not stated in the HRB introduction) then this messianised, True Name, version is a useful addition to the current library of messianic translations.
In addition to being a Messianic Jewish version (like a number of others), I would go so far as to additionally call it an Israeli-Zionist Messianic Jewish version. I say this because much of the interpretation that has gone into the footnotes (see below) has definitely been influenced by Israeli/Zionist currents, perhaps its greatest weakness, as we shall see. But there are other, not so obvious, currents which I hope to touch upon later.
Compared With Other Versions
This is not a scholarly work, involving many linguists, unlike the evangelical New Revised Version (NRSV) and English Standard Version (ESV), which I take far more seriously, so I don't treat it as such. Nor is it like the one-man messianic scholarly works of the AENT (Roth), HRV (Trimm) and CJB (Stern) which provide a good counterbalance for the NRSV and ESV. It is more of a 'commentary-translation' with a second layer 'footnote-commentary' and is useful as such provided nothing more is expected of it. I rank it alongside other one-man messianic versions like the RSTNE (Koniuchowsky), OJB (Goble), ISRV/HS (Koster).
Review of the HRB Footnotes
The Problem With Footnote Versions
The HRB comes with its own commentary in the form of many useful historical, linguistic and exegetical (interpretive) footnotes. But there is always a risk with footnotes that are doctrinally dogmatic or which are serving a particular denomination (like the RSTNE and HRV do) where a diversity of interpretations is possible, especially if you are trying to reach a wide audience. Had it not been for these, and the numerous doctrinal errors, NCAY might have recommended this version be purchased for use in our congregations. Authors and publishers need to be very careful about footnote inclusions. If the author is writing for his own congregation, denomination or association, with its unique compliment of doctrinal beliefs and practices then, of course, it may be said to be successful, but if you're looking for a 'rounded and sound' commentary for trans-denominational use, I'm afraid the HRB will greatly disappoint because of its emphases or lack thereof - it is pursuing an ultra-messianic, denominational agenda as shown, for example, by its sweeping denial of the work of the Ruach (Spirit) in Christendom over the centuries, a tell-tale sign of cultism. Yahweh is not so sectarian.
Commentaries and Their Agendas
Some Bible translations with commentaries, however, like the hugely successful (though doctrinally destructive) Scofield KJV Reference Bible, had (and still have) as their agenda the promotion of doctrinal teachings. If the quest is for doctrinal emet (truth), then the serious and earnest scriptorian must look out not only for good translation work but also accurate footnotes. We cannot give carte blance to either - everything must be thoroughly tested over a period of time.
What follows in this article is a preliminary examination of the footnotes, all of which I read and sorted over a three day period. An article on the text itself will follow. I began with typical enthusiasm over a new version, filled with hope, only to become progressively more disillusioned the more thoroughly I digested it. The 'spirit' behind it left me feeling heavy, much as I have felt reading other Bible versions that clearly have a denominational agenda. There is a lot that is excellent in it intellectually but this has been subsumed to a purpose that does not strike me as ultimately godly. I hope to explain why in this pair of articles.
The Good, the Bad and the Unimportant
As it it, there are several very serious doctrinal errors in the footnotes of the HRB, some more deadly than others (especially those which negatively impact the Torah lifestyle of the Messianic Community or which distort the nature of Elohim and the Messiah, or which don't give enough emphasis to a saving relationship with Messiah), some of which are the inherited, uncorrected errors of Talmudic Judaism, so that if we are going to recommend that students get a copy of this work for study, they need to know where these errors lie. I have to say that I cannot recommend this Bible to any but those who are extremely well-versed in the Scriptures who are able to discern clearly between and inside the spectrum of what is mostly good but which is spoiled by some very potent doctrinal lies. Hopefully you will see why I have added this translation to that collection of Bibles which I would use for private study but never for congregational use.
Dividing Up the Footnotes
To this end I have taken it upon me to first of all review the footnotes which I have divided up into two sections:
- 1. Section A - Footnotes with important doctrinal statements not necessarily in the messianic or evangelical mainstream but with which NCAY heartily agrees - there is definitely excellent material here; and
- 2. Sections B-F - Footnotes with serious and less errors (doctrinal, typographical, historical, geographical, etc.) containing links to our website where corrections may be found and mental adjustments made.
The remainder of the footnotes, covering about 60-70 per cent of the total corpus of notes, is very helpful and mostly uncontroversial (with the exception of commentaries on some of the prophetic material of Ezekiel and Daniel which I will not be commenting on as they speak for themselves). There are many gems amongst these footnotes, the result of painstaking research. Let it never be said that there isn't something good to be extracted from nearly every work such as this, because there is. And I have myself have learned from all of them, including from the HRB.
System of Analysis
I provide most (but not always all) page number references to the footnotes under scrutiny but not footnote numbers, as the identity of the material under review is usually self-evident as there is only ever a small selection of footnotes (usually less than a half-a-dozen) to choose from. I didn't have the time to go into greater detail. There is a link to the online HRB edition at the end of this article which you can read for yourself.
Praiseworthy Important HRB Footnotes
There is a lot of material in the HRB footnotes that is excellent of which I found at least 35 categories:
- A1. Uses the correct transliterations of the Divine Names, viz, Yahweh (our Heavenly Father - specifically 'Yah Yahweh') and Yahshua (though 'Yah'shua' or 'Yahushua' would have been better as 'Yahshua' is not grammatically possible in Hebrew) (Jesus - specifically 'Yah'shua Yahweh'), 'Yahweh' being a Divine Family Name. Many messianic versions, like the ISRV, HS, MATS and RSTNE play it safe and simply leave the original Hebrew consonants YHWH untranslated, or imitate Judaism by substituting in 'haShem' or 'Adonai' (OJB, CJB). To my knowledge, Esposito is the second messianic, after the ATOT author, to plump for 'Yahweh', though I should mention that Jackson Snyder used 'Yah'shua' in his translation of Matthew (e.g. p.175);
- A2. Throughout the author correctly promotes the Great and Lesser Yahweh doctrine of the Father (Yah Yahweh) and the Son (Yah'shua Yahweh) and understands Divine Echad, Messiah's pre-existence, Messiah as co-creator with Yahweh, etc. (e.g. pp.249, 331, 340, 353, 542, 554, 574, 575, 580, 581, 596, 652, 881, 906, 926, 950, 979, 1221, 1225, 1248, 1303, 1304, 1323, 1334, 1345, 1398, 1418, 1425, 1503, 1512);
- A3. Circumcision is not the sign of entry into the New Covenant but baptism (pp.95, 1638, 1639, 1438, 1440, 1450, 1496, 1517);
- A4. Views the 'Mark of the Beast' or Anti-Messiah (Antichrist) as not so much something physical but denoting thinking and action (p.95);
- A5. Pesach (Passover) is on Aviv 14, not 15 as Judaism teaches (p.96);
- A6. Understands the true tavnith (pattern) behind men not covering their heads while praying whilst women should (but see #C14) (pp.128, 193, 231, 430);
- A7. So-called 'Noahide Laws' are a rabbinical invention - there is one Divine Law for all mankind, not two (pp.199, 208, 1191);
- A8. Priests or ministers should not hoard or be overly concerned with money (but see #C13) (p.214);
- A9. Torah-obedience devolves upon saved believers in Messiah (e.g. pp.248, 296, 589, 1449);
- A10. Rejects the Oral Torah or Law of the Talmudists/Rabbis (e.g. pp.252, 285, 292);
- A11. Overcoming is a characteristic of a true talmid (disciple) (p.263);
- A12. A right view of Christmas and Easter and other pagan practices in Christianity (pp.264, 1741);
- A13. Life begins at conception, meaning that abortion is a grievous sin (p.291);
- A14. Arminianism and free will are central tenets in the salvation process (pp.293, 1448, 1529);
- A15. The nations were originally ruled by malakim (angels) whom he calls 'cherubs' (p.294);
- A16. The pre-incarnate Yah'shua (Jesus) was the Malakh (Angel) of Yahweh who accepted worship as the Lesser Yahweh ('Yahshua Yahweh') unlike all other malakim (angels) (pp.304, 1472);
- A17. The Remnant are the end-time faithful ones (pp.530, 540, 604, 634, 691, 1452);
- A18. Truth of the Virgin Birth (pp.537, 1412, 1414);
- A17. Restoration of Two Houses of Israel and Judah, though has a Jewish bias as to who the head is (see #B5) (p.542);
- A18. Majority of the world population will be wiped out during tribulations and judgments (p.552);
- A19. The earth is a globe, not flat (p.570);
- A20. 'Jehovah' is a perverse translation of YHWH (p.579);
- A21. Importance of the end-time Second Exodus (p.584);
- A22. Any future 'Third Temple' in Jerusalem will be be false (p.599);
- A23. 'Breaking bread' is an idiom for eating which many wrongly assume is sacral in some way (p.623, 1346);
- A24. Rosh Chodesh begins at conjunction (when it is dark) and not at first crescent sighting (pp.905, 920, 1431);
- A25. Understands that Hochmah or 'Wisdom' is not the Messiah (because of Her female gender) but does not make the connection with the Ruach (Spirit) (see #B14) (p.957);
- A26. Understands the true relationship between home and business for wives (pp.981, 982);
- A27. Though he correctly understands that malakim (angels - or 'cherubs' as he calls them) are 'sons of Elohim' (Dt.32:8) he does not understand the nature and composition of the Divine Council (p.983);
- A28. Tzitzit (tassels) may not be worn by women as they symbolise authority and covering, but does not understand the origin of the traditional Jewish tallit (p.1027, 1236);
- A29. Rightly adheres to Israel's Kashrut laws as devolving upon messianic believers (pp.1237, 1359, 1360, 1456);
- A30. Totally supports Paul as an apostle and rejects the anti-Paulists (p.1406);
- A31. Rejects the doctrine of biological evolution (p.1436);
- A32. Draws correct conclusions about same-sex issues (p.1437);
- A33. Correctly views 'tongues' as intelligible languages, not babbling, and not for all (pp.1474, 1475, 1476, 1477);
- A34. Correctly opposes mandatory celibacy for priesthood ordinands as in Catholicism (p.1530);
- A35. Agrees that men should have not long hair as it is a disgrace (p.1551).
In all of these things we are in enthusiastic agreement.
Divers HRB Footnote Errors
This section is sub-divided into further sections, that containing serious errors (which would prevent anyone joining NCAY if they believed them) and that containing less serious errors (which would not prevent membership in NCAY).
i. Serious Errors
- B1. Follows Talmudic tradition of days being from sunset to sunset instead of the biblical sunrise to sunrise (pp.93, 101, 173, 309, 312, 414, 1301, 1388, 1473);
- B2. Views the Sabbath through the lens of the Rabbinical-assimilated Roman calendar - Friday sunset to Saturday sunset - and goes out of his way to reject the biblical luni-solar Creation Calendar (pp.101, 123, 1224, 1227, 1365, 1366, 1376, 1377, 1421);
- B3. Like the Jehovah's Witnesses and some other messianics, does not accept a weekly or monthly Master's Supper in addition to the annual Pesach (Passover) meal (p.96);
- B4. Takes a very ultra-messianic line in the use of names or titles (like 'God') even when used in ignorance by Christians, not apparently understanding that it is not the sound of the name that is as important so much as the character that it represents (pp.109, 633);
- B5. Promotes Zionism and the Israeli Republic as biblical Israel restored in numerous footnotes, and has little concept of the difference between ancient Judahites, Judeans and modern Jews. He is obsessed with the terrorist organisation 'Hamas' which appears repeatedly in the footnotes. There is also, it seems sometimes, a failure to properly differentiate between the Old Covenant Jerusalem (Hagar) and the New Covenant New Jerusalem (Sarah) which is heaven-made, yet elsewhere he confesses correctly that the New Jerusalem comes from Heaven (p.1500). Like many messianic believers and their organisations, he is very Judah-centric and has not understood that all 12 tribes return to the Holy Land at the same time, thus perpetuating the error that Judah is basically 'there' already and Israel-Ephraim has to be added to it as a supplicant rather than as leader (pp.179, 542, 613, 636, 642, 643, 670, 787, 835, 836, 845, 906, 938, 1218, 1283, 1450, 1452);
- B6. Makes no distinction between permissive alcohol consumption in the Old Covenant and its prohibition in the New because all believers are a Rotal Temple Priesthood (pp.194, 655, 1305);
- B7. Though we agree on the importance of keeping the festivals, because the author believes biblical Israel was restored in 1948, we do not agree that the pilgrim festivals must today be observed in Jerusalem as he claims but must rather await Messiah's resturn and the establishment of the Millennial Kingdom (pp.266, 789);
- B8. Condemns and forbids polygamy (like Gabriel Roth and most other messianics) by obfuscating Scripture (p.276) yet, contradictorily, speaks positively of the Law of Levirate which in most cases (because the men entering it would usually do so later in life) demands it (since they would already have a wife or wives and children). He does, however, understand and rightly condemns Solomon's abuse of the principle. Because of his lack of understanding of polygamy, the rules he adheres to regarding divorce and remarriage are only partly correct (pp.282, 1042, 1242, 1466);
- B9. Denies ad nauseam the independent spirit of man and subscribes, like Jehovah's Witnesses and Seventh-Day Adventists, to the false and in our view, dangerous (because so many cults hold to it) soul-sleeping doctrine, and therefore rejects 'heaven' or the 'spirit world' (Paradise) as the 'holding station' or intermediary state and location of the dead prior to resurrection on earth. Also denies, like the Jehovah's Witensses, that Moses and Elijah were literally with Messiah on the Mount of Transfiguration, that it was a 'vision' (Witnesses say it was a 'dream'). Like all soul-sleepers, he indulges in the same scriptural acrobatics as the Witnesses and Adventists to maintain this false doctrine (pp. 709, 929, 961, 994, 1039, 1194, 1203, 1223, 1273, 1287, 1300, 1307, 1324, 1400, 1401, 1431, 1432, 1479, 1485, 1486, 1511, 1523, 1524);
- B10. A clear understanding of the distinction between the words 'fornicate' and 'commit adultery' seems to be lacking because, in part, he does not factor polygamy (see #B8) into the equation of Yahweh's sexual mitzvot (commandments) (pp.1184, 1444, 1468);
- B11. Makes a common mistake amongst messianics in believing that Messiah was born during an autumn/fall festival like yomturah.htmlYom Teruah or Sukkot (pp.1255, 1553);
- B12. Continues the 7 weeks = 50 days Omer count error instead of 7 weeks + 50 days (p.1300, 1339);
- B13. Appears to be advocating a very dangerous Jehovah's Witness and 'New Age Christian' heresy, viz. that Messiah's resurrection was spiritual and not physical - if this is what he actually means, then the author is most definitely promoting cultism (pp.1307, 1564);
- B14. Denies, like the Jehovah's Witnesses, the Personhood of the Ruach haQodesh (Holy Spirit) which in his view is genderless and impersonal (p.1335);
- B15. Seems to believe in Catholic/Mormon-type legalistic authority conferred through the laying-on-of-hands for the propagation of the priesthood (p.1356, 1445), yet elsewhere he seems to be saying that an elder's authority comes exclusively from Yahweh (p.1494). My suspicions were confirmed later (after I had completed my research on the footnote material) when I discovered that he is claiming to hold a special apostolic authority to ordain elders on the earth through what he calls his 'Judicial Order'. He makes the claim, apparently, that he lies in the successive line of ordination of the Apostolic Church of God - 7th Day organisation, in effect promoting one-and-only-true-church-onlyism, a very worrying sign of potential cultism, that is also being pursued by other messianic leaders like the leaders of YATI (producing the RSTNE Bible), SANJ (producing the HRV Bible) and of Radio Tsiyon (who has not produced a Bible translation yet but claims he is the latter-day 'Moses' called to lead the Remnant back to the Promised Land) to name but three of many who are active today;
- B16. It is not always clear when he means when he says Yah'shua's (Jesus') sacrifice is 'continual' which smacks of Catholic doctrine but hopefully by it he means it is perpetually efficacious (e.g. p.1429);
- B17. There is confusion over the binding nature of betrothal which the author says may be cancelled. It may not - only engagements may be cancelled (p.1467);
- B18. Claims the saved will have their memories erased for lost loved ones in the Millennium, indicating that he believes, like the Jehovah's Witnesses, in the total extinction of the unsaved, i.e. he does not have the hope of the conditional universalist (pp.1565, 1566).
ii. Less Serious but Not (in some cases) Insignificant Errors
iii. Miscellaneous Errors in the Footnotes
- C1. Melchizedek is mistaken literally for the pre-incarnate Messiah Yah'shua (Jesus) instead of Shem (e.g. pp.1424, 1425);
- C2. Whilst he does not believe circumcision is a sign of entry into the New Covenant he still maintains it is desirable for hygenic reasons even though Paul insists uncircumcised non-Jewish converts should remain uncircumcised (p.154; also see #B2);
- C3. Speculation is made concerning the location of the Sea of Reeds (Yam Suf) and Mount Sinai which may, or may not, be true (p.242);
- C4. Does not believe the earth was re-formed following a catastrophe in Genesis 1:2 (p.577);
- C6. In various places states that the final, modern Babylon is the USA (e.g. pp.677, 678, 679, 680, 681, 708, 839, 1560, 1561, 1562);
- C6. Numerous references to Russia and Iran in the prophetic literature (like Ezekiel and Daniel) - unfortunately, these territories are now no longer in the Russian Confederation but are independent nations (e.g. p.774);
- C7. Falsely states that Alexander the Great controlled most of what is the modern EU today when it was only a tiny portion of south-eastern Europe (p.774);
- C8. Wrongly views prophecies about the sun, moon and stars as referring to eclipses as opposed to smoke or ash (e.g. pp.796, 1248);
- C9. Reading in events not likely to have been in the mind of the original author like the 'holocaust' in Psalm 101:1 (pp.917, 918);
- C10. Somewhat hostile to birthday celebration though only hinted at (p.983);
- C11. Seems to recognise the Book of Esther as canonical scripture but interestingly has only one minor footnote on it;
- C12. Repeatedly insists that Yah'shua was crucified on an alive or living tree (e.g. pp.1365, 1518);
- C13. Believes ministers should be salaried but within sensible bounds not exceeding basic living expenses, having himself been supported by member tithes and offerings for many years (p.1469);
- C14. Believes long hair replaces women's headcoverings in the New Covenant (p.1472);
- C15. Understands that women are not to be ordained leaders over congregations but fails to understand that they may be appointed leaders over other women (p.1477) - also claims that a man may not be ordained if his wife is not of a high standard of moral character (p.1530);
- C16. Believes the two end-time witnesses in Jerusalem are malakim (angels) - 'cherubs' in his parlance - in spite of the fact that they are killed by men, which no malak (angel) can be (p.1552).
It is a pity the manuscript was not more thoroughly checked for spelling, typographical, grammatical and other errors before being sent to the publishers but perhaps this will be attended to if a second edition is ever printed. Inevitably some typos slip through the net because of the way the brain 'sees' text. What follows is just a small selection of those that caught my eye as I was skimming through the footnotes:
a. Spelling Errors
b. Grammatical Errors
- D1. 'dessert' or pudding instead of 'desert' (p.564);
- D2. 'Istar' instead of 'Ishtar' (e.g. p.579);
- D3. 'folklaw' instead of 'folklore' (p.665);
- D4. 'Goat Tee' instead of 'goatee' (e.g. p.675);
- D5. 'there' instead of 'their' (pp.695, 875);
- D6. 'road' instead of 'rode' (p.482);
- D7. 'whereas' instead of 'where as' (p.1402).
c. Geographical Errors
- E1. Yahweh is the 'protectorate' instead of 'protector' of Israel (p.571);
- E2. 'powerful' instead of 'power' (p.485);
- E3. 'appeasement with Yahweh' - doesn't make sense (p.866);
- E4. 'salvation of Yahweh's' - double infinitive (p.869);
- E5. 'entomology' is the study of insects - he means 'etymology' (p.1312, 1179);
- E6. 'stating to teach' - meaningless in English (p.1183);
- E7. abbreviating 'Matthew' as 'Math' instead of the conventional 'Mt' or 'Matt';
- E8. Mixing 'YHWH' with 'Yahweh' instead of sticking with one or the other (he uses 'Yahweh' in the main text).
- F1. Carthage is to the west of the Middle East (it's in modern Tunisia), not to the south (p.513).
d. Historical Errors
- G1. The First World War ended in 1918, not 1917; the Ottoman Empire ended in 1922, not 1917 - he is perhaps confusing the capture of Jerusalem which took place in 1917 (p.907);
- Alexander the Great never controlled 'most' of the EU as he claims but only a tiny sliver in the south-east corner of Europe (p.774);
The footnotes of the HRB do not give the reader much of an idea as to the actual Bible manuscripts (MSS) used beyond the very general fact that the Septuagint (LXX) was used for the Tanakh (Old Testament) and the 'Peshitta' for the Messianic Scriptures (New Testament). There are many references to 'the Aramaic' without telling us which Aramaic sources were used. Likewise, there is nothing on LXX variants. So this is not, strictly speaking, a translation but a commentary. To say that this is the 'original Bible restored' is, then, little more than polemic. We only have the author's word for it.
This is neither a professional nor a scholarly work but an amateurish interpretation made by one man. There is nothing wrong with that, of course, provided it is viewed for what it really is - a private commentary. There is a lot of interesting and useful information gathered from diverse sources even if the work of one scholar in particular sticks out like a sore thumb.
To be of better use to European English readers, Imperial Units (ounces, pounds, etc.) should have included Metric equivalents (grams, kilos, etc.).
Considering the amount of doctrine the footnotes contain, much of it repetitive as if to drill it into the reader, it is surprisingly undevelopped in many important areas, much of it stuck in long disproved rabbinical thinking. Its Two House doctrine is not very developped and still hearkens back to the early 1980's and 90's when Messianic Jewish identity was still being formulated. One footnote dismisses the Jewish Khazar connection off-handedly.
Though the author has taken on board some of the research work of Roth, Trimm et al, it is selective. Otherwise old rabbinical mistakes are being rehashed, and mistakes obtained from elsewhere, some of them of a dangerous heretical nature. For that reason alone I would not be sharing this Bible version's commentary with my children or parishioners.
That said, the footnotes do incorporate a lot of useful material, some of it original, much of which will be new to many messianics and to interested evangelicsls, and it is there they are the most useful. For those notes alone I would recommend this Bible to friends and acquaintances who know their doctrine well and are conversant with many Bible versions.
Next time we shall be looking at the text itself and then forming a general conclusion.
Continued in Part 2 (the Bible Text itself)
Also see Bible Versions
Read the Hebraic Roots Bible free (PDF file)
(This text may be downloaded but must not be altered or sold)
To buy a hardcopy, go the the
Congregation of Yahweh, Jerusalem website