Email from Matthew Nolan – (of Torah to the Tribes on FB)
From – Matthew Nolan
To – email@example.com
Date – 2014-02-17 10:24
Hi Dave. – This stuff just makes us better, stronger and gives us the strength to carry on! You’re amazing! Attached is my answers, you’ll hear your voice within my answers because Yah has used you and is continuing to use you mightily in my life. The questions are all from the same girl. – Matthew
Matthew Nolan (co-presenter w/ Jim Staley) on Melchizedek: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4cJTsxYtTg&list=UU30yVMtm10VHji7Rcg2hVfw
DrDave note – You will recognize much of Rabbi Nolan’s responses directly from my book – ‘Back to the Melchizedek Future’. Rabbi Nolan did ask me to help field these questions. And has given permission to post these questions and an audio of him answering the same in an open midrash.
The Audio – https://www.transferbigfiles.com/017c0cc9-df58-4daf-bca8-4a1cd0e9d7d4/lt8loL8jB84_aa75WyOhCg2
** – designates ‘Back to the Melchizedek Future’ quotes in Rabbi Nolan answers
Disclaimer: I really respect you (Rabbi Nolan) as a teacher, so as a forward, so Please take my questioning how it is intended, I’m just trying to figure out why I’m not able to completely see eye to eye with you, because of the respect I have for you. And I there are many things we both agree on, but some of those things, I think I took a different route to get where I’m at.
1) If we are only obligated to keep the “Book of the Covenant” which is only up to a point in Exodus, the why does Yeshua say this in Matthew 5:17-19 ?
17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill.
18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
MN Answer (Matthew Nolan)
Note: Book of the Law – BoL – Book of the Covenant – BoC.
Heb 7:18 For there is verily a disannulling of the commandment going before for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof.
The writer of the book of Hebrews understands that it is permissible to disannul the former BoL commandments without abrogating Torah for both the BoL and BoC are both Torah legal entities.
2Tim.2:15 instructs us to; “Study to shew thyself approved unto YHWH, a workman that
needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.” Psalm 119 tells us YHWH’s Torah is truth, we’re told to rightly divide the Torah. The Torah was always meant to be rightly divided. To divide the Torah correctly does not void any part of it.
Gen.49:10 ‘The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until
Shiloh come. **[“Until” demonstrates an impeding change in Torah.] Changes within Torah do not abrogate Torah, not one jot or tittle.
**Gal 3:19 ‘Wherefore then serveth the law? (the Book of the Law v:10) It was added because of
transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made. Rav Shaul tells us we were to serve the Bol until, again impending change outlined and understood from Torah
**Heb 9:10 ‘Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances,
imposed on them until the time of reformation.’ <Diorthosis> (specifically) ‘Messianic restoration’.
**Heb 7:12 ‘For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.’
Both Priesthoods are Torah – both laws are Torah law – one is Melchizedek – one is Levitical.
( read Heb.7:1-17)
**Remember Torah also states ‘that in the witness of two or three the matter is established’ (Dt.19:15). This then is the awareness we must realize – It is not a change of Torah to enact the change in Torah; that has in fact always been right there in the pages of Torah.
**The Brit Chadasha and Rav Sholiach Shaul teach the division of the law. Shaul identifies 16 of the19 categories of law mentioned in the Brit Chadasha:
Rom 3 Faith
Works, Marrige, Eloah, My members, The mind, Sin, Death
The Ruach, Righteousness, Moshe, Christ, Commandments contained in ordinances, Under the Levitical Priesthood, Carnal commandment, Civil
**James adds 2 more
1. The perfect law of liberty 2. The royal law
**The writer of Hebrews adds another: Covenant law
Rom.7:23 “But I see another law” (law of Moses;)
John 7:23, 1 Cor. 9:9) … warring against the “law of my mind”, and bringing me into captivity to the “law of sin” (sin or rebellion).
Rom.7 and 8, we have at least 6 categories of ‘law’:
1] The Law of “God” – (YHWH’s) Torah,
2] The Law of Moses; that all (Pre-New Covenant) had to go through to get to ‘1’,
3] The Law of Sin & Death,
4] The Law of the Mind, and
5] The Law of the Spirit.
6) The Law of Adultery
DP Answer – Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. -
This would have to include Gen.49:10 – ‘until’ is an awareness of impending change that must be fulfilled also – This is also ID’d at such verses as Gal.3:19 & Heb.7:12
Ask your self – Did Yahshua ever sacrifice according to the BotL to pay for or expunge some Sin?
If He had He’d of been the example to do the same – I could add more
2) Wouldn’t the law and prophets mean the entire Tanakh?
Matthew 22:40 “”On these two commandments depend the whole Law and the Prophets.”
MN Answer – Correct. The whole of the Tanakh builds upon the foundation of loving YHWH and loving your neighbor. Avraham demonstrated this (DP -pre) BoC with his pleading over Sodom and Gemorah as did the other Patriach’s in the BoC.
DP Answer – Yes – even Gen.49:10, Ezk.20:24-25, etc.
Ezk 20:24 Because they (Ex.32) had not executed my (Melkizedeq) judgments, but had despised my (Melkizedeq) statutes, and had polluted my (Melkizedeq) sabbaths, and their eyes were after their fathers’ idols.
Ezk 20:25 Wherefore I gave them *also* (Levitical) statutes that were not good, and (Levitical) judgments whereby they should not live;
3) If He didn’t mean the Tanakh, why did He include prophets, and not say ‘Book of the Covenant’?
MN Answer – See #2
DP Answer – Refer to #2 – ‘Book of the Covenant’ is Melkizedeq but its too narrow – The Melkizedeq portion of Torah is Gen.1:1 thru Ex.24:8-11 – Now ID the Melkizedeq issues peppered thru out
4) Why does He say “the law or the prophets” when the prophets definitely come after Exodus?
MN Answer – See #2
DP Answer – Refer to #3 – What ‘law’ are we assuming? – There are 19 ID’d in the NT
5) Weren’t the tablets, that are the ‘Book of the Covenant’ as you say, which were put into the ark, written in Paleo Hebrew and therefore would Not have jots & tittles? And therefore could not be the commands, or law, or Torah, He is referring to, but would have to be the Bible or scriptures that they currently had at the time of His life, because then at that point in time there were vowels points – the jots & tittles?
MN Answer – Jots and tittles are not limited to vowel points. As you stated in the Paleo Hebrew you’d not have any jots or tittles if they were limited to just vowel points in the modern Babylonian script. Jots and tittles are elongated letters, shortened letters and mysterious teachings that appear in YHWH’s inspired Torah, be it Paleo or otherwise.
DP Answer – Refer to #2
6) (Sorry, but a *little tongue in cheek here) Have heaven and earth passed away and I missed it?
MN Answer – See #1
DP Answer – Refer to #2 – What does ‘all’ mean? All includes ‘change’ – That must be fulfilled all so*
7) According to this covenant teaching would we not be obligated (like with tzit tzits) to follow the Shema or the Aaronic Blessing, since those are found in Deuteronomy?
MN Answer – **Most Messianic, Rabbinic, Orthodox, Reform, Conservative, etc. Hebrew Roots, Messianic Jews/Israel, etc. alike recite the ‘Shama’ of Dt.6:4 and the Aaronic Blessing of Num.6 saying ‘Adonai Eloheynu’ – Adonai, Adonai; this and that Adonai. The problem is Moses did not write ‘Adonai Eloheynu’ at Dt.6:4; he wrote ‘YHWH Elohim’. Num.6:27 uses the dynamic of Hebrew literature; restating to stress the point “ …they shall put *my* name upon the children of Israel; and *I* will bless them”; That “Name” occurring four times (Num.6:22-27) is Yahweh. The third commandment Ex.20:7 of the Book of the Covenant (Ex.19:5-24:8) suffers similar abuse. So; you decide are we learning the words of Moses or replacements of the Rabbi’s that’s the more important issue here.
Yet it’s not a command that you must sing the Shema or Aaronic blessing in the BoC, correct!
The priesthood being transferred from Aaron to Malki-Tzedik
Heb 7:12 ‘For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.’
YHWH is still the one true Elohim whether BoC or BoL so it would seem that the Shema would be applicable as to bless Israel comes right from the heart of the BoC (Gen 12:3) whoever does it – Aaron or Malki-Tzedik, the point I think is to bless Israel.
DP Answer – Then why do you (most of you) say Adonai instead of YHWH that Moses wrote? Realize that tzitzits were never part of the ‘Book of the Covenant’ Ex.19:5-24:8, were never part of Gen.26:5 – were never part of anything pre-Num.15. Tzitzits were given under the Levitical priesthood the same Law that Yahshua (Gal.4:4 – and most of us) could never be a priest under (Ps.110:1-4 /Heb.7:21/1Ptr.2:9).
8) Why does it say in the gospels many times that Yeshua taught to keep the Law and the Prophets? And to only listen to the scribes and pharisees when they spoke from Moses’ seat? Why doesn’t he say ‘Book of the Covenant’?
DP Answer – Refer to #3
MN Answer – Matt 11:13 For all the prophets and the law were until John.
Lk 16:16 For the law and the prophets were until John.
Gal 4:4 But when the fullness of the time had come, YHWH sent forth His Son, 12 made of a woman born under the law.
Yeshua was born under the BoL and kept it perfectly and taught others, like Moshe and the prophets before Him to do likewise. He had to have the proposal, acceptance, blood cutting and covenant confirming meal before there could be the final transferring of priesthoods and the bringing in of the much more glorious covenant and the doing away with the BoL.
2Cor. 3:11 ‘if that which is done away was glorious, much more that which remains is glorious.’
Heb 7;18 For there is verily a disannulling of the commandment going before for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof.
9) If it would no longer be applicable after Yeshua’s death to keep the commands that were written after Exodus 24, why were His teachings to keep those commands in the gospels for future generations, since the gospels were written after His death?
MN Answer – The Gospels are a written record of what Yeshua did and what He taught when He was alive. They can’t be divorced from the culture, context and setting. See #8
DP Answer – You would have to be specific – Even so – The Melchizedek Book of the Covenant does contain Melchizedek Covenant Law that is still binding that is not the same as the Levitical Book of the Law. That being said; caution must be stressed – This is not a ‘party hardy’ – total ‘free skate’! I have identified the parameters of the Levitical Book of the Law as Ex.24:12 to Dt.31:26. We are no longer under a Levitical Priesthood with its Levitical Law (the specific particular law point that the Christian Church is right about) that does not ‘remain’ (2Cor.3:11/13). However; there are many Melchizedek Priesthood issues that have been re-stated in the Levitical Book of the Law (Ex.24:12 to Dt.31:26) under the Levitical Priesthood – originally stated before this Law under the Melchizedek Priesthood (Gen.1:1 to Ex.24:11). These re-stateds stand in their original Melchizedek place and therefore ‘remain’ (2Cor.3:11). We must examine what has been thrust on us, what will be thrust on us; both the unconsidered and re-examine what we thought we knew – in the way we thought we knew it.
10) If these were the taught ones who Yeshua gave knowledge and left to teach everyone and make disciples after His death, and the gospels are the inspired word of Yah, why would Yah have these men write these specific teachings, after Yeahua’s death, if it were during a time when they were no longer applicable? I mean we weren’t given Yeshua’s life in it’s entirety so why include something that’s been done away with?
DP Answer – @If these were the taught ones ??? these who? The writing Apostles? Assuming so – We need to know all pertinent history – to ‘rightly divide’ truth (Acts 17:11).
@specific teachings, after Yeahua’s death??? Name 1 Levitical issue Yahshua upheld – Refer to #3
MN Answer – Many did teach the BoC after Yeshua’s death, burial and resurrection:
**The Levitical Book of the Law BoL Gal 3:10 is the Law that was:
1. Gal 3:10 ‘a school master’
2. Heb 9:10 ‘imposed’
3. Gal 2:21 ‘set aside’
4. Eph 2:16 ‘reconciled’
5. Gal 3:12 the law is not of faith
6. Gal 3:19 ‘added’
7. Rom 4:14 (Levitical Law) not of grace not of righteousness not heirs
8. Rom 5:20 ‘entered’ (alongside0
9. Heb 7:6 ‘carnal commandment’
10. Col 2:14 ‘nailed to the cross’
11. Eph 2:15 ‘abolished’
12. Ga.3:18 contains no inheritance
Gal 3:19 ‘Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made …’
2Cor.3:13 ‘…that the children of Israel could not steadfastly look to the end of that which is abolished: …’
Gal.2:21 “ … for if righteousness comes by the law (Heb.7:11), then Messiah died in vain.”
11) He says that our righteousness must exceed that of the pharisees. He expounded upon commandments making them weightier in the sermon on the mount. How can you then say commandments in Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy can now just be shelved, it’s not a sin to do them but you don’t have to do them?
MN Answer – The Pharisees weren’t keeping the BoL (Matt 15,16, 23 & Mk 7 to name a few.) Whilst still under the law Yeshua was teaching the BoL to His audience, like Moshe and the Prophets before Him. You can’t teach adherence to a covenant that is not yet cut. You must rightly divide the Torah to the covenant that is in effect and teach adherence to it which Yeshua did perfectly.
DP Answer – The ‘commandments’ ‘He expounded upon’ you speak of are Melchizedek. Refer to #2 & #3
12) Did Yeshua say that after His death, His followers are then only obligated to keep up to a point in Exodus?
DP Answer – Refer to #2 & #3 & #9
MN Answer – Matt 26:28 For this is My dahm of the New Covenant (Not BoL) that is shed for many for the remission of sins.
His blood ratified a New Covenant administered under a Malki-Tzedik Priesthood which can only be found in Gen 1:1 – Ex 24:11.
13) He told the pharisees that once He left, His disciples would fast, where is fasting in the ‘Book of the Covenant’, isn’t fasting first mentioned in the book of Numbers?
MN Answer – **The first reference to the English word fast in the KJV is in 2 Sam 12:21, the Hebrew word tsuwm.
YHWH did make children of Israel fast for three days from food and water in the BoC.
Ex 15:22 So Moshe brought Yisrael from the Sea of Reeds, and they went out into the wilderness of Shur; and they went three days in the wilderness, and found no mayim.
Ex 16:3 3 And the children of Yisrael said to them, Would to Elohim we had died by the hand of vuvh in the land of Mitzrayim, when we sat by the pots of meat, and when we did eat lechem until we were full; for you have brought us forth into this wilderness, to kill this whole congregation with hunger.
DP Answer – These Hebrew words – ‘tsum’ fast or ‘tsom’ fasting do not occur in Torah; being the first 5 books (of Moses) – Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy. Do not occur in Lev.23:27 or Num.29:7.
14) Are commandments after this point like extra credit, since you don’t have to do them, and is that how one would become greater in the kingdom?
DP Answer – Refer to #4
MN Answer – Gal 3:10 For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the ‘book of the law’ to do them. 11 But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of YHWH, it is evident: for, The just shall live by (Covenant) faith. 12 And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them.13 Messiah hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree: 14 That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Yahshua Messiah; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.
**Notice that the works of the law and the blessing of Abraham (by Covenant) i.e. ‘the promise’ are a dichotomy … a contradiction in terms … are not the same.
Yet Covenant Righteousness has never come through the enactment of damage control cleanup laws governing animal sacrifice stipulations offered to expunge the direct or collateral guilt and aftermath of Covenant Breaking. Definitely no extra credit for doing the BoL.
15) What about Acts 15:20-21 where they had come to the decision, to not put many requirements on new gentiles coming into the faith? They were given a few restrictions, but that wasn’t really the only thing they would have been required. I mean they wouldn’t have been allowed to break the 10 commandments. So obviously according to Paul, the implication is that this was just a stepping stone until they had a better knowledge of the law of Moses after hearing it read in the synagogues every Sabbath. Then they would adapt to follow all the laws, including circumcision.
MN Answer – Acts 15:20 “Instead we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols from sexual immorality from the meat of strangled animals and from blood” 21 “For the law of Moses has been preached in every city from the earliest times and is read in the synagogues on every Sabbath.”n
Ber 9:4 But flesh with the chayim in it, which is its dahm, shall you not eat. 5 And surely the dahm of your lives I will require; at the hand of every beast will I require it, and at the hand of man; at the hand of every man’s brother will I require the chayim of man. 6 Whosoever sheds man’s dahm, by man, shall his dahm be shed: for in the image of Elohim He made man. 7 And you, be fruitful, and multiply; bring out abundantly in the earth, and multiply in it.
Acts 15:20 is a restatement of the *7 Noachide laws contained within the BoC as jumping in point to covenant (BoC) keeping. (*DP – actually 4 predating the BotC)
In all cases those who circumcise today after Jos.5:2 think they are entering the covenant and being obedient to Gen.17 (Melkizedeq) – they are not; they are being obedient to Jos.5:2 (Levitical).
Jos 5:2 At that time YHWH said unto Joshua, Make thee sharp knives, and circumcise again the children of Israel the *second time*.
Jos.5:5 “Now all the people that came out were circumcised: but all the people that were born in the wilderness by the way as they came forth out of Egypt, them they had *not* circumcised.”
**The issue is; There is no mention in Torah that the Israelites every stopped circumcision; let alone at Exodus 32. The 40yr lapse of circumcision comes into play at Exodus 32 by way of Jos.5:5 – This verse in Joshua indicates that at some point pursuant to leaving Egypt all the males were circumcised. The question is – What event between initially leaving Egypt at Ex.12 and the witness of Jos.5:5 would cause the Israelites to stop circumcising all their males? Let alone babies on the 8th day for the next 40+yrs? The compelling answer is the ‘Golden Calf’ covenant-breach of Ex.32 (Rom.2:25). They were only 3 months out of Egypt (Ex.19:1) and had just vowed to keep the Covenant at Ex.24:7-8 – which they broke (Jer.31:32) some 40 days later (a total of 4+months). The beginning point of their 40 plus years wilderness wandering. After the covenant break they knew there was no longer any point.
Rom.2:25 For circumcision verily profiteth, if thou keep the law: but if thou be a breaker of the law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcision. – (The very Ex.32 point)
**So; from Ex.32 to the rest of Torah (1st 5 Books of Moses) into Jos.5:2 is proof that the Gen.17 Melkizedeq physical circumcision and with it the covenants that it was the entrance token/sign for were broken. Forever separated by the 40yr lapse of circumcision -And- the need for the Jos.5:2 ’2nd Command’ carried out under the Levitical priesthood (Heb.7:11-12). Note; the Melkizedeq Gen.12 everlasting oath of YHWH is still in force – not dependent on man or circumcision.
DP Answer – Read your own text – Acts 15:1-2 – Refer to #3
16) Doesn’t baptism come from Mikvah? And isn’t that found in Leviticus?
DP Answer – 1Pe 3:20 Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of Yah waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.
21 ¶ The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward Yah,) by the resurrection of Yahshua Messiah:
MN Answer – Cor Aleph 10:1 Moreover, Yisraelite brothers, I would not that you should be ignorant, 1 how that all our ahvot 2 were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea;2 And were all immersed into Moshe in the cloud and in the sea (BoC.)
Ex 19:101And vuvh said to Moshe, Go to the people, and set them apart today and tomorrow, and let them wash their clothes,….. And Moshe went down from the mount to the people,and set-apart the people; and they washed their clothes. 15 And he said to the people, Be ready for the third day: approach not your wives in intimacy.
17) What about when Paul was brought before the council in Acts chapter 24?
24:14 “But this I confess unto thee, that after the Way which they call a sect, so serve I the God of our fathers, believing all things which are according to the law, and which are written in the prophets”
MN Answer – The Torah and the prophets testify to the BoL and the New Covenant (BoC) reality of the Malki-Tzedki, there’s no conflict here.
Deut 31:26 Take this scroll of the Torah, and put it at the side of the Ark of the Testimony of vuvh your Elohim, that it may be there for a witness against you.
Jer 31:31 See, the days are coming, says vuvh, that I will make a Brit Chadasha-Renewed Brit with Beit Yisrael, and with Beit Yahudah: 32 Not according to the brit that I made with their ahvot in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Mitzrayim; which brit they broke, although I was a husband to them, says vuvh:33 But this shall be the brit that I will make with Beit
Yisrael22 after those days, 23 says vuvh, I will put My Torah in their inward parts, and write it on their levavot; and will be their Elohim, and they shall be My People- Ami.
DP Answer – This is Paul’s strategic defense ‘all’ includes Gen.49:10, etc. change found in Torah
18) What about the fact that the New Covenant in Jeremiah also comes with the promise of everyone knowing YHVH and “no longer shall they teach each one his neighbor and each one his brother saying know YHVH for they all know Me from the least of them to the greatest of them” 31:34? Won’t that be when Yeshua returns? It looks like the entire chapter 31 is speaking of a future time from now?
DP Answer – No not all is future; Jer 31:31-33 is realized by Yahshua at Lk.22:20 – Just like Gen.49:10 is not a ‘come back’ situation
MN Answer – The writer of Hebrews knew that this Scripture was the ever present reality of the work of Yeshua as He sat down at the right hand of YHWH taking His rightful Malki-Tzedik High Priestly position and that the old decaying Levitical priesthood was vanishing away.
Heb 8:8 For finding fault with them, 10 He says, Behold, the days come, says the Master vuvh, when I will make a Brit Chadasha with Beit Yisrael and with Beit Yahudah: 9 Not according to the brit that I made with their ahvot in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Mitzrayim; because they continued not in My brit, and I regarded them not, 3 says the Master vuvh. 10 For this is the brit that I will make with Beit Yisrael after those days, says the Master vuvh; I will put My
Torah into their mind, and write it on their levavot: and I will be their tvkt, and they shall be My People-Ami: 11 And they shall not teach every man his fellowYisraelite citizen, 5 and every man his Yisraelite brother,saying, Know the Master vuvh for kol Yisrael shall know Me, from the least to the greatest of them. 12 For I will forgive their unrighteousness, and their sins and their Torah-less-ness will I remember no more. 13 In that He says, a new priesthood, 6 He has made the first old. Now that which decays and becomes old is ready to vanish away
19) What about 1 Timothy 5:17-18? Why quote irrelevant verses? Yah inspired right? Why doesn’t it say “who labor in the ‘Book of the Covenant’?
17 Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in the Word and doctrine.
18 For the Scripture saith, “Thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn,” (Deut. 25:4) and, “The laborer is worthy of his reward.” (Lev.19:13)
MN Answer – Ex 21-24, the BoC contains the foundational Tza’ar Ba’alei Chayim/cruelty to animals laws, the moral and ceremonial laws concerning elders and laborers from which Deuteronomy and Rav Shaul draw from.
DP Answer – ‘Word and doctrine’. Would include Gen.49:10, etc. – ox & laborers – current to Gen.18:19 & 26:5 too – All current to Melkizedeq
20) Back to tzit tzits, if we are no longer obligated to wear them then why does it say in Numbers that it is a command to be kept “throughout all their generations”, especially since we know the 144,000 in revelation are the 12 tribes of Israel and therefore belong to the “all generations”?
DP Answer – You need to be honest and do your homework – the phrase “throughout all their generations” is not biblical it occurs nowhere in the Bible – the phrase is ‘throughout their generations’
First – this was given by YHWH the Melek Tzedeq – we must focus on what He said ‘in your generations’ and ‘everlasting’. 1] ‘everlasting’ from <’olam> does not necessarily mean eternal or forever; it most correctly means ‘to a point out of mind’ 2] ‘in your generations’ – sometimes gets corrupted at various points to ‘in ALL your generations’. The phrase – ‘in ALL your/their/his generations’ is not biblical; it is not a biblical phrase; it never appears in the Bible; it is either ‘in your generations’, ‘in their generations’, ‘in his generations’ or ‘in all generations’.
The English word ‘generations’ is translated from the Hebrew word ‘dowr’ (dore / door). In either case; ‘in your generations’, ‘in their generations’ or ‘in his generations’; ‘dowr’ is used 1 time in the sentence. BUT guess what the English word ‘all’ is translated from? The English word; ‘all’ is translated from the very same ‘dowr’; thus the phrase ‘in all generations’ in Hebrew is ‘dowr”dowr’. It is a dynamic of Hebrew literature having no punctuation that when something is being stressed it is repeated. Thus the phrase ‘in all generations’ (‘dowr”dowr’) is the phrase stressed with the most weight. – Get the Book.
MN Answer – If you are in the BoL then everything in the BoL is throughout your generations, correct. The point isn’t whether ‘throughout all your generations’ is applicable. It’s whether the BoL is still applicable which I believe Scripture identifies that it’s not.
Gal 3:17 For if the inheritance is from the law (BoL), it is no more by the word of promise (Gen 12, BoC): but vuvh gave it to Avraham by promise.19 What purpose then does the law (BoL) serve? It was added because of transgressions, 3 until (impending change) the Zera should come (that’s now, Yeshua has come) to whom the promise was made.
21) The tzit tzits were instituted to remember not to whore against Elohim, and to remember to be set-apart, so is there anyone today, including the believer, who can honestly say they are completely immune to following their own heart, putting idols in front of them in their life, not following Yah’s commands, and turning from being set-apart? Doesn’t this go back to the future revelation in Jeremiah, where this can actually be said of believers when Messiah returns?
MN Answer – **(Num.15:38) Tzitzit were to remind and attest to what? Commandment Keeping. Again most don’t realize and have never considered that ‘tzitzits’ by the witness of Jos.5:5 were given at Num.15:38 to an uncircumcising crowd of a large and growing (at the point of Jos.5:5 near total) uncircumcised male population. I realize the problems this presents; But there it is. Selah.
**Then there is the instruction for tzitzits/fringes Num.15:38 and Deut.22:12 – this does not include Rabbinic style Knots, Wraps, number of Knots, number of Wraps, with special (or otherwise) various contrived meanings – that have been added.
Deut 4:2 Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of YHWH your Elohim which I command you.
**There are those that raise the question about Yahshua wearing ‘tzitzits’ (Num.15:38); did He or didn’t He? I would have to agree, with little doubt that He did; perfectly not breaking any law. For He (Yahshua) was born as one under the (Levitical) ‘law’ (Lk.2:27/Gal.4:4). The same post Melchizedek Covenant breach (Ex.32) Levitical ‘law’ (Heb.7:11) that made Him (Yahshua) ineligible to ever be a Levitical priest (Heb.7:14). Includes the same Levitical circumcision Jos.5:2 ‘law’. Yet the ‘law’; that ‘(Levitical) law’ had to change (Heb.7:12/Gen.49:10) for Yahshua to become the Melchizedek High Priest. The same ‘law’ making Him (Yahshua) ineligible to be a Levitical priest also makes the majority of us ineligible to be a Levitical priests, for the same reason; Yahshua as are most of us are not from the tribe of Levi (Heb.7:13-14). Yet we are being called as priests into the Melchizedek Priesthood (Isa.61:6/1Pt.2:9); this would not be possible unless the ‘law’ did change (Heb.7:12) as prophesied (Gen.49:10).
**Most just simply point to such scriptures such as;
Jos 1:8 “This Book of the Law shall not depart from your mouth, but you shall meditate in it day and night, that you may observe to do according to all that is written in it. For then you will make your way prosperous, and then you will have good success.
**And have no realization that this as well as other scripture between Ex.32:10 and Jos.5:2 by the witness of Jos.5:5 were given to an increasingly and later a mostly – near total uncircumcised crowd.
… that thou mayest observe to do according to all that is written therein…
**This was given to a specific post Covenant breach (Ex.32:10 / Num.3:12) Israelite group – Today you cannot banner such insisting ‘nothing has changed’ and then not do it? Exactly as stated – by Jms 2:10 every bit of it – for that’s hypocrisy.
Jms 2:10 For whoever shall keep the whole law, and yet stumble in one point, he is guilty of all.
**Like – Do you have a fence on your roof? Do you animal sacrifice? BY fire? Do you drink, grain, fat, flour, etc. sacrifice? Do you go to your local Levite Priest to find answers too hard for you? Do you animal sacrifice morning and evening for Shabbat? – Etc.
**You know you don’t! To defend and say ‘I keep the law’ – You can’t pick & choose – that’s the point! If you say well there is no Temple – we can’t. ??? – Where exactly is that proviso in Torah? It’s not!
**Do you wear kippas meant for Aaron’s Sons? I used to. Do you defer to Rabbis over Torah? Do you say Adonai instead of YHWH that Moses wrote? Do you recite prayers ascribing YHWH commanded this or that? When He did not. Do you keep Jewish Feast days – the way that Jews describe them Over YHWH’s Feast days the way that Yah’s Torah describes them? Most do – Not even considering that these (and more) are all additions prohibited by Dt.4:2 & 12:32
**Ezk 20:24 Because they (Ex.32) had not executed my (Melkizedeq) judgments, but had despised my (Melkizedeq) statutes, and had polluted my (Melkizedeq) sabbaths, and their eyes were after their fathers’ idols.Ezk 20:25 Wherefore I gave them *also* (Levitical) statutes that were not good, and (Levitical) judgments whereby they should not live;
**Heb 7:11 If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the (Levitical) law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron?Heb 7:12 For the priesthood being changed (from Levitical back to Melkizedeq), there is made of necessity a *change* also of the law (from Levitical law back to Melkizedeq law).
Gal 2:21 “… for if righteousness comes through the (Levitical) law, then Messiah died in vain.”
**Or you can repent of ‘I keep the (Levitical) law’ realizing that you can’t; agree and accept that ‘until’ did mean change through Yeshua Messiah and with that back to the Melkizedeq law of Torah without the Levitical ‘not good’ additions.
**The Melkizedeq law of Torah – Basically found from Gen.1:1 to Ex.24:11 (this is Torah too) – without the ‘not good’ Levitical additions.
DP Answer – The tzit tzits were instituted to remember not to whore against Elohim – You are answering your our question – Did Abraham wear or need this remembrance? Hebrew thot – If you want to know the future look to the beginning – Refer to #7
22) In 2 Chronicles 34, you said Yoshiyahu “tried to renew the Book of the Covenant” but it doesn’t say that, it says in verse 31 & 32 And the sovereign stood in his place and made a covenant before YHVH to follow YHVH and to guard His commands and His witnesses and His laws with all his heart and all his being to do the words of the covenant that were written in this book and he made stand all who were present in Yerushalayim and Binyamin and the inhabitants of Yerushalayim did according to the covenant of Elohim the Elohim of their fathers. (and “this book” meaning Torah, which here is one clear example in this chapter where it very much looks like the terms ‘Book of the Torah’ & ‘Book of the Covenant’ are being used synonymously, but is not the only place.) So if 2 Chronicles is part of the Bible and therefore the inspired Word of Yah, when He says something did happen (not tried to) shouldn’t we believe Him?
DP Answer – Refer to #2 #3 #4 & #9 –
MN Answer – Yoshiyahu could of tried to do whatever he wanted that’s kind of irrelevant. What’s important like you said is what he did do and that was he, ‘made a covenant before YHVH to follow YHVH and to guard His commands and His witnesses and His laws with all his heart and all his being to do the words of the covenant that were written in this book and he made stand all who were present in Yerushalayim and Binyamin and the inhabitants of Yerushalayim did according to the covenant of Elohim the Elohim of their fathers.’
Yoshiyahu didn’t renew the Covnenant of Promise (Eph 2:12 – the BoC) there was no proposal, acceptance, blood ratification or covenant confirming meal. This is not a Covenant of Promise it doesn’t connect back to Beresheeth 12 or meet one single BoC requirement.
The whole paradigm shift of the Malki-Tzedik anointing is that the BoC and the BoL are not synonomous terms as religious Judaism has taught for thousands of years through tradition.
Gal 3:10 For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the ‘book of the law’ to do them. 11 But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of YHWH, it is evident: for, The just shall live by (Covenant) faith. 12 And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them.13 Messiah hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree: 14 That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Yahshua Messiah; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.
Works of the law and the blessing of Abraham (by Covenant) i.e. ‘the promise’ are a dichotomy … a contradiction in terms … are not the same.
23) And if it does in fact say, meaning Yah said, that he and the “did according to the covenant” and then it says he appointed the Levitical priests in their duties, wouldn’t that according to your teaching, be a direct contradiction to the Word of Yah?
MN Answer – See #22.
DP Answer – What are you specifically referencing? In both specific cases?
If you’re referring to 2Ch 34:32 – go understand what Gal.4:21 on is saying
24) Why does it say in 2 Timothy 3:16-17 not say “All scripture in Genesis and Exodus” if that’s all we have to keep?
16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.
DP Answer – This includes Gen.49:10, Ex.19, Ex.32, Num.3, Jos.5, etc.
MN Answer – This is true whether you’re in a ratified BoC or not. I firmly believe all Scripture is inspired by YHWH, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness that the man of YHWH may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work. BoC or BoL does not change this truth.
25) And do these verses in Deuteronomy, not apply to us? And what about this verse in Revelation chapter 22, is it only specifically referring to the book of Revelation, or to the Bible as a whole?
4:2 You shall not add to the word which I am commanding you, nor take away from it, that you may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you.
12:32 “[a]Whatever I command you, you shall be careful to do; you shall not add to nor take away from it.
MN Answer – See #1
DP Answer – You have your answer – You shall not add to the word which I am commanding you, nor take away from it – This includes Gen.49:10 ie change
26) What about this verse in Revelation chapter 22, is it only specifically referring to the book of Revelation, or to the Bible as a whole?
22:18 I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues which are written in this book;
DP Answer – the prophecy of this book – Read Rev.1:3 – refer to #25
MN Answer – See # 1
27) Is the Fast in Acts 27:9 the Day of Atonement?
The context of Acts 27:9 is describing the season of a ship voyage. It states V.12 that it was winter, Yom Kippur is in winter and Jews would have still been keeping Yom Kippur. This verse does not negatively or positively affect the analysis of our subject it’s out of context of our subject area.
But….Lev 23:27 Also on the tenth day of this seventh month there shall be a day of atonement: it shall be an holy convocation to you; and ye shall afflict your souls, and offer an offering made by fire unto YHWH.
**Clearly no sacrifice/offering; by fire – is involved in modern Atonement proceedings – a clear Torah commandment break / instruction secession – You cannot pick and choose – (itself an enacted yet denied ‘CHANGE’!).
DP Answer – Yes – They probably thot so. Now go find #13
28) And this is just something I feel compelled to ask after something you said in a teaching about a month ago “we don’t have to look like odd balls”, are you afraid of man, of what someone in the world would think if you went back to wearing a beard and tzit tzits? I’m not saying play dress up like some people do but, do you care more about blending in than having your set-apartness be reflected in your appearance? And if so, isn’t that what the jews did around the time of the second temple with the greeks?
2 Timothy 4:3-4
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.
I do agree that the Levitical priesthood may have been put in place because the people did not accept YHVH in their hearts and transgressed against Him, but I believe Yah has shown me that while certain laws may have been instituted as a result of the golden calf, the point at which the people relinquished their priesthood under the order of Melchizedek and the Levitical priesthood was put in place was at the base of the mountain where they refused to hear the voice of Yah for themselves. How can you be a priest if you refuse to hear from Yah? They asked for intercessors and that’s exactly what they got. I also agree that we are no longer under a Levitical priesthood for the purpose of making sacrifice for our sins, since we have Yeshua who is our perfect sacrifice, and He sanctifies us according to the order of Melchizedek, and is our High priest. And now having excepted Yeshua, we are ordained in the order of Melchizedich through the Holy Spirit we can now hear from Yah ourselves through Yeshua our High Priest. So, when the current rabbinical authorities in Israel construct another temple in Yerushelayim and put in place their Levitical priesthood we are not to partake in that for two reasons: 1, they don’t have the authority under Messiah, and 2, won’t they will be practicing under a false Messiah, the anti-christ of revelation who will make sacrifice on their alter? I wouldn’t want any part in that deception. But, like I’ve said before Paul took a nazarite vow (Numbers) as proof he kept ‘the Law’ (that is specifically what it says in Scripture, the inspired Word) and went to the temple to complete his vow, but I believe that because the Jewish authorities would not accept the gospel truth, that temple was destroyed not to far off in the future from that point. Making all means of sacrifice or offering on an alter impossible for anyone at this time. But prophesy tells us in Ezekiel, that during the millennial reign there will be a new Levitical priesthood instituted, and there will be a latter that will be cast down at that time. Those new Levite priests will still be referred to at that time as Yah’s inheritance, and Yah is their inheritance.
DP Answer – do you care more about standing out than having your set-apartness be reflected in your behavior?
will turn their ears away from the truth – is that the same truth of Heb.7:12?
was at the base of the mountain where they refused to hear the voice of Yah for themselves. – That is directly untrue – Read Ex.24:3
Wrong again – Paul ended a nazarite vow (Numbers) in the only Torah way possible as proof he kept ‘the Law’ (that is specifically what it says in Scripture, the inspired Word). He also said he would use ‘all’ means to try and save some – after all Paul was at the cusp of the law transition point.
You need to study this out before you spout – @Those new Levite priests will still be referred to at that time as Yah’s inheritance, and Yah is their inheritance. – Yah set a difference btx the sons of zadok and all others
Eze 44:13 And they shall not come near unto me, to do the office of a priest unto me, nor to come near to any of my holy things, in the most holy place: but they shall bear their shame, and their abominations which they have committed.
14 But I will make them keepers of the charge of the house, for all the service thereof, and for all that shall be done therein.
15 But the priests the Levites, the sons of Zadok, that kept the charge of my sanctuary when the children of Israel went astray from me, they shall come near to me to minister unto me, and they shall stand before me to offer unto me the fat and the blood, saith YHWH:
MN Answer – The Kingdom of YHWH is a Malki-Tzedik kingdom and I wouldn’t ever want to look back to the BoL.
Lk 9:62 And Yeshua said to him, No man, having put his hand to the plough handle, and looking back, is fit for the malchut of YHWH.
Many on the Messianic teaching circuit have taken issue and ridiculed other teachers and pastors who’ve been excitingly teaching what they’re learning about the BoC but not one person has stood before me to take issue. I truly believe that YHWH has given me courage to teach His truth regardless of what men think and He has protected me.
Josh 10:8 And the YHWH said to Joshua, “Do not fear them, for I have delivered them into your hand; not a man of them shall stand before you.
2 Timothy 4:3-4
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. MN Answer – YHWH’s BoC is still Torah/truth and certainly not a myth, so I think we’re safe here!
I do agree that the Levitical priesthood may have been put in place because the people did not accept YHVH in their hearts and transgressed against Him, MN Answer – (If the Levitical priesthood was put in place then that would mean there was a change in Torah) but I believe Yah has shown me that while certain laws may have been instituted as a result of the golden calf, MN Answer – (Laws were instituted and added due to the Golden Calf) the point (a point of change) at which the people relinquished their priesthood under the order of Melchizedek and the Levitical priesthood was put in place was at the base of the mountain where they refused to hear the voice of Yah for themselves. MN Answer – (It sounds like your working this out for yourself) How can you be a priest if you refuse to hear from Yah? (We all need a mediator, that’s the point.Moshe and Aaron under the Levitcal and Yeshua under the Malki-Tzedik. The Ruach Ha Kosesh is the still, small voice of YHWH given to us through the mediator Yeshua). They asked for intercessors and that’s exactly what they got. I also agree that we are no longer under a Levitical priesthood for the purpose of making sacrifice for our sins, since we have Yeshua who is our perfect sacrifice, and He sanctifies us according to the order of Melchizedek, and is our High priest. MN Answer – (My point exactly. But you are either under a priesthood with ALL it’s laws and ordinances or you’re not. You can’t have some of the Levitical but sideline the ones about sacrifice out of convenience) And now having excepted Yeshua, we are ordained in the order of Melchizedich through the Holy Spirit we can now hear from Yah ourselves through Yeshua our High Priest. So, when the current rabbinical authorities in Israel construct another temple in Yerushelayim and put in place their Levitical priesthood we are not to partake in that for two reasons: 1, they don’t have the authority under Messiah, and 2, won’t they will be practicing under a false Messiah, the anti-christ of revelation who will make sacrifice on their alter? MN Answer – (This is where it can get very convoluted. We must either follow the BoL with all its Levitical ordinances of Temple, sacrifice and Levitical authority. Or we must follow the BoC with the Malki-Tzedik ordinances, altar outside the gate and superior sacrifice. We can’t mix the two to fit our paradigm of belief. The Torah – BoL or BoC make no provision for a pick a mix.) I wouldn’t want any part in that deception. But, like I’ve said before Paul took a nazarite vow (Numbers) as proof he kept ‘the Law’ MN Answer – (1 Cor 9:20 And to the Yahudim I became as a Yahudi, that I might gain the Yahudim; to them that are under the law (BoL), as under the law (BoL), 2 that I might gain them that are under the Torah) To those still under the BoL Rav Shaul met them where they were at demonstrating that he was not lawless. Once he gained their ear he could reveal the right dividing point of the law which is exactly what he did with the Galatians. (that is specifically what it says in Scripture, the inspired Word) and went to the temple to complete his vow, but I believe that because the Jewish authorities would not accept the gospel truth, that temple was destroyed not to far off in the future from that point. Making all means of sacrifice or offering on an alter impossible for anyone at this time. But prophesy tells us in Ezekiel, that during the millennial reign there will be a new Levitical priesthood instituted, and there will be a latter that will be cast down at that time. Those new Levite priests will still be referred to at that time as Yah’s inheritance, and Yah is their inheritance.
29) So that leads me to ask why at Sukkot did you insinuate that possibly those working in the Levitical priesthood at that time would be the least in the kingdom?
MN Answer – **The Levitical BoL containing the Levitical Priesthood is the Law that was:
13. Gal 3:10 ‘a school master’
14. Heb 9:10 ‘imposed’
15. Gal 2:21 ‘set aside’
16. Eph 2:16 ‘reconciled’
17. Gal 3:12 the law is not of faith
18. Gal 3:19 ‘added’
19. Rom 4:14 (Levitical Law) not of grace not of righteousness not heirs
20. Rom 5:20 ‘entered’ (alongside0
21. Heb 7:6 ‘carnal commandment’
22. Col 2:14 ‘nailed to the cross’
23. Eph 2:15 ‘abolished’
24. Ga.3:18 contains no inheritance
I wouldn’t think Yah would take the least for His inheritance. But I believe the new covenant of promise has not yet taken place and therefore you cannot nullify any of the laws that we can and are able to still obey today. MN Answer – (The BoL makes no provision for, ‘laws that we can and are able to still obey today.’)We are betrothed, not yet married, so we are not in that new covenant of Yirmeyahu yet. MN Answer – (Matt 26:27‘This is my blood of the new covenant which is shed’ This seems pretty clear to me.) I know you teach that the last supper was the ‘covenant confirming meal’ that solidifies the covenant of promise, but I believe it was a meal enacting a covenant that builds on those of the past, MN Answer -(Covenants can’t ‘build or be added to. Gal 3:15 if a brit is a man’s brit, yet still if it is confirmed, no man sets it aside, or adds to it.)’because it was a betrothal meal, and we’re still waiting for the marriage supper of the Lamb and the covenant that will be an entirely new covenant not like the covenant made with our fathers (Yirmeyahu). When we are with the Bridegroom in the future, we will know Him, and being with Him will not need reminders or teachers, and then have hearts of flesh with His commands written on our inward parts.
MN Answer – That’s why it says in Hebrews 8:6-8
6 But now the work Yeshua has been given to do is far superior to theirs, just as the covenant he mediates is better. For this covenant has been given as Torah on the basis of better promises. 7 Indeed, if the first covenant had not given ground for faultfinding, there would have been no need for a second one. 8 For God does find fault with the people when he says, “ ‘See! The days are coming,’ says Adonai,
‘when I will establish over the house of Isra’el and over the house of Y’hudah’
“Days are coming” & “Better promises”, this is in the future, we are still waiting for those promises to be fulfilled. We are waiting for the Bridegroom, not all has been fulfilled yet. (Heb8:6 But NOW HE HAS OBTAINED a more excellent ministry. The context of Heb 8 is V1. The High Priest is SITTING DOWN at the right hand of the throne of Majesty in the heavens. This is a finished accomplished work.) the work Yeshua has been given to do
Matthew 5: 18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
DP Answer – “Days are coming” & “Better promises” … More error The NT/NC was future to Jer.31- If the New has not come then you/we are still under the old – with all the rigor, sacrifice, etc. that you are not doing – then you condemn your own self. V:34 is still coming but is part of the already in progress program
@I believe the new covenant of promise has not yet taken place – You would be wrong – read Lk.22:20
Wrong again a Katubah is a contract more than betrothal – That’s why Mary was to be ‘put-away’
till all be fulfilled – all at the same time? Wow! – It has begun Yahshua Himself ID’d that fact
By the way does ‘all’ includes Gen.49:10? Allow for Num.3:12 back to Ex.19:5-6? As per Heb.7:12?
30) So this leads me to my biggest question and most pressing question. I ask in all honesty, and if I am wrong Please show me through Messiah where I am in error.:
Is your teaching in line with the direct Word of Yah, and the direct words which came straight from the Messiah, the Son of Yah, Himself?
MN Answer – I pray you can see through the direct quotations of many Scriptures, ‘the direct Word of Yah’ and ‘the words from the Messiah Himself’ that this teaching is in line with YHWH’s Word.
Yeshua practiced the Jewish principle of Kol V Khomer – light and heavy.
Woe to you scribes and Pharisees ….you’ve omitted the weightier matters of Torah…….
Covenant Fidelity Law; that the ‘law’ “of weight” mentioned here can be no other but Covenant Law. Not the Levitical …“<nomos><ergon>” prescriptive law of works.
DP Answer – YES – Joh 5:46, Heb 10:7 – includes Gen.49:10