Recent Book Reviews

Recent Book Reviews

Donald McGrew
I was recently, mildly rebuked for grilling chicken for fellowship on the Sabbath. I never considered it at the time, I was helping my wife who had much on her that weekend. I saw it as a labor of love and ignored the rebuke. It was a delight to read in your book Back to the Melchizedek Future, and realize there was no fire restrictions until the Book of the Law. There are beginning to be a lot of people who will look into this enough to study it out and begin to see it. Often as I read, then search through the scriptures, there is a BIG smile on my face. It really changes things. Thanks.

Donald McGrew
Dr. Dave. I have put your book down and picked it up again for over a year. It is good but requires much study and searching to test it. Recently I have been driven to finish it. (Back to the Melchizedek Future). I will then stay in the another one. I have also snatched up any thing that Matthew Nolan has put it on the same subject.
I believe it changes every thing, if you believe Messiah had returned once as Yeshua. It has been a great and benefiting study. Shalom

Donna Overton Great Book …..For any Truth Seeker ……..Torah Keeper ….Who believes in Yahshua!

Donna Overton Woohoo! What an eye opener, opens the Scriptures to a Higher Level!!

Janis Walters-Barelman Like, like, like, like, and then some more likes!

Donna Teague – Dr. Dave, I have just this a.m. finished your “Back to the Melchizedek Future”. I read it slowly and thoroughly checking scripture references as I read. It is amazing. No, I don’t have any questions. I thought you explained things well and even outlined questions you still have. The book has been so helpful in cementing exactly which covenant I want to be in = Melchizedek or Levitical. Melchizedek wins hands down. While I admit this has not been a difficult choice because I’ve never been fond of the Rabbinical Judaism Messianic way since embracing my Hebrew roots 10 years ago, still I now recognize what a schizophrenic position it was to keep some of the laws and ignoring the most Rabbinical and ones “that couldn’t be kept”. I appreciate your efforts to enlighten us all. I have your “Covenant of Promise” book but I couldn’t wait to read “Back to the Mel. Future” so I started there. Reading this book has really opened my eyes as never before to the full extent of what Yahshua has done for me. Our Melchizedek future is very exciting.

my attempt

 
This is my attempt at a 1 page topical overview – Please critique and add to

************************************

One New Man

Two verses we would do well to pay attention to 1] Mt 6:33 ‘seek first the kingdom of YHWH (the King/Melek), and His righteousness (Zedek); and all these things shall be added unto you'; and 2] Mt 25:21 ‘well done,.. good and faithful servant’. Everything that we do in this life should be governed within these 2 verses. “His righteousness” does not mean a version of it, which is a counterfeit (Rom.10:2-3)

One New Man; Is not a Church, Rabbinic or Levitical concept; It is a Melkizedeq issue. A brief overview begins with Ex.19:5-6; YHWH said ‘if’ you keep My Covenant … I will make of you a Kingdom of Priests. This could only be a Melkizedeq Priesthood. There was no such thing as a Levitical only Priesthood until after the Covenant ‘Gold Calf’ breach of Ex.32 (Num.3:12).

This ran concurrent for the next 15 centuries until the death and resurrection of Yahshua. This death was significant, in that; Yahshua was born ‘under Levitical law’ (Gal.4:4/Heb.7:11); the same law that said you had to be a Levite to be a Priest. Yahshua is from the Tribe of Judah (Heb.7:13-15) most of Israel and all grafted in are not Levite – Therefore the Levitical law had to change back to the Pre-Ex.32 breach standards back to the original Melkizedeq Law (Heb.7:12); for Yahshua to be Melkizedeq High Priest. The same Melkizedeq Priesthood we all are being called back into (1Ptr.2:9).

The idea that Torah cannot be divided is a Jewish/Rabbinic idea; not supported or found in the pages of Torah or the rest of the entire Bible. The ‘change’ of Torah is evident throughout Torah – Gen.49:10, Ex.32:10, Num.3:12, Num.8:18 (even evidenced by Jos.5:5). Further evidence of this same thing is Ezk.20:24-25 and Heb.7:12, etc.

The awareness most need to understand is that; it is not a change ‘of’ Torah to enact the change ‘in’ Torah that’s always been right there in the pages of Torah – That also must have a fulfillment (Gen.49:10/Mat.5:17-19).

We all must admit and realize that ‘not one jot or tittle’ and to the Torah and the Witness if they speak not according to this word there is no light in them. Would have to include Gen.49:10.

This has been a 1 page overview; you will have to look up these verses – there is much to consider – Covenants, Laws, Priesthoods, What Yahshua did, What Yahshua said, ‘Change’ from Torah, Evidenced in the New Testament – (Gal.3:19, 2Cor.3:11, Heb.7:12; Jer.31:31-33, Heb.8:8-10, etc.)

I would be remiss to make these statements without further explanation as to evidence found in your Bible. There are two books that you can get; 1] The Covenants of Promise, 2] Back to the Melchizedek Future – These can be acquired thru;

http://torahwithoutrabbinics.wordpress.com/2013/06/30/books-2/

Yah’s Esteem

 

The Torah of Gen.49:10

The Torah of Gen.49:10

What could be more Messianic in the Hebrew roots than a Messiah who came to fulfill Gen.15 at His death in the context of Gen.49:10 and ‘The Book of the Covenant (Ex.19:5 thru 24:8) – Which just so happens to All be in a Melkizedeq context under Yahshua our High Priest after the order of Melkizedeq.

The same Melkizedeq Priesthood we are being ‘called’ back into (Ex.19:5-6/1Ptr.2:9/Heb.7:12)

The same Melkizedeq Priesthood and its laws that has to be reinstated over the stand in (Num.3:12) Levitical Priesthood (because of Covenant breach Ex.32) and its laws (Ezk.20:24-25/Heb.7:11-12)

The Torah of Gen.49:10 (‘until’ ie change) has to be ‘fulfilled’ also

Eph 2:14

Eph 2:14

Eph 2:14 ¶ For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us;

We are usually lead to believe that this ‘wall’ kept the Gentiles out. But – consider this;

The First Temple – The Hebrew Bible reports that the First Temple was built in 957 BCE[1] by King Solomon (reigned c. 970-c. 930 BCE).[2] According to Deuteronomy, as the sole place of Jewish sacrifice (Deuteronomy 12), the Temple replaced the portable sanctuary (aka The Tabernacle) constructed in the Sinai Desert under the auspices of Moses, as well as local sanctuaries, and altars in the hills.[3] This temple was however sacked a few decades later by Sheshonk I, Pharaoh of Egypt.

Although efforts were made at partial reconstruction, it was only in 835 BCE when Jehoash, King of Judah in the second year of his reign invested considerable sums in reconstruction, only to have it stripped again for Sennacherib, King of Assyria c. 700 BCE. The First Temple was totally destroyed by the Babylonians in 586 BCE when they sacked the city.[5]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temple_in_Jerusalem

The Second Temple was an important Jewish Holy Temple (Hebrew: בֵּית־הַמִּקְדָּשׁ הַשֵּׁנִי: Bet HaMikdash HaSheni; Arabic: بيت القدس: Beit al-Quds) which stood on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem during the Second Temple period, between 516 BCE and 70 CE. It replaced the First Temple which was destroyed in 586 BCE, when the Jews of the Kingdom of Judah went to exile, known as Babylonian Captivity. Jewish eschatology includes a belief that the Second Temple will in turn be replaced by a future Third Temple.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Temple

This is frustratingly difficult to prove – if you find more substantiation Please feel free to send – although I did find this that undergirds the same asserted premise.

“…Within the court of the Israelites was that of the (Levite) priests, which was separated by a low wall one cubit in height…”

http://books.google.com/books?id=HG82AAAAMAAJ&pg=PA543&lpg=PA543&dq=%22first+temple%22+-+wall+of+separation+priests+from+Israelites&source=bl&ots=uEmGCHb29M&sig=D2MonDP9yNvY8_HQiVmJHVHFans&hl=en&sa=X&ei=mkXnU8_0EI_soAS8r4DYBg&ved=0CDoQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=%22first%20temple%22%20-%20wall%20of%20separation%20priests%20from%20Israelites&f=false

The point is there would have been no reason for the First Temple to have a wall to separate gentiles in this autonomous Israelite Kingdom Nation. The only reason for a wall of separation was to separate Levite Priests from non-Priest Israelites.

The wall separating gentiles; was King Herod’s addition to King Herod’s Second Temple. The question is why would the Bible need to concern itself with a unTorah addition by an unTorah King? For we know by Torah that Yah had set a difference between the Levites and the Firstborn (including all Israel) because of the Covenant-breach (Ex.32 / Num.3:12; 8:17)

The significance of this is that this ‘wall’ by First Temple standards was to separate those who could be priests (Levites) from those who could not (all the rest). Since Yahshua our Melkizedeq High Priest has come ‘we’ (all including ‘all the rest’) are called into the Melkizedeq Priesthood (1Ptr.2:9, Rev.5:10). No longer under Levitical injunctions, standards or laws (Heb.7:12)

Rest assured that the Melkizedeq portion of Torah (Gen.1:1 thru Ex.24:8-11) contain Torah Melkizedeq Covenant and Law – Sabbath, Appt’d Times, Clean meats, Passover, etc. When he ‘broke down’ the wall of partition He was doing so that all First-Fruit believers could once again be ‘Melkizedeq Priests’ in the “household of Yah” (Eph.2:19)

Hebrew Roots at Boise State

Hebrew Roots at Boise State

We are searching for Facebook likes and club members for our brand-new Hebrew Roots Club at Boise State University!!! Would you help me get the word out there for people to support our young Israelites on campus!

On campus support & education for learning to live the rhythm of the Melchizedek Covenant–– focused on our Rabbi Yahshua.

https://www.facebook.com/HebrewRootsClub?ref=hl

- And – Hebrew Roots Club Join:

https://orgsync.com/90459/chapter

Melkizedeq Teaching in Whittier

Melkizedeq Teaching in Whittier

https://www.transferbigfiles.com/e1d3fede-e1ce-45ba-86de-42f75e3f635f/8h660uA37d3DZjFrvrtOWw2

These are the (3) teachings that Matthew Nolan of Torah to the Tribes gave while in Whittier at the Remnant of Truth Congregation – both on FB

I finally physically met him on Shabbat 7/26/14 and was invited to share the stage with him – You will recognize much of his material from my books

Rabbi Matthew does a truly wonder teaching adding his own material

Be Blessed

The Word ‘Rabbi’ Rule

The Word ‘Rabbi’ Rule

E J @ I have an honest question. Based on the passage Matthew 23:8 is it wrong to call a man rabbi or am I not understanding the translation?

My Response
I know there are a segment in our society that love to major in the minors – I don’t usually go there – but since you asked.

Mt 23:8 But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Messiah; and all ye are brethren.

9 And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.

Interesting you focus on v:8 and not v:9 ???

Do you call or have you called your DNA donor Father – of course you do – we all have

And – What of Com’dt #5? – Houston we have a problem

Ex 20:12 ¶ Honour thy *father* and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which YHWH thy Elohim giveth thee.

‘And’ reveals that v:9 carries as much weight as v:8

If you are calling some guy ‘Father’ other than your father as some sort of deeply devoted honor (inclusive of cult) title this ought not to be

The same with Rabbi There is a difference between what is a Rabbi (Teacher) and what is Rabbinics (the sum total body of compiled subjective and interpreted teaching assertions)

There is a difference between what is a ‘Beit Den’ sanctioned Levite usurping – Torah ignoring Rabbi inducted into the Rabbinic community and what is a Rabbi merely meaning Teacher.

You need to distinguish the difference – If you can’t for conscience sake you should abstain – but realize you can’t pick and choose – Father / Rabbi – No difference; and consider Adonai usually denotes deity – but not always – Abraham was called Adonai Gen 18:12 as well as others

So if your goal is to head up and enforce a lockstep keep away from the word ‘Rabbi’ rule you need to do the same with the word ‘Father’ or risk being shown as dishonest.