The Rabbis (thus most everyone else) consider “Mt. Sinai” and “Mt. Horeb” to be two different names of the same mountain
And this from the same guys that deny Yahshua, deny Yahshua ever came as Messiah or will come back again, deny the Melkizedek Priesthood, that gave us the contrive of ‘Oral Torah’, the 613 Lores, the flubdubbery of Talmud and all the rest, Who uphold the Levitical laws, yet usurp the legitimate Plan ‘B’ Levitical Priesthood to install themselves; 1st as Pharisees turned to modern day Rabbis; as upholders of Torah that uphold many others works that undermine and replace Torah. And this is what most defer to???
1st off the Christian Church defers to the Orthodox/Rabbinic Jews in many matters of understanding – what is the law, what is Sabbath, what are the Feastdays, etc. that they as a whole reject. Then there are the Messianic (et. al) that for the most part came from the Christian Church that likewise still defer to the Orthodox/Rabbinic Jews in matters of these same understandings that they now project, protect & embrace. That more than once has escalated into accepting ever more increasing Orthodoxy and/or Rabbinics. That at some few points go on to reject Paul, then reject certain NT books, then reject Yahshua and then ultimately the NT altogether and convert to Judaism or worse – Atheism
This is a Huge mistake – based on faulty intel, premise and logic. It has been suggested that we take issues to a ‘granular level’; actually I applaud this notion for it well mirrors what has been said about intelligence – that is; it involves the ability to make increasingly finer distinctions -But; we must connect those finer distinctions (the grains) in a continuity of evidence that tracks each issue/topic to its logical conclusion being faithful to the fully-accounted-for truth of that given matter.
Consider this point – Tho “Sinai” and “Horeb” has been asserted as two names of the same mountain – This by Torah just flat Cannot be so. Case in point, there are those that continually assert;
Dt.29:1 These are the words of the covenant, which YHWH commanded Moses to make with the children of Israel in the land of Moab, beside the covenant which he made with them in Horeb.
As some kind of Ah-ha gotcha issue. To the untrained and unstudied that go along to get along – Based on the accepted faulty Jewish reinforced default premise; this sounds like it ID’s Sinai even tho it says Horeb (???). This is a disregard of critical evidence. For there is corroborating evidence;
Ex 32:34 Therefore now go, lead <nachah> the people unto the place of which I have spoken unto thee:
05148. hxn nachah, naw-khaw’ – a primitive root; to guide; by implication, to transport (into **exile**, or as colonists):–bestow, bring, govern, guide, lead (forth), put, straiten.
What then is this there for? Nothin’? Everything in Torah is the record of evidence that we must heed as direction and cannot be summarily disregarded.
lead <nachah> the people into ‘exile’ where? The same place? That makes no sense! They had just broken the most monumental ground-breaking Covenant in all of Biblical history. Where Yahweh actually came down and spoke in the audible hearing of a nation of people. What does make sense is separating them from the scene of their great covenant sin to another place, hence Ex.32:34
Ex 33:6 And the children of Israel stripped themselves of their ornaments by the mount Horeb.
Confirmation that they had arrived at a different place – So then ‘IF’ they would have kept the Melkizedeq Sinai Covenant would they have needed to go to a different place to receive the same thing that they had just Broke? No! They were to remove themselves from all vestiges & ties to that ‘Covenant of Promise’ breech (See – https://torahwithoutrabbinics.wordpress.com/books) – They were no longer Melkizedeq Priests (Ex.19:5-6) this included Aaron & his sons (Ex.32:10/Num.3:12).
As I repeatedly state there is a huge difference between being a Nation ‘of’ (Melkizedeq) Priests and being a Nation ‘with’ (Levitical) Priests
This removal from the base of Mt.Sinai to Mt. Horeb is the initial separation response that permanently barred all Israelites from the Melkizedeq Priesthood until the time of Yahshua (Gen.49:10). The re-delineation of the terms of the Melkizedeq Mt.Sinai Covenant mixed with added law at Mt. Horeb was now under the Levitical Priesthood (Heb.7:11/Num.3:12/Ex.24:12/Ex.32:10; 40:13-15)
This Ex.34 Horeb ‘re-delineation’ of terms was more akin to the enactment of law that could be added to and did not have (or any later subsequent) – a Proposal, an Acceptance, a Blood Ratification or a Covenant Confirming Meal nor did any of the other subsequent so-called covenants under the Levitical Priesthood as you see with the Melkizedeq Mt.Sinai Book of the Covenant (BotC – Ex.19:5-24:8-11) – Please be honest and check (Acts 17:11).
There are those that lodge ‘covenant’ from – Dt.5:2 (and such) – YHWH our Elohim made a covenant with us in Horeb.
They do not realize let alone validate and/or will resiliently hide the fact (from others) to conceal from those who do not study that ‘brit’ can mean;
H1285 – berı̂yth – ber-eeth’ – From H1262 (in the sense of cutting (like H1254)); a compact (because made by passing between pieces of flesh): – confederacy, [con-]feder[-ate], covenant, league.
Total KJV occurrences: 284
So the chosen word ‘brit’ specifically means – initially means in order of importance (in the sense of cutting (like H1254)); a compact (because made by passing between pieces of flesh) which directly indicates the letting of ‘blood’ as in a Blood Ratified Covenant. After all you can’t ‘cut’ into fresh dead ‘pieces of flesh’ without ‘blood’ being present.
So from H1285 there are 280 some (in the sense of cutting) Blood Ratified Covenants in the Bible? I think not! – ‘brit’ ie translated Covenant can also mean; compact, confederacy, league, etc. which is more in line with a formal oration or proclamation or decree a vociferation an exclamation in the sense of a communication that could not be refused, a legal enactment that does not include ‘blood’ or “passing between pieces of flesh” let alone a ‘proposal’ or an ‘agreement’ or a Covenant Confirming Meal.
‘a communication that could not be refused’ after all the alternative was for Yahweh to exercise His Covenant Right to wipe them all out (Ex.32:10).
The meaning & use of many Hebrew words involve being based on ‘Context’ & ‘Evidence’.
Evidence for a ‘Blood Ratified Covenant’ include Gen.15:9-10, Ex.24:7-8, Lk.22:19-20 – Note a ‘Blood Ratified Covenant’ cannot be altered it must be kept as is (Gal.3:15). However it can be broken thru non compliance which requires a New Covenant be made – similar to Jer.31:31-33 / Lk.22:19-20
Whereas an authoritative decree ie ‘proclamation’ **without** a Proposal, an Acceptance, a Blood Ratification or a Covenant Confirming Meal can be changed by the originator (Gen.49:10). This is what we see at Heb.7:11-12
Dt.29:1 then underscores the separation point; placing a distinction between the Melkizedeq Sinai and the Levitical Horeb and all other subsequent enactments and additions under the Plan ‘B’ Levitical Priesthood instituted directly because of the Plan ‘A’ Melkizedeq (BotC – Book of the Covenant – Ex.19:5-24:8-11) Covenant-breach of Ex.32.
This ‘addition to’, all of it; under the Plan ‘B’ Levitical Priesthood allowed by YHWH, carries with it the innate understanding that YHWH can go back to the original Plan ‘A’ Melkizedeq Priesthood with the coming of His Son Yahshua; WITHOUT any further formal human involved proceedings.
YHWH’s permissive ‘fix’ of the Plan ‘B’ Levitical Priesthood was ‘glorious’ (2Cor.3:11); certainly much better than complete annihilation (Ex.32:10).
So – You can accept what is; what YHWH has done and operate under the Melkizedeq Plan ‘A’ feather-weight (Mat.11:30) or you can continue in; while shackling others to, the Levitical (Rabbinic) Plan ‘B’ (Acts 15:10) anchor-drag; your choice.