Teaching Covenant Error

Teaching Covenant Error

++Amy and Travis Alphin, with Derek Limbaugh – Amy the apparent author of this piece conveying Kirk Carmichael’s (KC) thoughts on covenant both Amy & Derek received my request for this piece but simply did nothing and remained silent – and they continue to teach this.
** DrDave replies
************

**Mark Twain – It is easier to fool the people than to tell the people they have been fooled.
**Ram Bam – We must accept truth wherever it is found.

**This is an abbreviated 12pg article based on rebutting a 144pg document – For the original send your eMail eddress to yst@YahsSpiritofTruth.com

19++Between that and the distance we had to travel to attend this community far from us, we went back to small fellowship studies, this time with Or HaOlam, the people we currently meet with. About 4 or 5 years ago, the Holy Spirit stirred in me the sketch of “the Kingdom Message” that I delivered in the previous chapter. I tried sharing it with a handful of individuals and it was very lightly received or ignored. Then years later in one of our Bible study sessions at Or HaOlam, I realized that I knew something that would address many of the questions that were being asked. I presented the Gospel of the Kingdom again. It was greatly receieved this time!! It was empowering and people understood it. During this same time, through a miracle all its own, we met Erik and Lisa Sowers. They put me in touch with a guy named Kirk Carmichael in CA.

** Kirk Carmichael (KC) originally got this Covenant message of distinctions from me that he has now corrupted. In the beginning they seemed normal – Hungry keeping the 7th Day (Fri/Sat) Shabbat and Mow’edim – Then I had to let the ties with him lapse because he and his group began not just exploring but pushing things like; Lunar Sabbath, which questions Mow’edim calendar issues, like the count to Shavuot, Morning to Morning Day, etc. (of which he now will neither confirm or deny – you should question him and his group on these until he/they give you a direct, honest & forthright answer) – He became incensed that I would not follow in his error and became badgering, caustic and derogatory to me. I quietly just let things go silent – and now this – He has taken this Message I clued him into, twisted it into his own fashion and is now pushing it – Hence what it has become today with the ones that have swallowed his Covenant error message including this your article – That I now have to rebut.

This just in as of 3.30.15 – From: john
Date: March 30, 2015 at 8:02:32 AM PDT
To: Matthew
Subject: Fwd: Re: Phone number

“… I (Kirk Carmichael) have been the chosen messenger of YHWH to deliver you the TRUTH then it is YHWH you (Matthew Nolan) are rejecting. If you choose to continue to ignore, I will start posting (an ‘IN LOVE’ threat) critiques IN LOVE of the messages so souls can find the right answers. I will post this reply IN LOVE on our group page today (before you even have a chance to respond). This is the closing exert of a 10 page document that twists several values.”

Kirk Carmichael is still not above besmirching me while threating Matthew now also. And has deemed himself the deliverer of the Most High no less – the magnanimous loving portrayor of truth? – let alone full truth? – This man (Kirk Carmichael) is 2 faced – smiles at your face, says smooth brotherly like love style things if you go along to get along, while manipulating what ever he can leverage including the Most High. This is a threat; pure and clear. I do appeal to honest biblical reason; who would use such tactics? – It certainly would not be above the Evil one to do just that (2Cor.11:13-15).

46++And with that said, let’s begin to explain covenant. ~ 25 ~BLOOD COVENANT Our next definition for this study is Blood covenant. We are going to begin detailing the covenants that are revealed in Scripture, but we are going to do so by focusing in on the blood covenants in particular because together they make up the “eternal blood covenant” that Yeshua RENEWED by his own blood.

**1st off; this is not an “eternal blood covenant” – The best it can be is ‘everlasting’ that all by itself has points that must be fully accounted for. By saying RENEWED You (parroting KC) are regurgitating (his swallowed) popular Jewish Messianic, HR, Netarim Israel thot. The“blood covenant” that Yahshua Ratified by his own blood was a NEW covenant with New parts making it brand New – just like Jer.31:31-33 says for the reason it says it.

52 ++Mat 24:44,48, But and if that evil servant shall say in his heart, My lord delayeth his coming; And shall begin to smite his fellowservants, and to eat and drink with the drunken; The lord of that servant shall come in a day when he looketh not for him, and in an hour that he is not aware of, And shall cut him asunder, and appoint him his portion with the hypocrites: …… Heb 10:26-31 For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries. He that despised Moses’ law died without mercy under two or three witnesses: Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace? For we know him that hath said, Vengeance belongeth unto me, I will recompense, saith the Lord. And again, The Lord shall judge his people. It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God. This phrase trampling under foot is because in ancient days, like in the first Passover, the blood of a covenant was sometimes placed on a threshold. They would step over the blood as they passed over the threshold and not trample it under their feet. To treat the blood of a blood covenant as common and willfully violate the terms of covenant after having the knowledge of truth isn’t without penalty; Not then and not now under the renewed covenant, because the renewed covenant is made by the shedding of blood as well. More precious blood even, because it isn’t just the blood of animals. We need to come to a proper place of reverent fear with regards to the understanding of what blood covenant is and how faithfulness isn’t just our goal, it is the very condition of such a covenant…or else.

**True enough – Everything we ask of the Father thru the Son is a Covenant Benefit. Shouldn’t we then strive to keep the Covenant? But we must correctly divide to know of wherewith we speak. And You (& KC) keep pushing the solely Messianic error of a Renewed Blood Covenant – you seriously need to read and understand Jer 31:32 *Not like/according* to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, … Dasha can mean both either – to make new or rebuild – the new parts are brand new, the“blood covenant” that Yahshua Ratified by his own blood was a NEW covenant with New parts making it New – just like Jer.31:31-33 says for the reason it says it. See Answer #12

68++This leads us into the first of the RESTORATION covenants.

** Now you throw around the term RESTORATION ‘covenant’ – in all caps trying to make a point of its inherent rightness – again you seem to be very light on scripture proof – the term RESTORATION ‘covenant’ – Where is it? Your (KC’s) attempt to introduce never used unbiblical terms is an attempt to control the conversation and the direction of it – Who would do such a thing? Yeah hath God said? This effort is not lost to me – you are hiding nothing and at that not very well.

89++2. Genesis 38 The chapter with Judah and Tamar makes reasonable sense in light of the seed of the woman promise. After Jacob had 12 sons, the roles of priest, king, and firstborn were split. Joseph (later Ephraim) got the firstborn double portion, Levi got the priesthood blessing, and Judah the kingship.

**There’s your board bush gaps with the holes again – You are precisely Wrong – at the point of Gen.49 – Levi is shown to be cursed and scattered with Simeon v:5 – Now how do you get a priesthood blessing (verbiage that is not there) for only Levi and cookie cut Simeon out of the picture? – it is only because the Levites distinguished themselves at Ex.32 that they got the Plan ‘B’ Priesthood as Num.3:12 records.

128++While I haven’t focused on this aspect of covenants, I mention it briefly now. But back to our key details we notice: The parties to this second Covenant with Abraham are: Abraham, his seed after him, YHUH The sign of this covenant is the physical mark of circumcision in the flesh representative of “seed” and offspring. The conditions were that Abraham had to walk blamelessly before Him. This means that Abraham had to mature in the intended purpose of YHWH in all things. The sign of this
covenant also requires Abraham to perform an action. He had to circumcise himself and his household and his seed after him. This sign marks the descendants as the intended inheritors of the unconditional promises that were made to Abraham. It shed’s blood and is therefore without question a part of this blood covenant.

** Gen.15 unconditional??? attached to a death position ie the ultimate condition? Also – Human blood is not part, needed or commanded by YHWH to ratify any biblical covenant to Israel accept Yahshua concerning the New Covenant – concerning when a man & woman join in human marriage this then is that couples unity – This is to mankind not just Israel.

129++Abraham is now getting further instruction about passing the promises onto his descendants as the sign of the FIRST covenant with Abraham is about to be born. (Isaac) The covenant meal was eaten just after this when YHUH and two angels show up to Abraham’s tent … where Sarah laughs as she hasn’t had a child and is very old. Abraham had her ~ 59 ~prepare a lamb and bake bread in that story.

** Isaac wasn’t “the sign of the FIRST covenant” – The Bible never says that. He was 1 of several delivered promises of Gen.15 – And – What Bible are your reading? Gen.18:7 And Abraham ran unto the herd, and fetcht a *calf* <ben> <baqar> tender and good,… – Not a lamb.

138++The eternal covenant is made up of these three covenants, Numbers 2,3, and 4 that is later renewed as covenants 2, 3, and 8.

**What bizarro reasoning is this? – The (as in 1) eternal covenant “is made up of these three covenants” but #4 is omitted it favor of a #8 you’ve never even mentioned – ??? – And you expect others to follow this. As I said you twist this all up and say Ta Daah; See?

And what is more you lack understanding of even what you (and KC) say. This is a good place to inform you and others that None of these covenants you speak of is “eternal” (no beginning / no end) they all had a start. The best these covenants can be is everlasting but then we have to deal with / in Hebrew ‘olam’ which does not only or always mean our concept of ‘forever’ or unending but includes the awareness of a ‘point out of mind’.

145++of Kingdom = by This is consistent with
Abraham’s unconditional covenant by which his faith is accounted to him as righteousness.

**The frequency of continual repetition will Never make your error a truth – You say “faith alone not of works.” Yet Eph.2:10 (& others) says differently – Covenant Fidelity (faithfulness) is based on & is evidenced by walking out Covenant ie Covenant works. You again pander to & try to reinforce your popularly largely Messianic accepted idea of ‘Abraham’s unconditional covenant’ – See Answers #100 – &- #107 &#111 & #114 &# 128

158++ Then He tells Moses the other judgments and ordinances about the way the Father thinks and how Israel is to act accordingly. Moses then composes these things, including the 10 Words, in the Book of the Covenant. I want you to realize how central this point is. The 10 Words are the only time in the Old Testament where He speaks audibly to the assembly, to the church in the wilderness.

**This is a greazy attempt to cover the truth of the matter – the 10 Words Ex.20 are NOT just ‘in’ the Book of the Covenant – but by Ex.24:3 are part ‘of’ the Book of the Covenant Ex.19:5 thru 24:8.The reason & need for Ex.24:3 is Ex 20:18-19 – The people feared the sound of His voice – they did not refuse what YHWH continued to say thru Moses hence the need for Ex.24:3 to agree to the merger of the 2 parts as 1 then Ex.24:7 to agree to the Whole Cov”t and Ex.24:8 to ‘Blood Ratify’ the Whole Book of the Covenant – Which brings up this point – When I ask 1’s that push this ’10 Words’ only non-sense; where was just the ’10 Words’/Com’dts ‘Blood Ratified’? They invariably go to Ex.24:8 like you (& KC) would have to – oblivious to the fact of Ex.24:3 – KC could have told you and everyone else this, he could have read it for himself and his group but he did not and does not listen – Will You?

175++Now, since they have broken the blood covenant, the Son must die.

**Now you have step in your own trap and not wise enough to see it – Again you do not ID this – but this is Gen.15 your so-called unconditional covenant – but say “the Son must die”! Why? According to your previous statements there is no condition! Now you say “since they have broken the blood covenant” IDing a condition and to top it all off you yourself (without saying so) ID Gen.15:17 – See Entry #174

190++All of this is a direct result of the broken blood covenant made with the first set of tablets. Also notice, that Moses wears a veil. Is it not interesting that this veil served to hide the glory of YHWH from the people and that when Yeshua renewed the eternal blood covenant in His own
blood a veil was rent.

**Again not ‘RENEWED’ – You (& KC) keep pushing the solely Messianic error of a Renewed Blood Covenant – you seriously need to read and understand Jer 31:32 *Not according* to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, … Dasha can mean both either – to make new or rebuild – the new parts are brand new the“blood covenant” that Yahshua Ratified by his own blood was a NEW covenant with New parts making it New – just like Jer.31:31-33 says for the reason it says it. See Answers 35, 36, 46, 52, 55. 83, 84, 85, 86, 120, 139, 177

195++Gal 3:18-25 For if the inheritance be of the law (ask yourself, “which law?”), it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise. (Look at the timeline and see to see where the promises came first) Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by an angel in the hand of a mediator. Now a mediator is not a mediator of one, but God is one. Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law. But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe. But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed. Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster. When we examine this passage, I want you to notice how simple it can be when we understand the distinction between the covenants and their functions. How “law” can at first seem mean in reference to any the many different covenant instructions, but if we put the context into what we know of the timeline progression of covenants, all is made clear. Promise and inheritance and references to Abraham: What are we referring to? The entry into blood covenant that was given by the PROMISE and entered into by faith alone at covenant 2. So, what is this “law” that was added BECAUSE OF transgressions? The Law of Moses or Covenant 5 as the Biblical narrative reveals.

**Now you (& KC) unknowingly have caught yourself yet again and at that in a twist of truth which is an untruth or commonly known as a lie. You are dealing with Gal.3. You have just quoted 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 …’ minus the verse designation ??? – Then you try to shoehorn in your ‘Law of Moses’ verbiage that is not there in Gal.3 – Yet you ignore Gal.3:10 which out right says “Book of the Law”; so Gal.3:19 while definitely IDing the ‘Law of Moses’ as you say also includes “Book of the Law” by context of Gal.3:10 which you neglected to reveal. Why? Because it doesn’t fit your story? Of what your pushing? This is neither Aware, Honest or Scholarly!!!

Research reveals that your (& KC’s) showcased pony-to-ride, point-to-push phrase ‘Law of Moses’ comes from ‘the Book of the Law of Moses’ appearing in the Bible 4 times; which both do Not appear till Jos 8:31. Neither appear in Gal.3. The phrase ‘Book of the Law of Moses’ Never appears in the NT. However the phrase ‘Book of the Law’ appears 1 time in the NT at Gal.3:10. (oh please do verify-Acts 17:11). Both John 7:23 & Acts15:5 on circumcision in the ‘law of Moses’ example Both Gen.17:10-11 & Jos.5:2-5 both are outside both ends of your Deut. Only ‘Book of the Law’ parameters as is Jos 8:31 & Jos 23:6 are outside your ‘Law of Moses’ parameters with Joshua ‘adding’ to “’the Book of the Law” (of Moses) at Jos 24:26; again outside of your set parameters for both – So – I will ask; Are we to believe you or the Bible? And it does not stop there; All mentions of the ‘Book of the Law’ and ‘the Book of the Law of Moses’ are synonymously interchangeable (Law of 1st mention) at Jos 1:8, Jos 8:31, Jos 8:34, Jos 23:6, Jos 24:26 as in the 1 in the same. Much as Gal.3:10, 17, 19 & Heb.7:11 tell it. Also See Answer #221 – Don’t you just love the complete full truth?

205++THE SECOND GENERATION – So we arrive now at the book of Deuteronomy. It is at the opening with chapter one that we are given the setting and the time of the next events: Deu 1:1-26 These be the words which Moses spake unto all Israel on this side Jordan ………. And it came to pass in the fortieth year, in the eleventh month, on the first day of the month, that Moses spake unto the children of Israel, according unto all that the LORD had given him in commandment unto them; After he had slain Sihon the king of the Amorites, which dwelt in Heshbon, and Og the king of Bashan, which dwelt at Astaroth in Edrei: On this side Jordan, in the land of Moab, began Moses to declare this law, saying, The LORD our God spake unto us in Horeb, (Sinai) saying,

**Horeb is not Mt. Sinai it is in the Sinai Wilderness yet not the same place – proof? Compare Ex 32:34 with Ex 33:6 – Ask yourself – where’d they go? The same place? That makes no sense!

206++Ye have dwelt long enough in this mount: …
Deu 4:1-2 Now therefore hearken, O Israel, unto the statutes and unto the judgments,

**Deu 4:1-2 Now therefore hearken, O Israel, unto the statutes **and** unto the judgments, – this is identical to Ex.24:3 – the giving of the full Book of the Covenant Not just 10 words.

207++which I teach you, for to do them, that ye may live, and go in and possess the land which the LORD God of your fathers giveth you. 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 the LORD your God which I command you. So here we go! Moses is giving commandments of YHUH to this second generation who is about to go up into the land. They had been functioning under covenant 5 and Moses takes note that: Deu 4:4 But ye that DID cleave unto the LORD your God are alive every one of you this day. It is at this point that I need to point out a phrase that you will see repeatedly in relationship to covenant 5, the Law of Moses: Lev 18:5 Ye shall therefore keep my statutes, and my judgments: which if a man do, he shall live in them: I am the LORD.

**Deu 4:1-2 Now therefore hearken, O Israel, unto the statutes **and** unto the judgments, – this is identical to Ex.24:3 – the giving of the full Book of the Covenant Not just 10 words. And is confirmed at Ezk.20:11, 13, 19, 21 the Mlkzdq portion vs v:25 the Levitical portion.

215++Deu 5:1-22 And Moses called all Israel, and said unto them, Hear, O Israel, the statutes and judgments which I speak in your ears this day, that ye may learn them, and keep, and do them.

** This is Deut 5:1 it sets the stage for the rest of Deut 5 this (in context is the law of 1st mention) & agrees with Ex.24:3 – This cannot be ignored much to the shagrin of those who only point to Deut 5:22

216++The LORD our God made a covenant with us in Horeb.

**The phrase is ‘YHWH our Elohim’ – and Horeb is not Mt. Sinai it is in the Sinai Wilderness yet not the same place – proof? Compare Ex 32:34 with Ex 33:6 – Ask yourself – where’d they go? The same place? That makes no sense! See Answer #205

217++The LORD made not this covenant with our fathers, but with us, even us, who are all of us here alive this day. The LORD talked with you face to face in the mount out of the midst of the fire, (I stood between the LORD and you at that time, to shew you the word of the LORD: for ye were afraid by reason of the fire, and went not up into the mount;) saying, … These words the LORD spake unto all your assembly in the mount out of the midst of the fire, of the cloud, and of the thick darkness, with a great voice: and he added no more. And he wrote them in two tables of stone, and delivered them to me

** The Hebrew word ‘lo’ translated ‘no’ can also be translated verily or as for a truth – ‘More’ which would agree with Ex.24:3, Deut 4:1, 5:1, 9:10, 10:4 and even the surrounding verbiage of Dt.5:22 itself See Answers #172, *180*, 207 & 215

221++They are given specific instructions about the quoting of the curses and the blessings upon the two mounts when they enter the land and we find in Joshua that they do as they were commanded and go to these two mounts to do this very thing when they enter into the ~ 97 ~promised land. Moses was giving them the instructions, but he himself wouldn’t enter into the land. Joshua saw through this part of the covenant instructions under his watch as we read in Jos 8:30-35 Then Joshua built an altar unto the LORD God of Israel in mount Ebal, as Moses the servant of the LORD commanded the children of Israel, as it is written in the book of the law of Moses

** I did some investigation into the phrase “the book of the law of Moses ” and found some interesting things along with what I already knew. 1st off Dt.31:26 – Jos 8:31, Jos 23:6, 2Ki 14:6, 2Ch 25:4, 2Ch 34:14, Nem 8:1 – You and KC say the BotL is only Duet. – 1st off the Apostle Paul disagrees with you – Gal.3:17 states that the Law (Book of the Law v:10 same chptr) came at the same 430yr proximity (after the Gen.15 ‘promise’) as the Book of the Covenant. That is Exactly what you see at Ex.24; the difference btx the ratification of the BotC at v:8 and the initiation of Law (BotL) at v:12. Read Gal.3:10 with 19 & Heb.7:11; the transgression that brought the Levitcal Priesthood started at Ex.32 and changed everything retro active to Ex.24:12 for the covenant was broken but Ex.24:12 and on remained; for it (the Law) was not ratified thus changeable (Ezk.20:25) – next we see (and you could have known) that Joshua adds to the ‘book of the law’ in Jos 24:26 you say is confined to Duet. – so your (& KC’s) Duet. as only your imagined Book of the Law parameters are blown at both ends.

227++~ 98 ~An additional thing I want to add to our understanding of the Book of the Law, or Covenant 6, is that it is an oath. Deu 29:12-14 That thou shouldest enter into covenant with the LORD thy God, and into his oath, which the LORD thy God maketh with thee this day: That he may establish thee today for a people unto himself, and that he may be unto thee a God, as he hath said unto thee, and as he hath sworn unto thy fathers, to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob. Neither with you only do I make this covenant and this oath; You might be asking, “Why does this matter?” I want you to see that while the Book of the Law (Covenant 6, the book of Deut. ) is a covenant, it functions as an oath added to a preceding covenant much like happened for Covenant 2 with Abraham.

** Now this is where you (& KC) have a problem – You have completely ignored Gen.12 as YHWH’s oath/self covenant to bless Abraham, it doesn’t even rate on your handy not so accurate 123 covenant line up. “and into his oath” makes a distinction – as is something different. Dedicated wholly unto YHWH. Ever bother to wonder why it doesn’t say ‘our oath’? Here or any where else in the Bible? – Probably not or else you (& KC) would have stated it showing that figured-out awareness on your own. How’d you miss this? You had access to my books or at least KC always had since his beginning. But then in his arrogance; he knows better. Ya think? Does the evidence prove this? Even Paul ID’d the Gen.12 oath as an oath at Heb.6:13 “… because he could swear by no greater, he sware by himself”. But KC missed this too. This is Not the demonstrated Blood Ratification of Gen.15. Gen.12 is YHWH’s Oath – the fall back position that is the base for all covenants with Israel especially the subsequent 4 “covenants of promise” (Eph.2:12) you (or KC) in addition; do not discern nor make a distinction of.

228++Let’s look at that right quick. In Hebrews 6:13 we learn that Abraham had the unconditional promises of Covenant 2, but AFTER he passed the test with the willingness to offer up of Isaac as a condition of covenant faithfulness, he received an oath which confirmed or strengthened the promises established in Covenant 2.

**You keep continually pounding this now expanded error – Now you twist in Hebrews 6:13 to validate your error at Gen.15 when it clearly goes to Gen.12 that you do not have the awareness to validate – You (& KC?) even say the words but have no awareness to understand what you just said (1Tim 1:7). But to be fair most all Messianic Torah Teachers teach this same error that you describe – That you (& KC) as the discerner & dispenser of covenant knowledge have bought into and swallowed! SHAME on you (both)!!! Gen.15 had the Death Position ie ‘conditional’. Gen.12 does not ie ‘un-conditional’ – Please do check up on me and verify it for yourselves Acts 17:11

240++I wish the story ended happily ever after, but as we know and as Moses and YHUH knew even in that moment, such would not be the case. Deu 31:27-29 For I know thy rebellion, and thy stiff neck: behold, while I am yet alive with you this day, ye have been rebellious against the LORD; and how much more after my death? Gather unto me all the elders of your tribes, and your officers, that I may speak these words in their ears, and call heaven and earth to record against them. For I know that after my death ye will utterly corrupt yourselves, and turn aside from the way which I have commanded you; and evil will befall you in the latter days; because ye will do evil in the sight of the LORD, to provoke him to anger through the work of your hands. But it was for this reason that this particular covenant was NOT put within the ark.

**Maybe because it wasn’t a bona-fide covenant in the 1st place – you can’t add or subtract to a covenant (Gal.3:15) but Joshua did (Jos.24:26 ) – But that blows your Book of the Law/Deuteronomy Only assertion.

243++Though there is much concerning the Book of the Law, that gives instructions regarding holiness and how to be a good neighbor when dwelling in the place of inheritance, we cannot assume this covenant is permanent and unchanging. There has been no demonstration that this is a blood covenant and there has been no new token or meal included within it. We know too that the detail pertaining to curses will be altered. ANY change to a covenant necessitates the making of a new covenant entirely.

**You are directly implying the the ‘new covenant’ of Jer.31 had to be made to replace what you call the law of Moses covenant (not ratified), the Book of the Law covenant (not ratified) – BUT – That is not what Jer.31:31-33 says; READ it! It is implicitly to replace the Blood Covenant the Israelite/Egyptain fathers broke at Sinai.

249++ … David was a Melchizedek

** Where in the Bible does it ever say That!!! – To be a Melchizedek you have to be King & Priest – David was King of Israel that had a prohibition of being a priest and also king – See. Gen.49:10, Num.3:12 – After Ex.32 no one could be a Melchizedek anything till Yahshua. And don’t even try that Ps 110 Jewish nonsense where David shoehorns himself into his own prophesy?

251++ … But also we see why it is that Yeshua, the son of MAN, a man Himself, is born of the line of David and promised to reign and rule over the nations of the earth. We know that YHWH had to become flesh in order to taste death, but also we see that the issue that Israel created in their sin of requesting a man from among them to reign over them is redeemed in Yeshua, the image of YHWH in this earth, becoming man to reign and rule! There are NO accidents. Not in any detail.

**Forever? Without end? See 1Kgs.9:6-7. Even in Yahshua’s time there was no king of Israel let alone from the line of David and had not been 1 since the Babylonian captivity around 587 BC and Yahshua himself decreed over Jerusalem that their ‘House’ would be ‘left’ not made but ‘left’ to them desolate as in already was (Mt 23:38) – Only a Kingdom has a King – A ‘House’ does not

254++ … So while Judah actually is recorded as being WORSE than her sister to the north, the ten tribes of Israel, who is scattered to the four winds and not returned to the land, Judah receives mercy for the sake of the unconditional promises to David

** You (& KC?) say “unconditional promises to David” this is yet another double speak – or did you forget quoting – 1Kgs 9:5-6 “…as I promised to David thy father, saying, There shall not fail thee a man upon the throne of Israel. *But* if ye shall at all turn from following me, ye or your children, and will not keep my commandments and my statutes which I have set before you, but go and serve other gods, and worship them: Then will I cut off Israel out of the land” – Helloooo – This is a Condition!!!

259++ … Not even a covenant cut in error can be undone!

** This is yet another not-quite-right ‘absolute statement’ misspeak – and another, and another, and another, and another until we come to our senses; of being under your (& KC’s) twisted tale of personal imaginations that include hairpin switch back misspeaks and tortured confess to anything double talk that conversely shoehorns in tripe while omitting crucial information – As you say – a covenant honored can Not be undone – BUT – it still can be broken – which includes being “undone”.

261++ … The RENEWED BLOOD COVENANT

**The Jer.31 NEW (BLOOD) COVENANT – See Answer #190 – On KC’s count of 8 that ignores the Gen.12 ‘oath’ the basis of all BLOOD COVENANT’s of promise (Eph.2:12/ Heb.6:13) a distinct category (not mentioned) including the Rev.19:7 ‘Marriage’ (COVENANT) of the Lamb that is also glaringly ignored in his 123 covenant not so accurate or complete line up

266++His arrival in the flesh, ~ 139 ~all glory of YHWH set aside, was so that he could bear the penalty of death per the broken blood covenant as detailed in Covenant 2 with Abraham!

**Now you in double-speak admit what you called ‘the eternal’ covenant that could Not be broken as “the broken blood covenant” … “with Abraham!” – Don’t look so “eternal”; now does it? – See Answers #138 & 159

267++ … Neos is the second most common word for new in the New Testament, occurring in its root form over 20 times. Thayer identifies its primary meaning as “recently born, young, youthful,” Neos . has the sense of belonging to the present moment, and not previously existent, just now appearing. So what is difference? Both the Hebrew chadash (Jer. 31:31) and the Greek kainos (Heb. 8:8) words for “new” may be more properly translated “renewed” as opposed to “brand-new”.

**Are you High? In your own schizophrenic imagination!!! – See you yourself (& KC) freely state – 2537 kainós – properly, new in quality, fresh in development or opportunity – “not found exactly like this before.” – STRONGS NT 2537 – as respects form; recently made, fresh, recent, unused, unworn and new, which as recently made is superior to what it succeeds: – Thayer identifies its primary meaning as “recently born, young, youthful,” Neos . has the sense of belonging to the present moment, and not previously existent, just now appearing. – All these words example “not previously existent, just now appearing” as in “brand-new” and NOT “renewed” which agrees with ‘not like’ of Jer.31:32
“Chadash and therefore Kainos may mean new in quality. It can mean to renew or repair.” Thankyou for that limp wristed attempt at honesty. Chadash does Not only or always mean ‘renew’ it most correctly means as is evidenced by your definitions ‘New’ as in “brand-new”.

272++ Yeshua is saying in effect that the symbols of the cup and the bread now represent the memorial of him taking on that penalty for the first broken covenant as well as being that which is cut and broken for the renewed and improved covenant that is being made through His own death.

**This is scrambled – Yes – 1] Yahshua is saying in effect that the symbols of the cup and the bread now represent the memorial of him taking on that penalty for the first broken covenant, 2] Don’t you mean your #2 count of Gen.15?, 3] This is Not a renewed and improved covenant it is NEW! – See Answers #190, 267

273++ … Do you see how this
too points us in the direction of the ONENESS of Yeshua in the place of YHUH, the Father? That is why when Philip says, “Show us the Father.” Yeshua replied, “Have I been with you so long and you don’t yet know. If you have seen me, you have seen the Father.” (John 14:9). This perspective of a testament is consistent with our understanding of covenant for many reasons. One, covenant is particularly about receiving the promises of an inheritance. The restoration of all things is about being restored as firstborn in the Melchizedek priesthood and that includes among the role of priest and kingship, the matter of inheritance. Well listen to the writer of Hebrews on this matter:

**Now we come to new heights of non-sense you have been hinting at this but now out-right declare – The non-sense of ONENESS the Father IS the Son and the Son IS the Father – so now you have some nut hanging on a cross saying – Me, Me why have I forsaken Me – ??? – This ONENESS shtick is so very wack and so easily disproved. See; https://torahwithoutrabbinics.wordpress.com/2014/05/28/oneness-error/

280++ … So to recap: Jesus Christ is the Messenger and Mediator of the new covenant (Hebrews 8:6;12:24). He is also the sacrifice — he himself is the new covenant.

**This sounds like the Christian Sunday School Hyper Religious vernier version of reason akin to the defense nonsense that My sweet ‘Jesus is the Sabbath’ and he did it all; Bless God – so that I don’t have to. (???) Yahshua Himself mediates the new covenant – It is ratified in His Blood BUT he himself is Not the new covenant itself. Just like Moses mediated the Book of the Covenant and was Not the Book of the Covenant itself – Rev15:3

295++~ 153 ~• The “husband” in the marriage that took place at Sinai dies (on the cross) which frees the wife/woman to remarry without being an adulteress

**Hellooo – to remarry without being an adulteress – implies to someone else – It was YHWH Israel was married to – Yahshua was the Go`el kinsmen redeemer of Gen.15 for all parties including YHWH the Father that’s why this time it’s to the Lamb Rev.19:7 & 9

299++• We are given authority in Yeshua’s name to function in the earth. This is a beginning step in restoring dominion to righteous men until they are given authority to reign and rule in the Kingdom to come. … • The wall of partition which was the division of the two houses of Israel has been torn down and now there is neither Judean nor Ephraimite (also called “Jew” and “Gentile”) distinction among YHWH’s people for they are again one nation or “house” in the renewed blood covenant. Eph 2:14-22

**Not renewed – BETTER promises alone would prove that point!– See Answer #190 – And “The ‘wall of partition’ was NOT about the division of the two houses of Israel”– your assertion is misleading and is neither honest nor scholarly. Eph.2:14 has to do with the separating “Jew” and “Gentile” -See Eph.2:11-13 in context. See; https://torahwithoutrabbinics.wordpress.com/2014/08/10/eph-214/

301++• We are promised that one day we will be “like Him” when we see YHWH face to face and that we will put on the “incorruptible.” This speaks of the promise to have the image AND the likeness of YHWH returned to us. We are empowered by the Holy Spirit to begin to function according to the image of YHWH now when we obey what He instructs us though for now, we may wrestle with corruptible flesh. That corruptibility will be put aside entirely according to the promises that remain to be fulfilled. 1 John 3:2-3 • The Levites are promised to be purified and restored into service along with the sons of Zadok (the sons of righteousness) who are likely the Melchizedek priests.

**Wrong! “the sons of (the man) Zadok (the sons of – ‘righteousness’ – Zadok the man’s name – 2Sam.8:17)” are still Levites in the Plan ‘B’ Levitical Priesthood who are Not Melchizedek priests

302++ There is evidence that there are those among the believing body who will function as priests without being Levites. Mal 3:3-4, Ez 40:46, Rev 20:6

**Mal 3:3 … he shall purify the sons of Levi, Ezk 40:46 …these are the sons of Zadok among the sons of Levi, – Do you even understand what you assert & post and hope no one checks? – See Answer #301 – You forgot 1Ptr.2:9 along with Rev 20:6 (& the NT) are Melchizedek

305++Not everything has been completely restored at this time, though we can rest assured that the work He has begun in US, the initial problem, He will be faithful to complete. … The final judgment will close out the deal where any remaining enemies will be ultimately and finally destroyed and the fullness of all remaining promises will be realized in the Renewed Heaven and Earth. I hope that this detailed breakdown of the most obvious conflicts and their resolutions through the function of 8 total covenants has assisted you in understanding the “big picture” and how it is that we cannot treat lightly the renewed blood covenant in Yeshua.

**Yet again – Not renewed – BETTER promises alone would prove that point!– See Answer #190 and your (& KC’s) 8 total covenants is neither total, completely accurate, defined well enough, as it omits the most important 1 the ‘oath’ of Gen.12 and the distinction of what are the covenants of promise

243++Though there is much concerning the Book of the Law, that gives instructions regarding holiness and how to be a good neighbor when dwelling in the place of inheritance, we cannot assume this covenant is permanent and unchanging. There has been no demonstration that this is a blood covenant and there has been no new token or meal included within it. We know too that the detail pertaining to curses will be altered. ANY change to a covenant necessitates the making of a new covenant entirely.

**You are directly implying the the ‘new covenant’ of Jer.31 had to be made to replace what you call the law of Moses covenant (not ratified), the Book of the Law covenant (not ratified) – BUT – That is not what Jer.31:31-33 says; READ it! It is implicitly to replace the Blood Covenant the Israelite/Egyptain fathers broke at Sinai.

263++He is a man that can bring the full judgment upon murderous men according to the role of Kinsman Redeemer and per the covenant death penalty detail of Covenant

**Well well now you confirm what I’ve been saying all along – But again (without knowing it ie oblivious to) you reveal your (& KC’s) double speak. See Answers #51, 128, 228, 259

320++There is no token presented to guarantee the place of the bride thereafter. What will remain for those that come after this time is the offer to be guests and friends of the bridegroom and the bride. Such will be allowed to share the table of fellowship with Yeshua and His bride. However not all are the bride of Messiah. How humbling it is to realize that the offer of being the bride and not just a guest has been made available through demonstrated faithfulness to the Instructions of Covenant! If you are among those whose heart is being drawn by this message, how marvelous is that realization?!!!!

**If you are among those whose heart is being confused and convoluted by this (KC’s) message, how marvelous is that realization?!!!! ?????????????????????????????

325++1Co 2:7 -10 But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory: Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. …But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searches all things, yea, the deep things of God. This Covenant plan is the mystery of YHWH revealed. I pray it has been edifying to you and provokes you to search to see if these things be true. If found true, may you be FAITHFUL to the Covenant Word of Truth and uphold it until the end!! Shalom in Messiah Yeshua ~~A Fellow Heir to the Promises

** This has been a grueling 6 day exercise of enduring your continual repetition of both reprinted Bible text narratives and your (& KC’s) consistent peppered errors of it. Not limited to Covenant or Priesthood. This assault on the understanding of Covenants and Priesthood is different in direction of the Levitical defending direct attacks on the Melkizedeq Priesthood. Although you (& KC) basically agree with Covenants & the Melkizedeq Priesthood BUT your equation is misguided in that it is a mix of truth with the skewed lack thereof with a multitude of error and some direct contradictions based on deceptive &/or convoluted comparisons yielding less-than conclusions.

You (& KC) gloss over and fail to to include in your handy (shoe) 1 – 8 covenant listing 2 of the most important Covenants of this whole Bible Covenant drama and fail to present the ‘Covenants of Promise’ (Eph.2:12) distinction category of a covenant class unto itself – Yahweh’s ‘Oath’ (which is a self covenant/agreement) of Gen.12 ‘to’ Bless Abraham before YHWH ever entered into covenant ‘with’ Abraham at Gen.15 to guarantee His (YHWH’s) promise already given to Abraham at Gen.12. Gen.12 is the anchor base for this covenant class. Then you fail to include the Marriage (a covenant) of the Lamb (Yahshua) at Rev.19:7 to a certain Bride-group of Abraham’s offspring – The whole crescendo point of Gen.12 within this very covenant class but then you can read my books.

https://torahwithoutrabbinics.wordpress.com/books

Matthew has stated and I full well see why people come away confused at your (KC) non-distinct cobbled covenant mess. It is not enough to end with a somewhat correct answer – coming from a mostly incorrect equation – For the sum of that incorrect equation leaves gaps and holes for others to be confused on and yet gives dissenting others an occasion to find verifiable fault both with the reasoning, logic, so-called evidence & skewed conclusions of it that do not completely match the biblical text.

PS – Your(&/or KC’s) continual repeating of an untruth will never make it truth.

May His Full Covenant Truth be Yours – David L. Perry Th.D.

Notice – This presentation has been edited for brevity – If you would like a copy of the whole 144 page document; you can send that request to; yst@YahsSpiritofTruth.com – Thankyou

Advertisements

4 thoughts on “Teaching Covenant Error

  1. Dear Dr. Dave
    this is anna…
    Considering the awesome revelations that the Ruach HaKodesh has been giving you and Matthew to teach and shepherd HIS people in these end times… and with that the great responsibilities that comes with it… count it all joy that your trials are exactly the same as they were for the disciples and the apostles in THEIR last days….
    we are with you and praying for you and learning very much through this

    1st JOHN 2
    18Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time. 19They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us. 20But ye have an unction from the Holy One, and ye know all things. 21I have not written unto you because ye know not the truth, but because ye know it, and that no lie is of the truth………….
    cont’d…
    26These things have I written unto you concerning them that seduce you. 27But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him. 28And now, little children, abide in him; that, when he shall appear, we may have confidence, and not be ashamed before him at his coming. 29If ye know that he is righteous, ye know that every one that doeth righteousness is born of him.

  2. Hello, Dr. Dave,

    I find all of this covenant stuff very interesting, especially since I started digging into things on my own, and realized that there was a lot more going on at Sinai than what I had been taught. I do have a quick question concerning the priests, and I hope its okay if I ask it here.

    Before the law was given, the people were instructed to get themselves cleaned up, and then on the 3rd day, they were to approach the mountain. On the 3rd day, they approached, and it said there were priests among them.

    Exodus 19:22
    “Also let the priests who come near the LORD consecrate themselves, lest the LORD break out against them.”

    Since there was no Levitical priesthood at this time, who exactly were these priests? Could they have been the firstborn that were consecrated back in Exodus 13:2?

    Exodus 13:2
    “Consecrate to Me all the firstborn, whatever opens the womb among the children of Israel, both of man and beast; it is Mine.”

    I ask, because in Numbers 3:12, He says,..

    Numbers 3:12
    “Now behold, I Myself have taken the Levites from among the children of Israel instead of every firstborn who opens the womb among the children of Israel. Therefore the Levites shall be Mine,”

    He appears to be saying that He has taken the Levites as priests, instead of the firstborn (who were suppose to be the priests). The Levites seem to have been given this position because of their response in Exodus 32:26.

    Exodus 32:36
    “then Moses stood in the entrance of the camp, and said, “Whoever is on the LORD’s side—come to me!” And all the sons of Levi gathered themselves together to him.”

    Would this be accurate?

    • they approached, and it said there were priests among them.

      @Exodus 19:22
      “Also let the priests who come near YHWH consecrate themselves, lest YHWH break out against them.”

      Since there was no Levitical priesthood at this time, who exactly were these priests? Could they have been the firstborn that were consecrated back in Exodus 13:2?

      A qualified No there could have been some – this is pre-Covenant acceptance there is no verbiage to support this – these priests translated from kohen were also the ‘captains’ of 10’s & 50’s suggested by Jethro at Ex.18

      You have to remember Numbers 3:12 is after the final acceptance of Ex.24:7-8 and after the breach of Ex.32

      @ Would this be accurate? sort of.

      Exodus 32:36 – does show the levites distinguishing themselves but this is after :10 were Yah was to wipe them all out to not only lose their lives but also any vestige of the Mlkzdq Prsthd to the 1st Born.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s