Melkizedeq Attack 7

Melkizedeq Attack 7

The redacted position accessing the rebuttable presumption of the space-time continuum a conundrum of the cosmos light speed vortex … Bla, Bla, Blahhhh

1st off – It is a debaters tactic – If you control the words, terms & phrases especially the 1’s you’ve made up you control a manipulatable conversation of your own creation.

2nd this is all the Levitical Priesthood that came (after) as result of the Melkizedeq Covenant breach of Ex.32 – No matter how many Pinehas spins and Zadok twists you can Levitically argue in favor of Aaron (still All levites)

3rd “High Priesthood” this is a Rico Fantasy ‘extra biblical’ phrase therefore NOT a biblical term.

4th this ‘Torah/Hebrew’ Levitical mind-set/Rabbi enamored teacher still uses the baby/infantile non-Hebrew, non-Torah, non-Covenant terms; God, LORD/Lord & Jesus, not discerning to raise the bar of knowledge and obedience (Heb.6:10-14). Mouthing honor to yet bowing to Rabbinic rule to not use Yahweh’s Name. Playing into & confirming his audience’s ‘I Doh Wanna’ attitude; because of his own ‘I Doh Wanna’ attitude.


Rico’s original post ‘if’ you care to or can access it – For he evidently has taken to lobe stones from a safe secured position.

The Following By Rico Cortes ++
DrDave’s Answers **

1++Shalom L’kulam

Many are now saying that the Levitical Priest are no longer part of the plan of God and that the Melchizedek Priesthood is now in Order. The Problem is that Elohim can not break his own oath given to the Levites. I would like for you to read about the Covenant with Pinchas which is in this week’s torah portion.

** 1st off YHWH will not break an Oath, Promise or Covenant – OR!!! – The pre-awareness proviso (Amos 3:7) that was stated before the forgoing was breached by the other party (Israel ie us & grafted in).


** This a card-stacking technique that has little to do with Yah & the Bible up to – CHALLENGING (or Forgetting) THE PRE-AWARENESS WARNING IS AN AFFRONT TO THE AUTHORITY AND KINGSHIP, WISDOM & FOREKNOWLEDGE OF YHWH & the MASTER Yahshua.

a pact of priesthood for all time The biblical notion of an eternal covenant, berit ʿolam,63 is also attested in extra biblical sources, for example, Akkadian adi dāriti, ūmē ṣâti, “an everlasting covenant, for all time.”

** Rico knows (or should) that ‘olam’ does not always or only mean our concept of Forever, Eternal, Everlasting, Evermore or ‘for all time’. ‘A concealed – vanishing point – out of mind’ means; for a really long extended period of time and does not only mean any of the forgoing but does not exclude any of them either – discerned context is the key.

4++ The text here mentions “the priesthood,” not the High Priesthood, which gives rise to the rabbinic suggestion that Phinehas did not become a priest together with Aaron and his sons (Lev. 8) but only when he killed Zimri.64 It may be the High Priesthood that is intended here.65 Phinehas is awarded the High Priesthood just as the Levites have been awarded the priesthood (Exod. 32:29; see Mal. 2:4–8)—for suppressing apostasy. However, the likelihood is that Phinehas is here promised that his line, later called the Zadokites (see Ezek. 44:15–16), will be the exclusive officiants in the Temple (see Excursus 61 for details).

** But the Bible wouldn’t mention ‘the High Priesthood’ this is Rico’s wish-list spin for there is no such designation in the Bible.
“It may be”- Appealing to ‘rabbinic suggestion’ is like the hen asking the fox for advise about the chicks.
The thing Rico (& others) will not to see is that no matter how you slice it or mix it; Phinehas, Zadok along with Aaron and his sons are all (every one Livites) of the Plan ‘B’ damage control for covenant breach priesthood, for ALL Israel was to be annihilated including Aaron & Sons (Ex.32:10/Num.3:12)
“It may be”; “the likelihood is” turns to an absolute statement “will be the exclusive” – ???
“Excursus” – Early 19th century: from Latin (???) –…/excursus -&- 8 – Is Israeli Hebrew Unique in Being a Western Language (semantics, use of tenses etc.) Under a Semitic Skin …
More of Rico’s adopted unbiblical terms – again posturing to gain superior control of this presentation & direct the conversation from an imaginary perceived uncontested scholaresq position.

5++ This covenant is one of five issued by God: the promise to Noah that humanity will not be destroyed, the promise of seed and soil to Abraham, the Torah to Moses (and Israel), and dynasties to Phinehas and David (cf. Jer. 33:19–22; Ps. 89:29–38).*** It constitutes another royal gift bestowed upon the High Priest, who, like the king, wears special robes and a crown and is anointed (Lev. 8:12; 2 Kings 11:12). Now, by virtue of this covenant, he is granted a ruling dynasty.***

** This covenant is one of five issued by YHWH: Rico is right about 5 but completely misses the ‘Covenants of Promise’ class of covenants (Eph.2:12). Which are all Melkizedeq. Phinehas and David are not.
This completely ignores, overlooks & misses the warning proviso of 1Kgs.9:5-9 confirmed by Yahshua at Lk.13:35. For those who would miss this ‘your house is left to you desolate’ is the slam-dunk end all that would include the Kingship & the Levitical Priesthood (Hosea 4:6) from Torah that had already been from Babylon corrupted.
For the point about the priests see;
There it is again “ruling dynasty” a ricoism – biblically where?

6++This dynastic promise to Phinehas, however, encounters the historic difficulty that certain High Priests, the Elids, trace their descent to Phinehas’s uncle, Ithamar (1 Chron. 24:3, 6).66 This passage, then, may reflect the victory of Zadok (the descendant of Phinehas) over Abiathar (the descendant of Ithamar). The two served jointly as High Priests during the reign of David, but Solomon banished Abiathar from his office, as told in 1 Kings 2:26–27 (see 1 Sam. 2:27–36), leaving the High Priesthood exclusively to the line of Phinehas.

** There it is again “dynastic promise” another ricoism – biblically where?
“This passage, then, ‘may’ reflect” – again a supposition leading to an absolute; oblivious of the proviso & confirmation of. See Answer 5b

7++ (story above and fight with the two priesthood during the reign of david and how Zadok was faithful to david who was appointed by Elohim to be King is why the sons of Zadok will officiate in the third temple.) my commentary here

** See;

8++ However, the text mentions “priesthood” not “High Priesthood.” The exact phrase, moreover, is “everlasting (ʿolam) priesthood,” which occurs in two other places (Exod. 29:9; 40:15), where Aaron’s dynasty is granted the priesthood. Hence, the reference here is not to the office of High Priest but to all those who are authorized to function as priests in the sanctuary. Therefore, it is more likely that the Baal-peor incident served to justify the banishment of Abiathar’s entire family from the Jerusalem Temple, leaving the Zadokites alone as the officiating priests.

** There it is again “High Priesthood”& “Aaron’s dynasty” other ricoisms – biblically where?
“everlasting (ʿolam) priesthood” – See Answer 3
Rico does not even precieve that Ex.29:9 is under the Melkizedeq Priesthood; while Ex.40:15 is under the Levitical priesthood for Covenant breach (Ex.32:10)
“the Jerusalem Temple” ??? – That did not happen till decades possibly centuries after Ex.40:15 – still under the Levitical priesthood tho.

9++ Other priestly families continued to serve on the staff of the First Temple but not as officiants (Ezek. 40:45–46; 43:19; see Excursus 61 for details) making expiation Rather, “ransoming” (see 8:19 and Excursus 19). By means of his passion (kinʾah), Phinehas provided a ransom for Israel, and God’s wrath was assuaged. So too, when the Levitical guard cuts down the encroacher on God’s sancta, he also provides a ransom that stays God’s wrath from venting itself upon Israel (see the Comments to 8:19; 18:22–23).67 Phinehas, as chief of the Levitical guards, now fulfills this Levitical function.

**There it is again “Excursus” – See Answer 4f
‘his passion’ ? Another ricoism from Mel Gibson? Biblically where? – ‘assuaged’ – ‘sancta’ ??? Biblically where? – Like I said control the terms; control the conversation/presentation.
“Phinehas, as chief of the Levitical guards, ‘now’ fulfills this Levitical function” – Now? Right Now? Where are they? Any of them? Phinehas? the Levitical guards? A functioning Levitical anything?

10++ Later tradition, interpreting “plague” as slaughter,68 claims that Phinehas’s example was followed by his loyal supporters,69 and it was they who slew the twenty-four thousand Israelites (v.9).

** All this still under the Levitical priesthood; and completely ignores the return to the Melkizedeq Priesthood of which Yahshua is the High Priest of – Ps.110:4, Heb.7:11-12; 21, 1Ptr.2:9, Rev.1:6; 5:10

++ Milgrom, J. (1990). Numbers (pp. 216–217). Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society.

** So let’s put this all in perspective – Rico you (and others) want to elevate defending the Levitical priesthood while you denigrate the Melkizedeq Priesthood of Yahshua no less – Basically saying Rah, Rah, Rah Sis Coom Bah the unbroken royal Kingship on the throne lineage of David & Rah, Rah, Rah Sis Coom Bah the unbroken Priesthood of Aaron, the unbroken Priesthood of Zadok, the unbroken Priesthood of Phinehas – Sounds Great! Accept for 1 problem. Unbroken; remember? Where are they? Any of them? For 2000yrs? Where are they on the Throne, in a Temple, even in a tent functioning in any capacity? And if you say ‘in the millennium’ – besides the ‘unbroken’ part; this is to all 12 tribes; and just who will set that up? YHWH? Or a bunch of Torah usurping / Covenant breaching / Out of Order / Priest replacing Rabbis? That have gutted the Levitical priesthood to a distant faint memory?

Saying it’s so when it is not is the hallmark defining definition of insanity. Just like saying it is not there when it is. It is/both are a schizophrenic religious construct.

Just like Yahshua said at Lk.13:35 – your ‘house’ not a Kingdom is left to you desolate meaning no King AND no Priesthood. That was right at 2000yrs ago.

And this comment in support of Rico by Diana Dye – The original covenant was the Creation or eternal covenant. All the other covenants are aspects of this covenant and have clearly not been “done away with.” The restoration of the creation covenant signifies the return of Melchizedek as High Priest – i.e. Adam in the garden. This in no way replaces the purpose and function for the Levitical priesthood.

** These 1’s as teachers need to understand the terms they just throw out as being accurate when there are not – The best the original covenant of Creation is not an eternal covenant but an everlasting covenant – Simply; 1 has a beginning; 1 does not.
About ‘olam’ – See Answer 3
About “done away with”; See –
“This in no way” this ignores the plain evidence of Ezk.20:10-25 and the New Testament – See Above^^^
Clearly the Plan ‘A’ Melkizedeq Priesthood is far&away superior to the Plan ‘B’ Levitical Priesthood forever because of Covenant breach – Yahshua Himself makes that point abundantly clear (Mat.11:11/Heb.7:7)

See –


2 thoughts on “Melkizedeq Attack 7

  1. Ely Hernandez Im glad you pull this out…I know Rico and his a very nice guy..but unfortunately the brother is erroneously seduce to “his role” in the levitical priesthood. What is worst is the masses his teaching (specially the Spanish community) that are following this non biblical mindset because of their lack of identity and biblical facts. Specially when he pulls his favorite card “Im a Cohen” .

    Torah without Rabbinics .
    This captures the situation – Rico is a nice guy – but he is trapped in His Levitical mindset – He has hitched his cart to the wrong pony for long enough that at this point to admit the truth – he would have to major back peddle and and eat alot of crow – calling into question much of his teaching. It seems that he is just too proud to ever do that in the foreseeable future. Yet we all must square with Jms.3:1

Leave a Reply

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

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

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )


Connecting to %s