Gen 26:5?

[Ron Amnsn]

I do NOT think that being an Israelite has ANYTHING to do with DNA.

[8thdaypriest]

Ron,

I don't believe that Abraham is "the root" of the Olive Tree called Israel. Though he may be the trunk.

Christ is "the root." He is "the Root of David" (Rev. 5:5). "We are rooted and built up in Him" (Col. 2:7).

EVERY branch was torn off of that tree. Even the disciples LOST FAITH, and even they had to be "grafted in again."

We are "grafted in" or legally adopted by Christ, the heir of the promise (that HE made) to Abraham because of our FAITH in HIM as the Redeemer sent by God the Father. The same goes for any Jew born anywhere in the world. The same goes for one of any other race.

Today's DNA descendants of Abraham are not closer to salvation than those of another race. In fact they may have a more difficult time "seeing" that Christ is the ONLY way.

www.prophecyviewpoint.com

Shalom

[Ron Amnsn]

I don't believe that Abraham is "the root" of the Olive Tree called Israel. Though he may be the trunk.

Christ is "the root." He is "the Root of David" (Rev. 5:5). "We are rooted and built up in Him" (Col. 2:7).

[8thdaypriest]

Ron said,

"Christians often assert that the olive tree (or its root or trunk) represents Jesus, but nobody has ever explained to me how the natural Jewish branches who are cut off could be grafted back into their own olive tree (if the tree/root/trunk is Jesus) when they were never attached to Jesus before. Obviously they were attached to the olive tree before they were cut off and they will be grafted back onto the same olive tree that was there before Jesus was born. Maybe you can explain."

Rachel answers:

Grief Ron! Who do you think called Abraham in the first place? Who spoke with Jacob? Who led Israel thru the wilderness? It was the pre-incarnate Son of God. He was then and has always been the only mediator between God and mankind.

The "root" of Israel was that covenant with Abraham - which Abraham didn't even participate in except that he did arrange the animal pieces. And there would have been no Israel if the pre-incarnate Son of God had not rescued them from Egypt.

Israel was grounded in (rooted in) the pre-incarnate Son of God. HE rescued her, led her, taught her, was betrothed to her. He is the One who left the Temple, and followed Judah to Babylon. He is the one who divorced the 10 Northern Tribes for their adultery.

NIV 1 Corinthians 10:1 For I do not want you to be ignorant of the fact, brothers and sisters, that our ancestors were all under the cloud and that they all passed through the sea. 2 They were all baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea. 3 They all ate the same spiritual food 4 and drank the same spiritual drink; for they drank from the spiritual rock that accompanied them, and that rock was Christ. (1Co 10:1 NIV)

Yes - God the Father is Supreme above all, but His begotten Son is His ONLY representative, who has taken HIS NAME. Mankind was separated from the Father by the sin of Adam. The Son of God stepped in as mediator, to bring about a reconciliation.

There is a study at my website titled "The Mediator" which is all about the pre-incarnate Son of God as the One who communicated with mankind thru the Old Testament.

Blessings

Rachel

www.prophecyviewpoint.com

[Ron Amnsn]

Grief Ron! Who do you think called Abraham in the first place? Who spoke with Jacob? Who led Israel thru the wilderness? It was the pre-incarnate Son of God. He was then and has always been the only mediator between God and mankind.

[8thdaypriest]

The pre-incarnate Son of God did NOT renege on any covenant. The descendants of Aaron BROKE that covenant - in fact they despised it (just like Esau). That is why the LORD told Eli HE would one day replace "his house" (of Levi) with "a faithful priest who shall do according to what is in My heart and in My mind." Only the Son of God could live up to that. "And He shall walk before (Me as) My anointed forever." (I Samuel 2:35).

The Father has appointed His own Son as the only and forever High Priest. And HE has appointed those who are adopted by His Son as "a kingdom of priests" "after the order of Melchizedek".

There is a study at my website titled (A Kingdom of Priests).

Ron,

The Temple ministry HAS MOVED to "the true Tabernacle which the LORD pitched and not man" - Heaven Itself. The LORD is NOT at that Mount any longer. He is sitting at the Father's right hand. We must look THERE, and approach HIM there.

The Father has recognized His Own Son as the Once and forever perfect sacrifice. Each time we pray for forgiveness in His name, we ARE presenting a sacrifice.

I believe the writer of Hebrews (most likely Paul). He said, "the priesthood being changed" and I believe it WAS changed - to Christ - the Priest after God's own heart and mind.

I believe circumcision of the flesh has been replaced with the fulfillment - the promise of circumcised hearts, and circumcised flesh (at the Second Coming).

[8thdaypriest]

The pre-incarnate Son of God did NOT renege on any covenant. The descendants of Aaron BROKE that covenant - in fact they despised it (just like Esau). That is why the LORD told Eli HE would one day replace "his house" (of Levi) with "a faithful priest who shall do according to what is in My heart and in My mind." Only the Son of God could live up to that. "And He shall walk before (Me as) My anointed forever." (I Samuel 2:35).

The Father has appointed His own Son as the only and forever High Priest. And HE has appointed those who are adopted by His Son as "a kingdom of priests" "after the order of Melchizedek".

There is a study at my website titled (A Kingdom of Priests).

Ron,

The Temple ministry HAS MOVED to "the true Tabernacle which the LORD pitched and not man" - Heaven Itself. The LORD is NOT at that Mount any longer. He is sitting at the Father's right hand. We must look THERE, and approach HIM there.

The Father has recognized His Own Son as the Once and forever perfect sacrifice. Each time we pray for forgiveness in His name, we ARE presenting a sacrifice.

I believe the writer of Hebrews (most likely Paul). He said, "the priesthood being changed" and I believe it WAS changed - to Christ - the Priest after God's own heart and mind.

I believe circumcision of the flesh has been replaced with the fulfillment - the promise of circumcised hearts, and circumcised flesh (at the Second Coming). You could say - Christ is our circumcision.

Concerning the tree - Israel. Jacob was only a type. Christ IS our Israel. He is "the firstborn." He is the one who "prevails with God" (That's what the name means). The LORD said, "I called my Son out of Egypt." Well - the infant Jesus went down to Egypt.

HE IS THE TREE - not a DNA bloodline from Jacob.

Branches were broken off from HIM, because of unbelief. And branches are grafted IN to HIM because of belief (faith).

The tree died! Then it(HE)was resurrected. Any branch that was attached to HIM when He died, had to grafted in again - to the risen TREE (Israel-Christ). Absolutely NO ONE believed in HIM as THE Son of God, who would save to the uttermost. "Of the people there was none with Him." They ALL had to be grafted in again to the resurrected TREE.

Even Zechariah (for example) - the Father of John the Baptist, had to be "grafted in" to the risen TREE. He had to be baptized in the name of Yeshua.

I am a grafted in Israelite - because I am "grafted in" to Christ.

www.prophecyviewpoint.com

Shalom

[Ron Amnsn]

The pre-incarnate Son of God did NOT renege on any covenant. The descendants of Aaron BROKE that covenant - in fact they despised it (just like Esau). That is why the LORD told Eli HE would one day replace "his house" (of Levi) with "a faithful priest who shall do according to what is in My heart and in My mind." Only the Son of God could live up to that. "And He shall walk before (Me as) My anointed forever." (I Samuel 2:35).

[8thdaypriest]

So Ron,

Has ANYTHING CHANGED since Messiah died?

If so - WHAT HAS CHANGED?

Are you Jewish Ron, by faith I mean? Do you believe that Yeshua was/is Messiah and the Son of God?

[Ron Amnsn]

So Ron,

Has ANYTHING CHANGED since Messiah died?

If so - WHAT HAS CHANGED?

[8thdaypriest]

Why do these Christians teach that God is fickle with his covenants and promises? Apparently so that they can supposedly appropriate the promises (and the priesthood) to themselves.

So - you do NOT believe that EVERYONE from the first resurrection will become "priests of God and of Christ"? (Rev. 20:6).

If they WILL become priests - to what order will they belong?

Peace,

Rachel

[8thdaypriest]

If the priesthood of the descendants of Phinehas ends WHEN "day and night" end - wouldn't that be at the Second Coming, when "heaven and the earth shall pass away" ?

If Phinehas comes up in the resurrection of the redeemed, he will of course be a priest. He will be a Melchizedek priest like everyone else who comes up in the first resurrection. He can still be a Levite. That's his tribe.

[8thdaypriest]

Ron,

I have been trying to answer your questions. I just don't like rhetorical questions that DEMAND I answer a certain way. I think maybe you just don't like my answers.

[Ron Amnsn]

Has ANYTHING CHANGED since Messiah died?

If so - WHAT HAS CHANGED?

I don't have a definitive answer for this. Christians assume huge changes came into effect with the death and resurrection of Messiah, but most of those alleged changes are based on man-made teachings. The Bible doesn't mention many changes. Here are the ones I can think of:

The biggest change is that the promised Messiah came and finished the work he was to do at that time. The promise of the Son of Adam who was to come has now been fulfilled. The better sacrifice has been offered, redeeming us from the penalty of sin.

The veil of the Temple, representing the body of Jesus (Hebrews 10:20) was torn from top to bottom, possibly turning the Holy Place and the Most Holy Place into one room (referred to in Hebrews as "the Holies"), in both the earthly Temple and the Heavenly Sanctuary.

The Holy Spirit was poured out on the believers with power at the Feast of Weeks. The Spirit caused them to be careful to follow God's Laws (Ezekiel 11 & 36) and be zealous for the Law of Moses. (Acts 21)

Forgiveness is now available through Jesus for things for which forgiveness was not available in the Law of Moses (Acts 13:38-41). I think these were primarily the things that resulted in a person being "cut off from his people".

The believing Israelites now had a fuller understanding of the what the animal sacrifices represented, especially when the officiating priests were those who believed in Jesus (Acts6:7) and could explain things. The years between Acts 2 and the destruction of the Temple, while the sacrifices continued at the Temple, were the most successful years for Jewish evangelism ever.

The Lord's Supper added more symbolism to Passover, which now commemorates the death of Messiah in addition to it's previous meanings. The day of the Wave Sheaf now commemorates the resurrection of Messiah in addition to its previous significance. Pentecost now commemorates the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, in addition to its previous significance.

We now have Jesus serving as the better high priest in the the better heavenly Sanctuary, in addition to the Levitical priests serving at the earthly Temple (when it is standing).

Gentile believers are now grafted-in to Israel through faith in Jesus, heir of Abraham's covenant. Gentiles could be grafted-in before but that required living among Israelites. And we look forward with Israel to the "restoration of all things about which God spoke by the mouth of His holy prophets from ancient time," (Acts 3:21) and the return of Messiah.

Jesus explained to the believers all the things concerning Messiah written in the Old Testament (Luke 24:27).

The written Law of Moses which functioned as a "tutor" or "child-conductor" has brought us to Messiah, the living Word, who has shown and taught us how God's Law of Moses should be lived the way God intended, and has empowered us to do so through the Holy Spirit (not to earn salvation, but as a result of salvation).

Jesus has directed his followers to go and make disciples of all nations.

[Ron Amnsn]

Today I finished reading Feast-keeping and the Faithful by Ron du Preez, an anti-feast-keeping book intended to convince SDA's that it's wrong to observe God's appointed times (but not harmful to "mark" the the feasts for learning or cultural purposes).

If you're already an SDA who doesn't want to keep God's appointed times, you'll feel good about that position when you're done reading the book. And you'll probably think (erroneously) that there is absolutely no valid reason to ever reconsider your position. It's too bad that the author makes money doing this disservice to so many people.

If you're an SDA who is already interested in the feasts, as you read the book you'll probably want to write (or read) a rebuttal. You will probably notice that the book has a strong bias, omitted some vital information, makes some unsupported assertions, and contains a number of significant contradictions. However, in spite of that I think the book does successfully show that most of the EGW quotations commonly used by SDA feast-keepers to try to show that EGW supported keeping the feasts are taken out of context. I have never seen any evidence that EGW intended to write anything in support of feast-keeping by modern Christians. But that's okay-- you don't need EGW to give permission to do something that Jesus did and that God himself gave instructions to do.

As a non-SDA torah-follower, I don't fall into either of the two previous groups. I found that the author did not deal with most of the reasons that I observe God's appointed times. The book does superficially cast aside a few New Testament passages of Scripture that provide evidence in support of feast-keeping. The author doesn't deal with the underlying issues but relies on non-Scriptural assumptions.

In answering one question, the author comes so very close to proving that his own position on feast-keeping is contrary to the teachings of the apostle Paul. The only thing lacking to complete the proof is to draw attention to the sequence of events chronologically in context. I expect that section will be revised in future editions of the book.

I'd like to have time to do a full response to this book, but I'm not sure that would be allowed on this forum.

[Ron Amnsn]

There is another change that occurred with the death of Messiah:

Jesus provided the sacrifice to initiate the New Covenant with house of Israel and the house of Jacob (Jeremiah 31:31, Luke 22:20, John 11:51, Hebrews 8:8).

Like the covenant God made with Abram, which was initiated with a sacrifice in Genesis 15 but not fully implemented until much later, the New Covenant was initiated with the sacrifice of Jesus but has not been fully implemented yet (Jeremiah 31:34 for instance). We have seen in the lives of some believers the first fruits of that covenant, but the full implementation is yet to come.

Like all of God's previous covenants, the New Covenant does not annul nor invalidate previous covenants or the covenant promises (Galatians 3:17, Romans 9:4).

[Ron Amnsn]

So - you do NOT believe that EVERYONE from the first resurrection will become "priests of God and of Christ"? (Rev. 20:6).

If they WILL become priests - to what order will they belong?

[8thdaypriest]

A "problem" which is currently dividing Feast-Keepers, is about WHEN to "keep" them. Some follow the Jewish calendar. Others wait for someone in Jerusalem to send the news that the barley crop is almost ripe. Then they start the "year."

What calendar do you subscribe to Ron?

[8thdaypriest]

Ron,

Where does the Torah say that Israelite males living at a distance from Jerusalem do NOT have to present themselves before the LORD at Jerusalem, at the appointed times ?

You seemed to say that not every male of Israel is required to present himself at the appointed times. Sorry if I got that wrong.

[8thdaypriest]

[8thdaypriest]

If I agree that the Sinai Covenant is still in force WITH all of the Law which was written down by Moses at the LORD's dictation, what does that CHANGE about the way I live now - over here in East Texas??

Even IF the Jews regained control of the Mount, my husband would NOT be allowed on the Mount. Even if a Levitical priesthood were re-established, he could NOT present a sacrifice. He is NOT a DNA Hebrew, and is certainly NOT going to convert to Judaism.

I believe that the Jews WILL regain control of the Mount. Then they will loose it once again, to "the nations" for 42 months. I am very concerned about "the enemy" who will "sit as god in the Temple of God showing himself, that he is God." I believe THAT will happen just BEFORE the return of Christ in glory. His House and His Mount will be sooooooo polluted by the Evil One, that only fire can cleanse it (along with the whole earth).

At the Second Coming of Christ "the heavens and the earth" will "pass away" - so at that point everything will be "fulfilled" and the covenant with Levi/Phinehas would END. And at that point "a jot" and "a tittle" may "pass from the LAW" - allowing for a priesthood of ALL the redeemed - all of Israel (both native and grafted in).

Shalom,

[Ron Amnsn]

A "problem" which is currently dividing Feast-Keepers, is about WHEN to "keep" them. Some follow the Jewish calendar. Others wait for someone in Jerusalem to send the news that the barley crop is almost ripe. Then they start the "year."

What calendar do you subscribe to Ron?

In our family we currently follow a calendar that uses the new-moon sightings in Israel to determine when each month begins (with a maximum of 30 days per month), and uses the readiness of the barley in Israel to determine which month is the first month. Usually that means we celebrate God's Feasts according to the calendar of the Karaite Jews.

When we are celebrating with those who follow the calendar of the Orthodox Jews, we respect those dates as well.

[Ron Amnsn]

Ron,

Where does the Torah say that Israelite males living at a distance from Jerusalem do NOT have to present themselves before the LORD at Jerusalem, at the appointed times ?

You seemed to say that not every male of Israel is required to present himself at the appointed times. Sorry if I got that wrong.

That is how I understand what is written in Scripture. However, I may not be able to prove it conclusively from the Scriptures.

From Numbers 9:10-13 we know that a person on a distant journey is not required to keep Passover in Jerusalem.

From Lev 26 we know that God would drive the Israelites from the land into exile if they were disobedient and that the land would make up for its sabbaths while they were away. So it appears that not being able to go Jerusalem for the feasts is a part of the consequences of being in exile.

I think we see an example of this with the prophet Daniel who lived during a period of exile for the Israelites. Daniel never returned from Babylon to Jerusalem to celebrate God's feasts, yet he was apparently considered righteous (Daniel 12:13, Ezekiel 14:13-21). If it took four months to travel from Babylon to Jerusalem when conditions were good (Ezra 7:9), and four months to return, then a person living in Babylon would be able to make the trip only once per year. He would have at best only 5 months remaining to raise, harvest, and sell a crop, if that person wanted to return to Jerusalem again the next year. So the logistics of going to Jerusalem from exile did not make it possible to make the journey to Jerusalem three times per year, and for most people it would not be possible to go even once per year. I think God knew that when he sent the Israelites into exile.

[Ron Amnsn]

OK - let's say that the covenant with Phinehas is still in force, along with the Levitical priesthood. And let's say that I can identify a descendant of Levi by DNA. Should I pay tithe to that man?? (I'm think of Rico Cortes, who claims descent from Levi.)

I think that would require some serious prayer.

Scripturally, I think the Levites have a better claim on the tithe than any other organization. However, they also have some responsibilities. The Levites were to have storehouses from which they fed the Levites, the priests, and the poor.

The Scriptures only mention paying tithes for the agricultural increase produced from the land. For instance, there's no indication that the Israelites gave the Levites a tenth of the manna they collected.

Also, it appears that not all of the tithes went to the Levites. A portion of the tithes were to be used by the people to celebrate God's feasts.

[Ron Amnsn]

If I agree that the Sinai Covenant is still in force WITH all of the Law which was written down by Moses at the LORD's dictation, what does that CHANGE about the way I live now - over here in East Texas??

Let's start with a disclaimer. I don't know how you're living now. The changes you make would depend on how you're living now.

Probably the most important change would be to start looking at God's Old Testament instructions as good instructions (as the Bible teaches that they are) rather than as something detrimental that people are better off without (as most Christians have believed).

Then you would probably start out by following the four instructions from Torah that the Jerusalem Council sent to the Gentiles who were turning to God in Acts 15. Those were the starting place for new Gentile believers.

The next step would be to read the books of Moses to learn God's ways. You'll be kind of like an Israelite child living in exile learning to follow Scripture. You'll probably be learning for a number of years. Because you're not setting out to follow the Law in order to earn salvation, you don't need to stress-out about stuff. Just have a willing heart to learn to obey God's Word the way Jesus did. You'll be following Him.

If you're looking for someone more experienced that you can learn from you might check out Tim Hegg's teachings at TorahResource.com. Tim Hegg's teachings are usually carefully researched (except some of his opinions about SDA beliefs) and hype-free. He was a Baptist pastor before learning about his Jewish roots. I don't agree with everything Tim Hegg teaches, but I do carefully consider what he says. If you're like me, you may be initially put off somewhat by some of the Jewish traditions that his congregation uses.