1. Thanks for taking my call today Dr. Brown. I was hoping that you could recommend me some books that offer a defense of the Ontological Trinity and another on the Incarnation of Christ (hyperstatic union, God-man). I appreciate your time. P.S. I would of gave anything to have met Leonard Ravenhill when he was alive. If you ever get time I would like to hear what you have to say about the man of God.
    In Him

  2. Dr Brown no doubt you are aware of the Jewish book “the two powers” what are you thoughts on this ? People tend to think the Godhead is a Christian invention but this book shows that it is directly a Jewish position in the times of the early Church. This i find interesting particularly “The Word” reference we see “The Word” poping up all the time in the OT for instance 1 Samuel 3:10 where “The Word” makes a physical apperance standing next to Samuel this in turn can give a better understanding when John opens his magnificent Gospel with the profund and amazing opener which we are all aware of, The word was with God and the Word was God ! so we can see this came right out of the OT, John knew his OT and applied “The Word” to Our Lord !

    Sometimes the Word is a voice but sometimes is personified as seen in Samuel, context will dictate this and when you tie it up with the NT is just makes sense in a wonderful and very profund way 🙂

    I dont think anything is more exciting than finding the Lord Jesus Christ in the Old Testament. It’s amazing and fascinating.

  3. Fitzgerald, we have provided a massive amount of evidence in our writings and DVD’s to all who want to search for the truth, and we constantly give away free materials to serious seekers. But when people write to us to mock the faith of Jesus the Messiah, we have no desire to waste precious time getting into silly arguments. Also, please look at the Simple Rules to Abide by When Commenting, which require you to stay on subject.

    If you have genuine questions but are not into reading serious material, then by all means call the show and we’ll be happy to answer your questions. But again, if you’re not serious, we really can’t help you. (Just to be clear: There’s no need to respond here, since you’re completely off topic right now.)

  4. Fitzgerald,

    First, this is not the place to post your objections to the New Testament. Comments must stay on topic, and you are completely off topic.

    Second, all your questions have been answered many times over, but when you contacted our ministry, it was clear that you had no desire to seek the truth but rather to argue your point.

    We pray that God would have mercy on you and help you to see His truth!

  5. Thanks for all the solid evidence on the deity of Jesus I’ve gotten from listening to your broadcasts. Having one parent who became a “Jehovah’s Witness” when I was 12, I overheard a lot of doctrine which sought to reduce Him considerably. It’s so good to learn of all the Scriptures which clarify His true, exalted identity!

  6. Hi,

    I haven’t listened to the show yet – just read through these comments, and I’d like to clarify the translation of Matthew 1:16.

    By at least two independant translators this verse has been translated from the Aramaic like this:

    “Jacob became the father of Joseph, the father of Miriam, from whom was born Yeshua, who is called Messiah.”

    From the Aramaic text this is the translation that would make sense. Here the link to the translation of the New Testament from Aramaic into English:


    So according to this text Miriam’s father also had the name Joseph. Only in this context do we then have

    “…from the carrying away to Babylon to the Messiah, fourteen generations.” (Matthew 1:17b)

    In this context I also would like to link again to this free video: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2662031810327980639#


  7. Dr. Brown,
    I have a question in response to the question of “two Torahs”. As I am studying, I find it hard to believe that Jesus and the apostles would contradict the original teachings of the Torah. Deut 12.32 and 13.1-5 and several other scriptures would actually lead me away from Christ if the result would be to leave the Torah. I have not been raised in this belief, but now realize that my responsibility is more than previously understood. Acts 15.20-21 also confirms this to me in that when asked about commanding them to keep the law, they give a small number of commands and allow growth into the rest of the law as they learn of Moses.

    I am also studying Pauls writings on our relationship to the law, but there are several areas that are less than clear when all of his statements are taken as translated…nomos (Torah) vs. dogma, etc. I am still studying his letters, so please excuse any ignorance I have in that area.

    Thanks for your input.

  8. Jeremy,

    Everything in Torah and Prophets was pointing to Jesus, and we are to put our emphasis on Him, the goal of the Torah, the One to whom Torah was pointing. There are scores of things in the Torah that you would never practice today, so I would encourage you to put your focus where it belongs, on the substance more than the shadow, especially if you are not Jewish.

    If you don’t have my book What Do Jewish People Think About Jesus, I would encourage you to get a copy and start reading in section four of the book where I deal with these questions in some depth.

  9. Michael thank you for your ministry! I appreciate your answer about is being Torah observant mandatory for believers in Yeshua. I just finished a study in Galations 1-5.

    I appreciate Paul’s explanation of the Law and the Promise.

    15Brothers, let me take an example from everyday life. Just as no one can set aside or add to a human covenant that has been duly established, so it is in this case. 16The promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. The Scripture does not say “and to seeds,” meaning many people, but “and to your seed,” meaning one person, who is Christ. 17What I mean is this: The law, introduced 430 years later, does not set aside the covenant previously established by God and thus do away with the promise. 18For if the inheritance depends on the law, then it no longer depends on a promise; but God in his grace gave it to Abraham through a promise. Galations 5:15-18 NIV

    “It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery.” Galations 5:1 NIV

    Blessed is the one who comes in the name of the LORD! Psalms 118:26 NASB

  10. Dr. Brown and David,
    Thanks for your answers, but here is a question…if the law given to Moses does not set aside the covenant previously established, then does the new covenant set aside the one established on Sinai? Did God annul that covenant or was it only a shadow that led to the death, exile, etc, of those who disobeyed? I’m actually ok with shadows…as long as there is light, the shadow is an integral part of, inseparable, and absolutely just as real as the substance. I don’t think that I am ignoring the substance by also noticing and observing the shadow.

    And I agree that there is freedom in Christ, but freedom from what? We were slaves to what? TO sin…and Paul himself said that he didn’t know sin except by the law. How else am I to understand what is righteous except by the Torah (which is what Christ confirmed and clarified by His teachings, also giving the spirit of the law). “Do we then make void the law through faith? Certainly not! On the contrary, we establish the law.” Romans 3.31 NKJV. We are free from sin, no longer under the condemnation of the law because we have been made righteous by faith in Christ…never by works (by doing the law) but by the liberty in Christ.

    Here is the problem…I agree that we all must work out our salvation and most of the issues in the Torah are not heaven/hell issues. But there is a difference between doing something that is binding versus striving to be more observant out of a relationship with Him. If I’m not Torah observant, it will not keep you out of heaven (Matt 5.17-20) but I believe from what I have studied that there are blessings the closer we get to Him and the more we are willing to submit to Him, including our observance to His laws (especially since He is King).

    This show has opened my eyes to so many issues as a result of overt lawlessness. I don’t think that we should command anyone to observe Torah, which would only enforce legalism, but IF we focus on it not being binding, then I expect lawlessness to continue and more abominable things to infiltrate the church. Why can’t we just do them and teach them (Matt 5 and Acts 15) instead of ostracizing those that wish to observe. Here’s the key…I’m not doing anything to be saved, but I am doing things because I’m saved! Am I completely observant, God knows I’m not but I am striving and willing.

    “All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any. I Corinthians 6.12…all things are lawful for me, but all things edify not”…I Corinthians 10.23. Even if no longer bound, can it be that we still have a choice that will bring life (Deut 30.15-20)? If not for me, for someone else (I Cor 10.32)?

    Again, just questions…
    One more that I would like answered (because I don’t know) – what commandments did Jesus make directly that were not Torah? In John 14.15 he states if you love me, keep my commandments…so which commandments does He refer to?

    PS – please don’t think I am getting inflammatory, I’m just at a point where God is challenging me with something I would never have thought would be a part of my walk with Him. I was a fence rider, a dope smoking teenager that would play drums at church while high as a kite and could care less. Last 5 years, he has really shown me a lot of things and nurtured me back to Him, revealing Himself in portions over time…and I will never let go of what He puts in my heart even if it isn’t required…doing more than required with sincere and pure motives is never wrong (I Samuel 1.11,28) but can be a blessing to you, God, and others.

    Thank you again Dr Brown, as you have become part of my freedom in God and a voice of conscience to many. You have taught me a great deal in a short time. Blessings and peace in the name of Jesus.

  11. Jeremy,

    Thanks for your post, and be assured that we’ve addressed these questions many times in recent years. They are certainly important!

    Two simple questions for you: 1) Have you read what I have written on the subject? 2) What exactly do you mean by observing Torah? Which commandments in particular? All of them?

  12. Jeremy,

    Sorry, but I just spotted your specific question re: Jesus calling us to keep His commandments. I would simply encourage you to read the Gospels, and whatever He commanded there is what He was referring to.

  13. Dr Brown,
    Thanks for your reply.
    1) I have not read much of your material as I am currently unable to purchase your books, so I have only read what is available online. I plan to purchase them as I can, especially your Jewish Objection series. For the last year I have had something burning in me for the Jewish people and desire to be a vessel for God to use in whatever He sees fit for me.

    2) I will be honest, I don’t know…I’m still studying on the matter. I do believe God wants to be a part of every aspect of our life, hence the Torah is almost all inclusive…the problem is I hear people talk about legalism related to Torah when the same ones take legalistic approaches to New Testament scriptures, but then if someone tries to do more out of love for God they are put on the heretic list. There are several places in the New Testament where for no apparent reason they specifically mention aspects of Torah observance. I will only mention one as my posts are huge (I’m sorry)…Acts 21 – Paul accused of teaching against Moses; they know it is false, so they instruct him to purify himself…he even makes an offering (which is not spelled out what kind, but most likely a sacrifice) to show (v24) that he is keeping the law…and what kind of vow does he take? Not specified, but most likely a nazarite vow. Many others are given in the text. And I know what Acts 21.25 says, but I believe it refers to circumcision observance and points back to the Acts 15 discussion which included the Gentiles learning of Moses in the synagogue.

    So what should be observed? As you learn and God leads you, growing into Him in all ways. It was a revelation of God then, I don’t believe He has changed, “Whose voice then shook the earth: but now he hath promised, saying, Yet once more I shake not the earth only, but also heaven.” Hebrews 12.26. I believe you are right, the shaking is coming and I want to sink my roots as deep as they can go.

    3) I have read the Gospels several times, but I am having difficulty identifying commands that are not originally Torah. Also, if He is eternal and was from the foundation of the earth (Before Abraham was, I am. John 8.58) then I can also believe that ALL of His commands would include Torah.

    “All scripture [is] given by inspiration of God, and [is] profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.” 2 Timothy 3.16-17 – I believe the only scripture available was Tanakh at the time with the addition of the letters…I could be wrong, but were these (New Testament) considered scripture when Paul wrote this?

    Again, thanks Dr. Brown, especially with your patience in dealing with my onslaught of questions.

  14. Jeremy,

    Send a note to us through the website, and we’ll send you a free copy of What Do Jewish People Think About Jesus. This will help get you started.

    Two quick pointers for you:

    1) Think of the Torah and Prophets primarily existing to introduce you to Jesus. Once He is introduced, He becomes central. Focus on Him. Walk with Him. Get to know and understand Him. Worshiping and adoring and enjoying Him must be your all in all.

    2) Don’t worry about which commandments of Jesus were “originally” in the Torah or not. Just do what He says! But even His command to love one another as He loves us is something that was never taught before.

    You’re asking some wrong questions and making life difficult for yourself. And consider this too: There are millions of believers around the world that at present just have the NT in their language, and still, they are vibrant disciples of Jesus. That should tell you something.

  15. Thanks Dr. Brown, but I’m not looking for charity, only some straight answers. I will continue my diligent and prayerful search…even if answers are difficult and unpopular, but to me its personal.

  16. Jeremy,

    I’m giving you straight answers. Are you not hearing them? I could care less about popular answers. I only care about truth, and when I tell you you’re asking some wrong questions, I’m not trying to be popular. Take heed to what I’ve written here in the posts to you, get your priorities in the right direction — Torah points to Yeshua more than the reverse — and things will fall into place for you.

    Anyway, I’m not able to respond more here, but I’ve said enough to get your focus in the right place.

  17. Dr Brown,
    I was not accusing you, only telling you what my motives were…that’s all. I appreciate your instruction and your teaching and will continue to read your work as I obtain it and to follow your broadcasts. I greatly respect your work and am currently learning a lot from it. I am also adopting your apologetic principle of considering the weight of the objection which you explained several weeks ago.

    I apologize that you thought I was accusing you. Please forgive me. Believe me, I respect your responses very much…otherwise, I would never post.

    In Christ,

    PS – no need to respond, I will leave your discussion board alone but will check it on occasion for nuggets of wisdom…

  18. Jeremy — all clear, and no problem on this end. When we do address this issue in a show, that’s the time to hit this discussion board with questions and comments, and others will join in then too.

    Blessings to you!

  19. A question for clarification. Why is Moshe’s covenant called “an eternal covenant,” and too, why is Yeshua’s covenant so labeled (see Hebrews)?

  20. Jeremy,
    I have wrestled with some of the same questions too. If I may give my 2 cents.

    Paul, in dealing with the church at Corinth, wrote 1 Corinthians. In it he was answering questions on marriage, on food sacrificed to idols, on the gifts of the spirit. “Now concerning” was written dealing with at least three issues (off the top of my head). Get this: the church was about 5 years old at the time, and Paul was with them for the first 18 months of their existence. Stay with me. Paul was a student of Gamaliel right? He could have taught them systematically from the Torah about marriage, about food sacrificed to idols, or anything else. However, having his presence for 18 months, and several years later the questions remained: “what about marriage?”, “What about food sacrificed to idols?” Paul did not even give them a systematic teaching in those early months on the gifts of the Spirit (charismatic ouch!). They would not have asked him if they had known.
    If he had not given them systematic teaching on marriage, ect, then what was he teaching in those formative 18 months he spent with them?

    In 1 Cor 3:10 Paul stated “as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid the foundation”; that characterizes his work in that 18 months. In characterizing his message, He also said:

    1Co 2:1 And I, brethren, when I came to you, came not with excellency of speech or of wisdom, declaring unto you the testimony of God.
    1Co 2:2 For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified.

    If we miss this, we miss everything. God Bless. -josh

  21. Jabez,

    Thanks for the question. I would say the Sinai covenant was “eternal” in several ways:

    1) Israel broke the covenant, so God replaced it with a new and better covenant, meaning that the covenant itself was not necessarily temporal but when broken, it was replaced.

    2) It is “eternal” in the sense that what it pointed to reaches its goal in Yeshua and thus continues forever.

    3) In any case, the Hebrew for “eternal” can also mean into the distant future, or, simply, “lasting.” Would anyone think that we will be offering animal sacrifices or stoning adulterers in the New Jerusalem a billion years from now?

  22. Dr. M.B., Interesting response. I hoped for a less common sense response, that there was some estoteric intention involved, but then, I live in Boulder.

    Seriously, thanks. It seems that this idea is often raised by those who believe in Yeshua, and yet believe too that observance of the law is somehow important to our Father. I agree completely that Yeshua was refering to what He commanded in the New Testament when He told his followers to obey His Commandments. This seems to come up often when dealing with some folks, as believers, who seem to stay stuck on getting it all right, i.e. as to one’s own righteousness being somehow connected to observing the Sinai laws.

    It seems that those laws were for a particular people group, in a particular area, as bonded in particular ways, for a particular season. Fortunately Yeshua embraced the Ten Commandments when enlarging our understanding of the relationship of seekers to the Father through his teaching–it seems especially so in the Sermon on the Mount.

  23. And this raises a second question, to what extent was the Sinai Covenant conditional, and to what extent is the New Covenant conditional?

  24. Right on, Josh! There is no other foundation laid. There is no other divine Plan. There is no greater relationship offered us continuously since His visitation and Pentecost.

  25. Also, I too am hearing to have three months of food in reserve, like Wilkerson of NYC. Instability in this world is a factor to consider for each household in these times.

  26. Dr Brown, Josh and Jabez,
    First I apologize that I am posting after I said I would cease.

    Josh – Reading into where the text is silent is dangerous. My response to this is a question: Who taught the Galatians? Galatia went extreme right and tried to be justified by keeping the law without faith…this is far from what I am arguing. Also, how long did the children of Israel have Moses? Time and teaching is not the issue…its a matter of the heart and a relationship with Him, which is always the case.

    Jabez – When God wakes you nightly, around 2AM, and speaks to you through scripture, and lays something on your heart FOR YOU, then tell me about self-righteousness. I know I am righteous by faith, all in Christ are, but some are called to more than faith alone…which by the way, James tells us that faith also contains an element of action on our part.

    To give an extreme example which is by no means a sin biblically: if God convicts you over wearing a watch, then stop…I don’t care how much you paid for your Rolex or if its a Timex, if its part of your vanity or pride and God convicts you about it, listen.

    I will say, I find it funny that if I would say “I stopped eating pork and shrimp,” everyone points and says I’m trying to justify myself, I’m self-righteous, I’m fallen from grace, etc, automatically without any questions. On the same note, I could say there are some things that are plainly stated in the scripture yet disregarded because of arrogance. The extent that we as the body of Christ no longer find ourself “bound”, we are saved by grace only, and our actions don’t matter leads to pride and sin. An example of this came from the words of Jennifer Knapp from this broadcast on 4/26/10 (its the only place I heard her speak). Her response (paraphrased): “What happened to loving you neighbor?” or “God is love”. No sense of wrong, and still under the assumption that she was saved by grace and her actions didn’t matter.

    Last comment:
    I am not looking to stone anyone…I am not looking for a Galatia response to the law…but I am looking to be humble and accept whatever the King, my LORD Jesus reveals in scripture. If He is LORD in your life, if He reigns, then we should listen. There are definitely extremes…I don’t want to be to the right nor the left, but directly where He wants me.

  27. Amen Jeremy!! Jesus did not come to bring a new religion as He Himself said in Matthew 5:17.

    Those who try to establish a new religion are in reality promoting lawlessness!!

    Yeshua came the write the law on our hearts (Jeremiah 31:33) – but lawlessness will bring us to hell!!

    The message of Yeshua gets severely distorted when saying the He came to abolish the law – what He came to abolish was the “law of sin and death” – a different law than God’s law (Romans 7:23 and Romans 8:2) that we have inherited from the serpant in the Garden of Eden whom we have invited to bring sin and death into our lives!

  28. Erika,

    You wrote, “Those who try to establish a new religion are in reality promoting lawlessness!!”

    That, to me, is a very dangerous comment. Are you saying that what I wrote — namely, that the Sinaitic covenant is not binding on believers today — is establishing a new religion and in reality promoting lawlessness?

    Let’s be totally clear here, since if you are promoting that, you are in massive denial of the truth of the NT — and in serious error — and if you are not promoting that, you need to be very careful with such sweeping statements.

  29. Dr. Brown,

    I do believe that the ten commandments apply to us today, especially the fourth commandment. Why should Yeshua have done aways with it, just because He supposedly rose from the dead on Sunday, when all the New Testament says is that He had risen from the dead very early on the first day of the week (when it still was dark)Already?

    I also do not believe that WE can change biblical law just because we like the Sunday better than the Sabbath. Furthermore we have completely lost the sense of what the Sabbath is all about. It has nothing to do with physical relaxion.

    I do not believe that the Old and the New Testament contradict each other – they are all Yahweh’s word. Yahweh teaches us that there is something that He calls “sin”. If the world does not get reminded of this fact, it simply is lost.

    If we want to know WHY we need a Messiah, we need to get a DEEP look into the so-called “Old Testament”. A Messiah without the Old Testament is meaningless.

  30. I believe that just like the psalmist of Psalm 119 says, we get deep and rich blessings from the whole Bible – not just the New Testament. The Old Testament helps us to understand who Yahweh is and what His standards are, so that we indeed can effectively “put off the old man and put on the new man” as described by Paul for example in Ephesians 4:24 and Colossians 3:10. Yahweh’s words are eternal, and Yeshua came to fulfill them in our lives.

  31. Erika,

    Would you kindly be more specific? You made some very serious and sweeping charges, then reverted to saying that just the Ten Commandments are binding, and your last answer blurs things even more.

    Of course we all use all of God’s Word, and of course all of God’s words are eternal, but do you believe all of the Sinaitic covenant — including all the purity and slavery and levirate marriage laws — are binding on all believer today? A simple yes or no would be very helpful in light of the serious charges you brought earlier in this thread.

    These are important issues, and charges of spreading lawlessness and starting a new religion need to be addressed.

  32. No, I’m not saying that just the Ten Commandments are binding. What I am saying is that the essence of the Sinaitic Covenant is Yeshua, as Shaul/Paul also says in Romans 10:4.

    Just like with the name thing people can get crazy about following the letter of the Law while violating against the spirit of the Law. But this does not shake the fact that Yeshua is the true content of the Law.

    If that is not clear enough, please go and watch

  33. Or did you want me to take specific stances on

    1. Purity Laws: In my opinion thy greatly advance women’s rights – so I’m all for that!

    2. Slavery Laws: They teach us that no man can serve two masters! So if you for example subscribe to the health insurance system of a country, you will have some problems later on if you decide that you don’t really want to get certain mandatory shots. So don’t tell me you didn’t know!

    3. Levirate marriage Laws: these were the laws of social security of that time. They teach us that we as a body of Messiah should look out for each other, but today the means for doing so is not by marriage (and of course also not by relationships outside of marriage), since today’s economy is working differently.

  34. Erika,

    You know that I strongly reject Michael Rood’s writings, so as a warning to others who go to the link: Proceed with caution!

    So, you believe the purity laws of Lev 13-15 are binding today? And you believe those of who do not follow those laws are practicing lawlessness and following a new, unbiblical religion?

  35. Dr. M.B., What I inquired on and stated on the 12th seemed to strike a chord for you as to your own experience and your own history convictions from hearing the voice of the Lord (at 2AM no less). I was not writing about grace through faith as being the only NT requirement on a soul, as I had already stated agreement with your earlier remark to another as to Yeshua’s admonition to obey His commandments being an admonition to obey what is written of His words and Way prior to the Paulene summary assumption being of the essence of the New Testament (by grace through faith then so being a special revelation of God for all believers). This would especially hold as to what Yeshua introduced to the discipleship scene in His day, so to speak: by what is recorded in red letters and of Yeshua’s activities recorded among He and his followers around and about(as such in some translations). There was indeed a keen and exceptional discipleship awareness in Israel in His expectant season. People were looking for the Messiah to come, and He did.

    Yes, He extended the New Commandment you cited in response as a result of us finally knowing and comprehending the extent of His love from what He spoke, did, and established earlier in the Gospels, prior to giving that New Commandment remark. I have often rejoiced at this commandment clarifying for a disciple of Yeshua what it was He intended for His followers (Where Paul’s interpretation that “the only thing that counts is faith expressing itself in love” becomes the challenge involved).

    It is obvious too, from our Lord’s Sermon on the Mount comments, that He knew those crowds listening to Him came in a pursuit which respected and honored the Ten Commandments (which He certainly upheld in His remarks there). FYI, I am not upholding any particular commandment as being vital to salvation, or as to a particular observant day by what I wrote and recently inquired about. I accept what Paul wrote on that matter, and the early church example as adequate on comprehending obedience on that matter.

    I do feel positive about these Ten Commandments of Sinai giving a moral reference, as well as certain other conduct instructions given to those of the Sinai Covenant. Where, e.g. Levt. 18 stikes me as especially relevant to obedience in the light of today’s confusion of sexual boundaries and Godly Marital Establishments as were established since and in Genesis. Mention of such which Yeshua established from the beginning “as so” was regarded more than oral and unwritten traditions of Israel’s elders. It must strike a discord for you as well as me to have a supposed believer confess lesbianism as being somehow under the blood and love of God at all times (rather than after repentance).

    You then seem to be answering my other May 12th observations and questions thoughtfully and academically, answered in regard to what God can place on an indivdual soul in relationship with Him. Such is cited in your own experience so placed as specific responses–in addition to what is written in the New Testament for across the board observation.

    A Messianic Pastor and friend once pointed out to me that there are many more commandments in the NT than 613. Therefore the requirements placed on us are actually even more exacting in a sense than the traveling Tabernacle Community requorements, as Yeshua stated in the Sermon on the Mount. And He upheld moral responsibility in so many of His own NT commandments of reference–with the overarching reality being that He lived a life of love (sexually pure love I might add).

    James (Jacob, sharing the same mother as Yeshua), indeed speaks of faith as an action word. So, I am not quite sure what you were saying was conditional about the NT, as was requested by my original question so framed about that covenant vs. the first one (the Sinai covenent of which you wrote of earlier had “been replaced”. I am sure it is “being replaced” [per Hebrews], not that it has, for observant Jews or some others, “been replaced”: due to the remarks given to the chosen Nation by Peter, e.g. in Acts 3:21 [where he seems to be saying that the Promises given the Prophets of Old for those of the chosen Nation are extant by that covenant’s words until indeed completed]. I do not write this argumentatively, or emphatically, but with caution as to what God is still doing as He has promised in relationship to any and all covenants He has made to date.).

    Keith Intrater, prior to moving to Israel, and extending a dicipleship community there to new Israeli believers, wrote a book called “Israel and the Church”, where he delt effectively with covenant promises vs. so-called dispensationalistic notions of replacement theology and so-called church age assumptions asserted accordingly by some in English Bible translation preferences as implied yet unwritten New Covenant rules (by Scofield and others). What has become his understanding of the active nature of redemptive plans includes those of the chosen nation, and those of the New Covenant through graceful interactions and convictions of a living God in today’s Israel, and among today’s churchgoers.

    I do not find the New Covenant replacement notion you wrote of eariler being upheld as being past tense by the writer of Hebrews, but it is presented therein being an active state of engagement, new to old, by the better covenant of Yeshua. In the light of Romans 11 and Acts 3:21, among other active scriptures in the NT and in the Prophets of Old, it would seem precarious theologically to assert that the New has completely replaced the Old, rather than is progressively replacing it as to the ongoing history of redemption and its plan (e.g. see Mt. 13:52 as to the coexistence until that Day of both the new and the old).

    I still would appreciate a more academic and less pensive reflection on my question by your person on what is now conditional about the Sinai, Old, Covenant, and the Calvary, New, Covenant. What Intrater concluded–as he and his community in Israel are living out as living proof of God’s ongoing redemptive acts among new believers in Israel now–is that the Promises and intertwined Redemptive Plans spoken of by the Prophets of Old are active and living in this Day as well as in the time of the Visitation. The Return is conditional upon these living sciptures promises and condtions coming to pass.

    Let it be so, Maranantha! –Jabez

    PS Erkia, Of course we get “deep and rich blessings from all the Bible”. And, as M.B. has shared as being of the most importance to followers of Yeshua holding, where “I am looking to be humble and accept whatever the King, my LORD Jesus reveals in scripture. If He is LORD in your life, if He reigns, then we should listen [to Him, ‘hear ye Him’]”.

  36. Jabez, I plan to devote at least one entire show to the questions that are relevant to your post and to other recent posts. In the meantime, may I ask if you’ve read my treatment of these subjects in vol. 4 of my series?

  37. Dr. M. B., at the late hour I misread Jeremy’s comments as yours, but still answer my questions when you can, as you can. These are important to my understanding of how to proceed with the personal implementation of the New Covenant as an ambassador so employed.

  38. Dr. Brown,

    Leviticus 13-15 is teaching us that there is to be a separation between the holy and the profane within the people of God.

    If we teach against this principle (I said principle), then yes, we are practicing lawlessness and following a new, unbiblical religion.

    By the way – this was my last post in this forum since I’m Michael Rood’s coworker.

  39. Dr. M.B., my budget has granted hundreds of reference books purchased over time prior to knowing of your series. The series is on my acquisition list, and will be read in time, as a respected source, as equal in authority to orignial language source commentaries. I want to avoid book lust, and book greed, in spite of all my justifications of such needs at this time. I hold many other of your books, though some I pass on for others’ needs as well.

  40. Though it has been iron on iron with Erika, and some others, never has it felt within like the strife experienced when debating Zvi in these forums in the past. Love still seems in the mix, and not a dividing love.

    I generally hold to the Acts 15 and 21 church counsel requirements stated as extended to those in the Nations re: the law. I hope that Erika will continue to challenge me and others in radio blogs here, even though we understand the purpose of the law differently. I like your latest qualifications, Erika, on principles. We can all learn principles from all written in the Bible, NT and Tenach, in general. (per Mt. 13:52).

    My understanding is not after ever waxing toward legalism or formalism, with tight divisions, but toward celebration–which can entertain rejoicing around the rhythms of the Hebrew calendar, or with my Norsk wife around the Advent calendar. Our children are dual citizens and walk in both worlds while loving our Lord. Neither are pagan to me, for both regard the revelation of the Messiah from different angles of faithfulness.

    Erika, I ask that you go to your prayer closet and consider there on hearing our Father on how human loyalties work, and how cheap they can be when regarded as indelibly so active. Are we of Apollos, Paul, or of the Christ? This is one area of discernment where division is unnecessary–provided one is yielding to the justice and mercy of our Messiah in heart and mind.

    I have no lovers quarrel with your principles, but, where these become a human measuring stick of judgment for those not rejecting, for example, the advent of the Christ, based on different months and rhythms than the Hebrew calendar–where the Jerusalem Counsel has already resolved what is to be observed of the law, and not–examine your own heart, whether or not it be of our faith. It is not faith in our own obedience to what Yeshua took to task, or Paul did (see John 5, e.g.)held by Judaizers in labeling Yeshua as a blasphemer.

    Consider instead of your loyalties, in the climate in the religious Jerusalem Yeshua confronted. One does not have to become a turn of BCE Jew, or prior, to become a follower of the Way, truth, and life of Yeshua. He sent his Apostles into the nations as the guarantors of his message. These former Tenach covenant shadows are good in leading us to the Way, not expedient for many in literal observation, nor required of many unless commanded so to be a witness of Yeshua in certain contexts.

    I might be insulted of your statement on religion if my heart were not enamored in its loyalty to Yeshua over any ministry or teacher or candidate for mentor. –Jabez

  41. Erika,

    Well, if we’re talking principles, then we’re in harmony — but I urge you to step back from the sweeping and dangerous accusations you made here. They bring division and misunderstanding rather than advance God’s truth, even though you are certainly sincere and passionate. You have read my review of Michael Rood’s book from a few years back. If he would like to take issue with anything I have written or even come on the radio with me to debate our differences, I would be delighted to do so.

  42. Jabez,

    If it’s a budget issue, then allow us to send you vol. 4 as a gift. It will be our privilege. Just send us your contact info via the website. Allow us to be generous!

  43. MB, Thanks, but it is about present priorities, I will get to it in time. Please let me know when the show on the subjects raised will be. –Jabez

  44. I second Jabez on knowing when.

    If I could make a request, could you specifically talk about ceremonial vs moral delineation of the law…most arguments I read try to separate the types of laws, but there is no scriptural delineation in this fashion. What is in the text are positive vs negative (do, don’t do) and statutory vs case law…what makes this even more difficult to separate is the fact that the apostles give instruction on both moral and ceremonial laws in the Acts and the epistles.

    I started searching the ‘red letters’ as discussed here…what I didn’t find was interesting. Especially lately with all of the homosexual issues arising (or maybe my heightened awareness), Jesus was silent on this issue. His disciples later speak of these acts and the Acts 15 counsel instructs against sexual immorality, but how did they come to that conclusion? (They also speak of eating blood, which is ceremonial right?) To even define their sweeping statement, you have to know Leviticus 18 and the long list of negative statutes.

    Another issue that really rocked my boat as I was studying…Luke, a gentile, writes two letters to Theophilus (I love that name, theo – God + philus – love; I don’t know that it is the actual meaning but it makes me smile to think he was writing to a God-lover) and specifically mentions his/their observance to the law, especially the ceremonial laws (i.e. ‘sabbaths day journey’ in Acts 1, Paul and going through the rites of purification in Acts 21, etc). Especially for a gentile to ensure that these issues are covered in detail tells me that he found importance in those details.

    Did you ever wonder why the dietary laws are claimed to be no longer relevant (except of course all of the specifics in the Acts 15 counsel) using scriptures that are not talking about food? Jesus confronted with the issue of unwashed hands, declaring ‘all foods clean’…their definition of food was levitical, not the same as our culinary definition, but besides that he was confronting ritual hand washing. Peters dream in Acts 10…common (defiled by contact) vs. unclean (inherently unclean), God only addresses the common being cleansed. Besides that, the interpretation was correct by his response in going to Cornelius, but this is used to say “See, we can eat all manner of animals”…Peter was required to interpret and respond, which he did.

    What does Acts 15.21 mean? To be joined to the specific commands for the gentiles in v20, to me, means that they were using the specific prohibitions as a beginning for the apostles to teach and disciple. If this was not the case, all of the moral law is either ignored by this counsel, assumed that it was understood by the nations, or was to be taught.

    I have also heard Josh’s argument (above) before. Explain how Paul’s influence led to different responses. Corinth who needed additional instruction vs Galatia that went far right and needed to refocus on the goal and purpose (issues of the heart and faith vs working to become righteous). I do believe that your works (fruit) will align with your heart condition and relationship with God…

    An hour broadcast (or ~40 min actual talk time) and I don’t expect you to focus on my requests, these are just some current things I am seeking scriptural answers to and I cannot find anyone that addresses these issues without ignoring some facet. When I’m talking to people that claim to know and they give an argument and I bring up such areas of question, they think for quite a while and say something like “I just know it’s this way…” which is not enough for me without scripture to back it up.

    Thanks Dr. Brown and others. I agree with Jabez, iron on iron and definitely all of this is out of a love for God and diligently seeking understanding of His word.

  45. Jeremy,

    Thanks for these questions, which I appreciate. I do deal with them in some of my writings, so I’d encourage you to check out what I’ve written rather than wait for a specific radio show.

Comments are closed.