Matthew Nolan and David Perry’s Melchizedek Doctrine: Subtracting from Torah | Torah to the Tribes Response

There are two individuals in the Torah-keeping movement who teach what I consider to be errors concerning a supposed distinction within the Torah. One of these individuals has written two books on the topic while the other is actively teaching their ideas at conferences and congregations around the United States. Normally I tend to keep to myself and let people believe what they want. I rarely feel the desire to publicly address other people’s teachings, but I’ve received quite a few questions about the information brought forth by these two individuals. After privately trying to reason with both of these teachers over e-mail, I’ve decided that I should go ahead and write this public response. To open with I’d like to establish a foundation of truth going forward, our author states: “Normally I tend to keep to myself and let people believe what they want. I rarely feel the desire to publicly address other people’s teachings.” First, to those of you who care to investigate further on the author’s FB page you’ll find this statement is patently false. Our author has a prolific and quite vitriolic history of attacking teachers publicly on Social Media if they disagree with his theology. Secondly, take note our author states, “After privately trying to reason with both of these teachers over e-mail, I’ve decided that I should go ahead and write this public response”. Neither I or Dr. David Perry have ever been contacted over email by our author as he states above. This is a patently untrue statement. How are we to trust any subsequent statements made by the author when public false statements are made like this? Right for the outset this title is a dead give away – It presupposes that the “Book of the Covenant” and the “Book of the Law” are the same – They are Not! It also presupposes that the content of these two are the same – They are Not! Melchizedek values and issues (including “Book of the Covenant” Exodus 19:5-24:8) are peppered throughout the “Book of the Law” (Exodus 24:12 thru Deuteronomy 31:26) but still stand in their respective original Melchizedek place (Genesis 1:1 thru Exodus 24:8-11). If the book of the covenant and the book of the law are one and the same as our author assumes, then what ‘Torah’ sanctioned change of law does our author actually recognize?  Throughout this article the author takes the position of a ‘NO change of law’ which is a contradiction to the written Word of both the Old Testament & New Testament (Genesis 49:10 & Hebrews 7:12). Adding ‘Jesus’ to Judaism is not the answer and is rejected by both Christianity and Judaism itself. The authors position is one of propagating the status quo ‘one book theory’ accepted by both Christianity and Judaism for the past 2000 years which denies the ‘Torah’ and ‘New Testament’ sanctioned “a change also of the law;” which leads both religions to draw opposite but equally erroneous conclusions about the redemptive work of Messiah. Torah to the Tribes position, in contrast, is one of viewing Torah as applicable in its New Covenant administration under Melchizedek Yahusha recognizing “a change also of the law” which is uniquely distinct from both Judaism and Christianity. Torah to the Tribes believes this position should be at least studied with merit before being dismissed offhand. Hebrews 7:12 For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.   A) Either the law has changed with Yahusha        <OR>   B) The law was not changed. If B) is true (which our author believes) then we’re left with one of two choices: To be lawless (the law in its entirety is done away with, Christianity’s position – a status quo position) To be Judaized (the law is unchanged and we’re to keep it in its entirety, including animal sacrifices – The Judaizing of ‘Jesus’ – a status quo position) I offer a final and third option; but it is contingent on accepting the truth of A): The New Testament has been given as MalkiTzedik Book of t