The Temple and Elijah

0. Introduction

I shall argue that if the Messiah has not appeared before the destruction of the temple in 70 CE then he will never appear, and therefore this is evidence for Christianity against Rabbinic Judaism. On the Christian hypothesis, we would expect that Jesus of Nazareth would be a successful Messiah claimant who appears before the destruction of the temple, but on Rabbinic Judaism the absence of the Messiah and the temple jointly ought not to be expected. 

1. The Temple and Elijah

There are traditions which say the Jewish people must be in a period of mass heresy and apostasy when the Messiah arrives. It is recorded in Sotah 49b that Rav Eliezer said "the meeting place of the Sages will become a place of promiscuity" when the Messiah arrives. [Compare Sanhedrin 97a.] Rabbi Jochanan said, "The Son of David shall not come, until all be either just or all be unjust." (Sanhedrin 98a) The prophets foretold that a period of great apostasy among the Jews must occur when the Messiah is revealed and did not leave it as a conditional matter.

"Do not trust in a neighbor. Do not have confidence in a friend. From her who lies in your bosom guard your lips. For son treats father contemptuously, Daughter rises up against her mother, Daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; A man’s enemies are the men of his own household. But as for me, I will watch expectantly for the Lord; I will wait for the God of my salvation. My God will hear me." (Micah 7:5-7) 

Micah 7:6 is applied to the Messianic era in many places in Jewish tradition. [Sanhedrin 97a; Sotah 49b; Shir HaShirim Rabbah 2:13.] The book of Enoch (56:7) notably cites Micah 7:5-6 regarding the last days before the advent of the Son of Man and says "A man shall not recognize his brother, nor a son his mother, until there shall be a number of corpses from among them." The Messiah would arrive at a time of godlessness and apostasy, Hosea 2:2 prophesied, 

"Plead with your mother, plead— for she is not my wife, and I am not her husband— that she put away her whoring from her face, and her adultery from between her bosom."

The Midrash understands this passage to signify that Israel would be redeemed at its lowest point, as though God were saying, "when you descend to the lowest level, at that moment I will redeem you." (Midrash Tehillim 45:2) The late second temple period was filled with numerous Jewish factions and sects each with their own peculiar doctrines. The Gospels repeatedly detail incidents of extreme arrogance and apostasy among the sect of the Pharisees. The apostles argued that the Jewish rejection of Jesus was a fulfillment of Scripture rather than something which conflicted with it. Indeed, in places such as Psalm 118:22 it is prophesied that the Messiah would be rejected by his own people, "the stone the builders rejected has become the cornerstone." Again in Malachi 3:1-5 prophesied that the Messiah would cleanse the temple in Jerusalem when he arrived, this implies that the temple was corrupt due to the misconduct of the Levites. 

"I shall send my messenger, who shall prepare the way ahead of me. And suddenly, the Lord whom you seek shall arrive at his sanctuary—the messenger of the covenant in whom you delight," proclaims the Lord Almighty. "But who can endure the day of his arrival? Who shall withstand his appearance? For he shall be like a refiner's fire or a launderer's soap. He shall assume the role of a refiner and purifier of silver, cleansing the Levites like gold and silver, until they present offerings of righteousness to the Lord. Then shall the offerings of Judah and Jerusalem find favor with the Lord, as they did in days of old and former years. "So, I shall come to put you on trial. I shall swiftly testify against sorcerers, adulterers, and perjurers, as well as those who exploit laborers, oppress widows and orphans, and deprive foreigners among you of justice. Yet, despite these transgressions, you do not fear me," declares the Lord Almighty."

The Messenger mentioned in Malachi 3:1 is identified with the "Elijah" mentioned in Malachi 4:5 in Pirkei De-Rabbi Eliezer c. 29 and it is he who prepares the way for the arrival of the Messiah. According to this text the Messiah had to appear before the second temple was destroyed. How can Elijah and the Messiah arrive at the temple if there is no temple? If the Messiah did not come during the second temple, then there will be no Messiah and the word of God has failed because the temple has fallen. [Haggai 2:9 may indicate that the Messiah must come during the time of the Second Temple by saying that this greater glory indicates the glory of the Messiah.] How can the Messiah cleanse a temple which no longer exists? But the Lord Jesus preached in the temple frequently, and it is recorded that he cleansed the temple of merchants on several occasions. (Joh. 2:14-21; Matt. 21:12-13) He spent much of the final years of his ministry teaching in the temple, he said to the crowds, ""I sat daily with you teaching in the temple." (Matt. 26:55) At Matthew 11:11-15 Jesus claimed that John the Baptist filled the role of Elijah who was prophesied in Malachi 4:5. Some Rabbinic apologists complain that John the Baptist was not literally Elijah and therefore he could not have fulfilled Malachi 4:5. John the Baptist had a similar appearance to Elijah and came in his spirit and power. In a similar way Jeremiah 30:9 and Ezekiel 34:23 say that the Messiah himself will be David although no one thinks the Messiah will literally be David. The king Messiah will be a great ruler similar to David and because of the similarity between the two he is prophetically called David. Any objection or complaint about John the Baptist prophetically being Elijah can be applied to the Messiah being called David. The Aramaic Targum of Psalms 118:26 assumes that the Messiah must arrive while the temple still stands, 

"Blessed is the one who comes in the name of the word of the Lord," said the builders; "They bless you from the house of the sanctuary of the Lord," said David." 

The sanctuary has already been laid to waste and not even a single stone of it remains. If this scripture was not fulfilled when the crowds blessed Jesus as he rode into Jerusalem on a colt, then it will never be fulfilled because there is no such temple in our day. Targum Jonathan of Exod. 12:42 speaks of four holy nights, the nights of creation, the night of the Abrahamic covenant, the night of the first Passover and the night when Moses came out of the desert and concludes by saying, 

"As Moses came out from the midst of the desert; but the King Messiah comes from the midst of Rome."

Exactly on schedule, Jesus was born during the second temple period and during the time when the Roman Empire still existed. According to Daniel the Son of Man must be presented to the Ancient of Days while the Roman empire still exists. (Dan. 7:9-11) But the world powers or "beasts" of this period have all fallen or been replaced by modern governments or republics. His prophecy was specifically concerning the Roman empire which can be proven by the identification of the "beasts" given in chapter 8. Now, I shall say very little of the 70 weeks of years presented in Daniel chapter 9 because the interpretation of the passage is complicated, controversial, and seldom understood by the average Christian or Jew. To argue that the Messiah must arrive before the destruction of the second temple, one need only cite Malachi 3:1 as proof, but the prophecy of the 70 weeks recorded in Daniel chapter 9 might also be used. However, I would suggest that for apologetic purposes one should avoid arguing from complicated chronologies and calculations whenever possible. It would be far simpler to only refer to Malachi 3:1 and similar passages without recourse to calculating weeks of years. In short I shall say that Rashi says the 70 weeks span from 587 BC to 70 CE and correspond to the two destructions of the temple but this ignores the importance of the decree mentioned in Dan. 9:25 which marks the start of the 70 weeks. Further, these 70 weeks of years could not refer to Cyrus, because his decree does not refer to the "building of Jerusalem" (Dan. 9:25) but only to the restoration of the temple. (2Chron. 36:22, 23) Only the decree of Artaxerxes includes orders to rebuild the temple and the holy city and only this decree was successful. (Ezra 1:1-4; 5:13, 17; 6:3) 

The New Covenant and the New Torah

[I do not wish to defend any of these prophetic claims nowadays. Anything previous to 2023 is rather too fundamentalist for my taste now. However, when I cared to argue with Rabbinic apologists these are the sorts of things I would bring up in written discussions.]

When the Torah says that its ordinances will last perpetually and into all generations it does not mean that the ordinances will be followed exactly without alteration for all eternity. (Exod. 12:14; 27:21; 29:42; 30:8, 10, 31; 31:16; Lev. 3:17; 7:36; 10:9; 17:7; 23:14, 21, 41; 24:3; 25:30) This is proven when we observe what the Torah says about the Holy Tabernacle. According to the holy Torah, the Tabernacle was to last perpetually and throughout all generations, and the Ark of the Covenant was to be kept inside of this holy tent. (Exod. 27:19-21) The Rambam taught that the Messiah will not make any alterations to the Torah whatsoever when he arrives, 

וְעִקַּר הַדְּבָרִים כָּכָה הֵן. שֶׁהַתּוֹרָה הַזֹּאת חֻקֶּיהָ וּמִשְׁפָּטֶיהָ לְעוֹלָם וּלְעוֹלְמֵי עוֹלָמִים. וְאֵין מוֹסִיפִין עֲלֵיהֶן וְלֹא גּוֹרְעִין מֵהֶן: 

"The main thrust of the matter is: This Torah, its statutes and its laws, are everlasting. We may not add to them or detract from them." (Mishneh Torah, 11:1-5)

The Torah nowhere describes the building of any temples whatsoever. The construction of the tabernacle is given in great detail and the method of construction was given by God directly to Moses, but the Torah says nothing of the temple Solomon built. Regarding the tabernacle it is said, 

וְעָבַ֨ד הַלֵּוִ֜י ה֗וּא אֶת־עֲבֹדַת֙ אֹ֣הֶל מוֹעֵ֔ד וְהֵ֖ם יִשְׂא֣וּ עֲוֺנָ֑ם חֻקַּ֤ת עוֹלָם֙ לְדֹרֹ֣תֵיכֶ֔ם וּבְתוֹךְ֙ בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל לֹ֥א יִנְחֲל֖וּ נַחֲלָֽה׃

"Only the Levites shall perform the service of the tent of meeting, and they shall bear their iniquity; it shall be a perpetual statute throughout your generations, and among the sons of Israel they shall have no inheritance [of territory]." (Num. 18:23)

The services in the tabernacle were "a perpetual statue" and yet they were done away with when the temple arrived. Was Solomon adding to the Torah when he built his temple? (Deut. 4:2) No, because God himself proposed an alteration to the Torah. God decided that instead of using the tabernacle that Moses built as the Torah commands, the holy temple ought to be used. The Torah also specifically commanded that the Ark of the Covenant must be kept in the Holy of holies in the tabernacle built by Moses, but Solomon removed the Ark from this place and transferred it to his new temple. (Exod. 26:31-35) The former Holy of Holies built by Moses was put away in storage and was no longer used as it is written in Tosefta Sotah 13:1, 

משנבנה בית ראשון נגנז אוהל מועד ונגנז עמו [קרסיו] קרשיו ובריחיו ועמודיו ואדניו [ואעפ"כ] שלא היו משתמשין אלא בשלחן שעשה משה ומנורה שעשה משה לא היתה צריכה שמן המשחה שקדושה הראשונה קדשה לשעתה וקדשה לעתיד לבא

"When the First Temple was built, the tabernacle was put away and its planks, bolts, posts, and bases were put away with it [hooks] and its boards [and yet] that would not be used except for the lamp that Moses made and the lamp that Moses made did not need the anointing oil that the first saint sanctified for her time and sanctified for the future to come."

The Torah never commands that the tabernacle should be made obsolete and replaced by a temple and yet it calls the tabernacle service a perpetual statue for all generations.  Some will retort that the tabernacle was brought to the holy city and the temple was built over it but that is not what the Talmud says. It says that the tabernacle was "put away" and stored in the treasuries with other items that were no longer needed. Furthermore, the Torah nowhere says to build a temple over the tabernacle, rather it says to put the Ark inside of the tabernacle which Solomon did not do. Solomon removed the Ark and utensils from the tabernacle. 

לְכֹל֙ כְּלֵ֣י הַמִּשְׁכָּ֔ן בְּכֹ֖ל עֲבֹֽדָת֑וֹ וְכָל־יְתֵֽדֹתָ֛יו וְכָל־יִתְדֹ֥ת הֶֽחָצֵ֖ר נְחֽשֶׁת: וְאַתָּ֞ה תְּצַוֶּ֣ה | אֶת־בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֗ל וְיִקְח֨וּ אֵלֶ֜יךָ שֶׁ֣מֶן זַ֥יִת זָ֛ךְ כָּתִ֖ית לַמָּא֑וֹר לְהַֽעֲלֹ֥ת נֵ֖ר תָּמִֽיד: בְּאֹ֣הֶל מוֹעֵד֩ מִח֨וּץ לַפָּרֹ֜כֶת אֲשֶׁ֣ר עַל־הָֽעֵדֻ֗ת יַֽעֲרֹךְ֩ אֹת֨וֹ אַֽהֲרֹ֧ן וּבָנָ֛יו מֵעֶ֥רֶב עַד־בֹּ֖קֶר לִפְנֵ֣י יְהֹוָ֑ה חֻקַּ֤ת עוֹלָם֙ לְדֹ֣רֹתָ֔ם מֵאֵ֖ת בְּנֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵֽל:

"All the utensils of the tabernacle used in all its service, and all its pegs, and all the pegs of the court, shall be of bronze. "You shall charge the sons of Israel, that they bring you clear oil of beaten olives for the light, to make a lamp burn continually. In the tent of meeting, outside the veil which is before the testimony, Aaron and his sons shall keep it in order from evening to morning before the Lord; it shall be a perpetual statute throughout their generations for the sons of Israel." (Exod. 27:19-21)

Therefore, the phrase "perpetual statute throughout their generations," does not mean that every ordinance and law given in the Torah will be kept to the letter for all eternity.  It merely signifies that the ordinance will be remembered forever by the children of Israel and will be kept until God himself decrees it is fulfilled. The prohibition on adding to the Torah or taking away from it in Deut. 4:2 does not apply to the Creator himself. God is free to alter, adjust, or replace aspects of ceremony, sacrifice, and worship given in the Torah, just as he did in the days of Solomon and he will do again when Ezekiel’s temple is built. It is said here that the Levites shall not be given any inheritance of land yet Ezekiel 48:12-14 states the opposite and prophesied a land inheritance for them. (Num. 1:47-49, et al.)

וְהָיְתָ֨ה לָהֶ֧ם תְּרוּמִיָּ֛ה מִתְּרוּמַ֥ת הָאָ֖רֶץ קֹ֣דֶשׁ קׇדָשִׁ֑ים אֶל־גְּב֖וּל הַלְוִיִּֽם׃ וְהַלְוִיִּ֗ם לְעֻמַּת֙ גְּב֣וּל הַכֹּהֲנִ֔ים חֲמִשָּׁ֨ה וְעֶשְׂרִ֥ים אֶ֙לֶף֙ אֹ֔רֶךְ וְרֹ֖חַב עֲשֶׂ֣רֶת אֲלָפִ֑ים כׇּל־אֹ֗רֶךְ חֲמִשָּׁ֤ה וְעֶשְׂרִים֙ אֶ֔לֶף וְרֹ֖חַב עֲשֶׂ֥רֶת אֲלָפִֽים׃ וְלֹֽא־יִמְכְּר֣וּ מִמֶּ֗נּוּ וְלֹ֥א יָמֵ֛ר וְלֹ֥א (יעבור) [יַעֲבִ֖יר] רֵאשִׁ֣ית הָאָ֑רֶץ כִּי־קֹ֖דֶשׁ לַיהֹוָֽה׃

"It shall be an allotment to them from the allotment of the land, a most sanctuary, by the border of the Levites. 13 Alongside the border of the priests the Levites shall have 25,000 cubits in length and 10,000 in width. The whole length shall be 25,000 cubits and the width 10,000. 14 Moreover, they shall not sell or exchange any of it, or alienate this choice portion of land; for it is holy to the Lord."

Therefore the Jews have misunderstood the meaning of the phrases "forever" and "throughout all generations." These phrases do not prohibit alteration, corrections, or fulfillments of the ordinances. The Tabernacle gives us the clearest example of this fact. The reader must consider this argument carefully before he can give an objective analysis of the remaining arguments presented in this little book. Furthermore, did Solomon violate Deuteronomy 4:2 when he built the temple? Such a Temple is nowhere described in the Torah. This argument is unavoidable. Therefore, certainly the Messiah himself would be free to do the same just as Christians claim he did. This ordinance was changed in 2 Chron. 5:5-7, the most high God commanded a temple to be built and this Temple replaced the Tabernacle. Yes, even though the Torah says that the Ark of the Covenant shall be kept in the Tabernacle forever and throughout all of their generation, the almighty God replaced the Tabernacle with the temple. God by means of his holy Prophets has at times altered the ordinances given in the Torah.  Elsewhere, the Rambam states that when the Messiah arrives, 

 וּבוֹנֶה הַמִּקְדָּשׁ וּמְקַבֵּץ נִדְחֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל. וְחוֹזְרִין כָּל הַמִּשְׁפָּטִים בְּיָמָיו כְּשֶׁהָיוּ מִקֹּדֶם. מַקְרִיבִין קָרְבָּנוֹת. וְעוֹשִׂין שְׁמִטִּין וְיוֹבְלוֹת כְּכָל מִצְוָתָן הָאֲמוּרָה בַּתּוֹרָה.

"Then, in his days, the observance of all the statutes will return to their previous state. We will offer sacrifices, observe the Sabbatical and Jubilee years according to all their particulars as described by the Torah." (Mishneh Torah 11:2)

This statement is not correct because the temple ordinances given in the final chapters of Ezekiel differ from those described by the Torah. The ordinances given in Leviticus are at times contradictory to those found in Ezekiel, therefore it is incorrect to say that Israel will observe the Torah and all of its procedures in the Messianic age. It is true that there will be animal sacrifices in the Messianic age, but these offerings will be very different from those described in the Torah and even Gentiles will have a share in offering incense before the Lord God. The very structure and regulations of the priesthood will be changed when the final temple is constructed. There will be added regulations that will be laid upon all of the priests which in the Torah only apply to the high priest. The priests are forbidden from marrying prostitutes, immoral women or divorcees.

 אִשָּׁה זֹנָה וַחֲלָלָה לֹא יִקָּחוּ וְאִשָּׁה גְּרוּשָׁה מֵאִישָׁהּ לֹא יִקָּחוּ כִּי־קָדֹשׁ הוּא לֵאלֹהָיו׃

"They shall not marry a woman who is a prostitute or a profane woman, and they shall not take a wife divorced from her husband, for he is holy unto his God." (Lev 21:7)

While the high priest is only permitted to marry a virgin who is an Israelitess  "of his own people" (מֵעַמָּיו). (Lev. 21:13, 14) In contrast, Ezekiel foretells that priests may marry the widows of another priest during the Messianic era when the temple is rebuilt. 

וְאַלְמָנָה וּגְרוּשָׁה לֹא־יִקְחוּ לָהֶם לְנָשִׁים כִּי אִם־בְּתוּלֹת מִזֶּרַע בֵּית יִשְׂרָאֵל וְהָאַלְמָנָה אֲשֶׁר תִּהְיֶה אַלְמָנָה מִכֹּהֵן יִקָּחוּ׃

"They shall not marry a widow or a divorcée; they shall marry only virgins of the seed of the house of Israel. But they may marry the widow of a priest." (Ezekiel 44:22) 

Ezekiel says that the priests may only marry a virgin or the widow of a priest, but the Torah says the high priest may only marry a virgin and the priests are only prohibited from marrying prostitutes, profane women, and divorced women. These ordinances for priests are clearly different. All priests in the ordinances of Ezekiel may marry the widow of another priest but in the Torah the high priest may only marry a virgin. The style and architecture of Ezekiel’s temple is very different from that of the previous two temples and so are the sacrifices. The sacrifices and offerings described are found nowhere else in the Tanakh.  Hananiah ben Hezekiah is said to have used up three hundred barrels of oil in lamps attempting to harmonize the temple ordinances in Ezekiel with those found in the Torah.

אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר רַב: בְּרַם זָכוּר אוֹתוֹ הָאִישׁ לַטּוֹב וַחֲנַנְיָה בֶּן חִזְקִיָּה שְׁמוֹ, שֶׁאִלְמָלֵא הוּא נִגְנַז סֵפֶר יְחֶזְקֵאל, שֶׁהָיוּ דְּבָרָיו סוֹתְרִין דִּבְרֵי תוֹרָה. מֶה עָשָׂה? — הֶעֱלוּ לוֹ שְׁלֹשׁ מֵאוֹת גַּרְבֵי שֶׁמֶן, וְיָשַׁב בַּעֲלִיָּיה וּדְרָשָׁן.

"Rav Yehuda said that Rav said: Truly, that man is remembered for the good, and his name is Ḥananya ben Ḥizkiya, as if not for him, the book of Ezekiel would have been suppressed because its contents, in many details, contradict matters of Torah. The Sages sought to suppress the book and exclude it from the canon. What did he, Ḥananya ben Ḥizkiya, do? They brought him three hundred jugs of oil, for light and food, up to his upper story, and he sat isolated in the upper story and did not move from there until he homiletically interpreted all of those verses in the book of Ezekiel that seemed contradictory, and resolved the contradictions." (Shabbat 13b)

Even with his efforts the temple ordinances given by Ezekiel contradict the Torah. It is mandated that "on the day of the new moon, a young bull without blemish; and six lambs, and a ram; they shall be without blemish." (Ezekiel 46:6) But the Torah commands different offerings to be presented on the new moon. (Num. 28:11) Ezekiel speaks of the offering of a single bull and six lambs, but the Torah speaks of "two young bulls," and seven lambs. 

"The Gemara cites a baraita with regard to the offerings sacrificed on the New Moon: The verse states: "And on the day of the new moon, a young bull without blemish; and six lambs, and a ram; they shall be without blemish." The baraita asks: Why does the verse state "a bull" when the verse in the Torah requires two bulls, as it is stated: "And on your New Moons you shall present a burnt offering to the Lord: Two young bulls, and one ram, seven lambs of the first year without blemish"? The baraita answers: Since it is stated in the Torah with regard to the offering of the New Moon: "Two young bulls," one might think that it is not acceptable to bring fewer than two bulls under any circumstances. From where is it derived that if one did not find two bulls, he brings one? Therefore, the verse states: "A young bull," in the singular, to teach that even if one has only one bull it should be sacrificed. The baraita discusses the continuation of the verse in Ezekiel, which mentions "six lambs." Why does the verse state only six lambs when the verse in the Torah requires seven? The baraita answers: Since it is stated in the Torah with regard to the offering of the New Moon: "Seven lambs," one might think that it is not acceptable to bring fewer than seven lambs under any circumstances. From where is it derived that if one did not find seven lambs, he should bring six? Therefore, the verse in Ezekiel states: "Six lambs," to teach that in the absence of all seven lambs one should sacrifice six." (Menachot 45a) 

But as the reader can plainly see, the number of the offerings is different when you compare the Torah with the book of Ezekiel. Furthermore, the Prince or Messiah is said to offer sacrifices that would normally be reserved for the high priest. Ezekiel makes no mention of an Aaronic high priest, only of the Messianic Prince and his under priests. The sacrifices offered by the Prince in the third temple have no parallel in the Torah with regard to frequency, amount, or ceremony. Why is there any alteration to the priesthood and the ceremonies thereof? David prophesied of an eternal priesthood after the order of Melchizedek not Aaron or Levi. Where is the Aaronic high priest in Ezekiel’s temple? The priests who serve in this temple are not mere Levites but "the sons of Zadok among the sons of Levi." (Ezek. 40:46; 43:19; 44:15; 48:11) As descendants of the high priest Zadok, they are sons of Aaron and Levi simultaneously. The very structure of the priesthood is changed, the Levitical and Aaronic divisions no longer exist in the temple foretold by Ezekiel. The priests are sons of Aaron and Levi. There is no need for the Aaronic high priest, since the Prince takes up his functions and leads worship and sacrifice as the new high priest after the order of Melchizedek. (Ezek. 45:17, 22; 46:4, 10, 12; Psa. 110:4) When the Messiah brings a new covenant he brings with it a change of priesthood and "the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the Torah." (Heb 7:12) The priesthood of the Messiah is mentioned in Psalm 110 which is quoted more than any other Psalm by the NT authors. 

"The Lord says to my Lord: "Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet." (Psa. 110:1)

It is sometimes mistakenly thought that these words are either about the King Messiah or they are about Abraham, but these are not mutually exclusive interpretations. The sages applied this prophecy to Abraham himself, (Nedarim 32b) but in the Midrash we find this Psalm applied also to the Messiah with Abraham sitting at his left hand. (Midrash Tehillim 2:9; 18:29) In the Midrash, Psa. 110:1 is understood as David speaking and relating what God spoke to his Messiah, hence many Rabbis took no issue with king David referring to the Messiah as "my Lord." 

"The Lord will stretch forth your strong scepter from Zion, saying, "Rule in the midst of your enemies." (Psa. 110:2)

The scepter is interpreted as the Messiah himself in Bereshit Rabbah 85 and interprets the seal of Judah as the kingdom and the bracelet of Judah as the Sanhedrin. (Gen. 38:18; 49:10) The scepter is given a very different interpretation in Bamidbar Rabbah 18 where it is interpreted as a literal wooden staff which was owned by Jacob, Judah, Moses, and David, which is will be given to the Messiah before he fights his conquests. This passage is consistent with the Christian doctrine of the Second Coming which necessitates that the Messiah does not immediately fight Gog of Magog but for many years rules ‘in the midst of his enemies.’ There is a similar statement in Dan. 2:44, 

"In the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom which will never be destroyed, and that kingdom will not be left for another people; it will crush and put an end to all these kingdoms, but it will itself endure forever." 

For a time, the kingdom of Messiah will exist at the same time as "those [pagan, heathen] kings," who rule upon the earth. This corresponds to our present era when the Messiah rules from heaven at the right hand of God until his enemies shall be placed as a stool for his feet. The kingdom of Messiah will eventually destroy all of these heathen kings, but for a time the Messiah will reign in the days of "those kings," that is, ‘in the midst of his enemies.’

"Your people will volunteer freely on the day of your power. In the holy array, from the womb of the dawn, your youth are to you as the dew. The Lord has sworn and will not change His mind, "You are a priest forever after to the order of Melchizedek."" (Psa. 110:3, 4) 

The priest described here is the Messiah himself, not Abraham for he was not an eternal priest but died and was buried. (Gen. 25:7, 8) The priesthood of Abraham came to a definite end, but the priesthood described in Psa. 110:4 is eternal. Jesus of Nazareth was immortalized at his resurrection and at this time he became a priest forever. (Heb. 7:16) The priesthood of Jesus will never come to an end because he will never die again. The priesthood of Melchizedek existed before the Torah was ever given at Sinai and before Aaron was ever made priest. (Gen. 14:18) This is a radical change which is entirely different from the ordinances of the Torah. If the Torah of Moses were eternal and unchangeable in all of the precepts it teaches then David ought to have prophesied that the Messiah be a priest of the order of Aaron or Levi not after the order of Melchizedek. Melchizedek was a priest and a king at once, and the Messiah is also a kingly priest who leads sacrifice in the temple of Ezekiel. There is no high priest in the temple of Ezekiel, the Prince himself takes up his functions and leads in sacrifice. (Ezek. 46:4, 10, 12) If the Torah of Moses will never be replaced, then Ezekiel ought to have prophesied of an Aaronic high priest leading sacrifice rather than the Messiah himself. The prophet Jeremiah states that God will establish a New Covenant not according to the Sinai covenant. If the Torah were sufficient for all time and the Sinai Covenant were eternal, why does he prophesy of another covenant? The Torah records that Melchizedek himself was also both priest and king. (Gen. 14:18) This could not be the Levitical or Aaronic priesthood, because they are not Kingly Priests. Nor is Melchizedek merely a "ruler" but he was an actual priest because he carried out religious functions which were normally reserved for priests. The excuse that kohanim merely means "ruler" with regard to Melchizedek is quite desperate. The traditions of the Rabbis even claim that Adam was the first priest and Melchizedek was his successor and gave to Abraham the special priestly robes which were worn by Adam. This tradition would make no sense whatsoever if Melchizedek were not understood as an actual religious priest who functioned in an intercessory capacity—Melchizedek was an actual priest not just a civil ruler. By the very act of announcing a new covenant, God himself was demonstrating that the Sinai Covenant was insufficient and required replacement. 

""The days are coming," declares the Lord, "when I will make a new covenant with the people of Israel and with the people of Judah. It will not be like the covenant I made with their ancestors when I took them by the hand to lead them out of Egypt, because they broke my covenant, though I was a husband to them," declares the Lord. "This is the covenant I will make with the people of Israel after that time," declares the Lord. "I will put my law in their minds and write it on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people. No longer will they teach their neighbor, or say to one another, ‘Know the Lord,’ because they will all know me, from the least of them to the greatest," declares the Lord. "For I will forgive their wickedness and will remember their sins no more." (Jer. 31:31-34) 

This new Torah would not merely be external and judicial but written upon the heart and would deal with sin in a decisive way. By prophesying that it will not be broken and that God will "remember their sins no more" it is shown that this New Covenant would also address the problem of sin in a greater way than the Mosaic Covenant ever could. After quoting this passage, Hebrew 8:13 says, "When He said, "A new covenant," He has made the first obsolete. But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear." The Sinai Covenant and the Torah are inadequate, and have been  replaced by a New and Better Covenant. If the Torah was eternal then why is there any need for a New Covenant? Why did Jeremiah prophesy of one whatsoever? It is also prophesied in Zech. 11:10 that God himself will break his former covenant,  

"I took my staff Grace and cut it in pieces, to break my covenant which I had made with all the people." (Zech. 11:10)

From a comparison of Jer. 31:32 and Zech. 11:10 it is clear that both parties of the Sinai Covenant will ‘break’ or annul it. The Jewish people were specially privileged out of every other nation, and were entrusted with the holy covenant, the priesthood, the temple, and the sacred oracles; but they proved unfaithful to the requirements of the Sinai covenant, therefore God promised to annul the Sinai Covenant. God promised to "make a new covenant"—not refresh, renew or revive the Sinai Covenant—and this new covenant is "not according to the covenant" made at Sinai with the forefathers. Why is he going to replace the holy Sinai Covenant with a New Covenant? Because of the sins of the Jewish people, he says, "they broke my covenant although I was a lord over them." Rather than appreciatively following the holy law, the Jews have repeatedly gone into apostasy, turning to pagan gods, misinterpreting, and at times even deliberately editing the Torah. The Sinai Covenant and the New Covenant are absolutely distinguished, the old covenant was broken, but the New Covenant will not be broken, because he will put this law in their hearts and forgive their iniquities. Saint Paul teaches that when Jesus arrived he brought his own Torah to replace the former Torah of Moses, and this he calls "the Torah of the Messiah." (Gal. 6:2; 1Cor. 9:21) He was not inventing a novel concept for as we have already seen there will be a change of priesthood and a new covenant, so naturally there would also be a change of law. The Torah of Messiah is spoken of by the prophets, 

"Behold, my servant, whom I uphold; my chosen one in whom my soul delights. I have put my Spirit upon Him; He will bring forth justice to the nations. "He will not cry out or raise his voice, nor make his voice heard in the street. "A bruised reed he will not break And a dimly burning wick he will not extinguish; he will faithfully bring forth justice. "He will not be disheartened or crushed until he has established justice in the earth; and the coastlands will wait expectantly for his law." (Isa. 42:1-4) 

The Coastlands wait for "his torah"  the Torah of the Messiah himself, just as Moses brought with him a Torah, so does the King Messiah. When the prophet speaks of "his torah," the coastlands, that is, the Gentiles, will await to receive the Torah of Messiah. This could not refer to the Torah of Moses for it was given before the Messiah ever appeared and it was not given to Gentiles but only to the Jewish people. It is prophesied at Hosea 2:21-23 foretold that Israel would go into apostasy and the Gentile people would be given adoption as God’s sons. 

"It will come about on that day that I will respond," declares the Lord. "I will respond to the heavens, and they will respond to the earth, And the earth will respond to the grain, to the new wine and to the oil, And they will respond to Jezreel. "I will sow her for Myself in the land. I will also have compassion on her who had not obtained compassion, And I will say to those who were not My people, ‘You are My people!’ And they will say, ‘You are my God!’" (Hos. 2:21-23)

Under the Sinai Covenant only the Jewish people are the chosen covenant people of God, and were adopted as his sons. (Exod. 4:22) The Gentile nations were not his people, but he tells of a time when "I will say to those who were not My people, ‘You are My people!’" The only provision for Gentiles to receive their own Torah from the Messiah and receive adoption as God’s sons is found in the new covenant described by the apostle Paul. The King Messiah speaks in the song of Asaph in Psalm 78:1-2 and says,

"Listen, O my people, to my instruction; Incline your ears to the words of my mouth. I will open my mouth in a parable; I will utter dark sayings of old." 

All those familiar with the New Testament know that  Jesus of Nazareth often taught in parables, riddles, and allegory. This is rendered in the Targum this way, 

שִׂכְלָא דְרוּחַ קֻדְשָׁא עַל יְדוֹי דְאָסָף אֲצֵית עַמִי אוֹרַיְתִי אַצְלוּן אוּדְנֵיכוֹן לְמֵימְרֵי פוּמִי: אֶפְתַּח בִּמְתַל פּוּמִי אַבִּיעַ חֶדְוַן דְמִן לְקַדְמִין:

"A teaching of the Holy Spirit, composed by Asaph. Hear, O my people, my Torah; incline your ears to the utterances of my mouth. I will open my mouth in a proverb; I will declare riddles from ancient times." (Psalm 78:1-2)

Again, in the phrase "my Torah" we find the concept of the Messiah bringing with him a new law code along with his New Covenant. In Kohelet Rabbah 11:8a we read, 

"For if [a man lives] many years," "let him rejoice" in the joy of the Torah; "and remember the days of darkness" – these are the bad days, "as they will be many." The Torah that a person studies in this world is vanity relative to the Torah of the Messiah." 

The Torah of Moses and the Torah of Messiah are placed as opposite to one another in this passage as they are in the prophets. If a Jew is to deny that there will be a New Covenant which replaces the Sinai covenant, then he has denied the plain teaching of the prophets. But if he is to admit that there will be such a New Covenant—then what priesthood, what sacrifices, and what atonement will be made for this New Covenant? It could not be the Aaronic or the Levitical priesthood, because these belonged to the Sinai covenant and do not apply to any other covenant. The priesthood of Aaron did not completely remove sin, which is why year after year he and his descendants had to offer the blood of bulls and goats. The temple of Ezekiel is clearly not following the priestly ordinances of the Torah of Moses and is operating under a different system. The deficiency of the Sinai Covenant is shown in the curses of the law, 

"Cursed be he that confirmeth not the words of this law to do them. And all the people shall say: Amen.’" (Deut. 27:26) 

The Jews have not obeyed the law, they have broken the covenant on innumerable occasions, and therefore, as a nation, the Jews have come under the curse of Deut. 27:26 because every Jew has broken one of the commands of the Torah at least once. This curse cannot be removed merely by prayer and repentance. The wages of sin is death. Nor does the Torah provide any sacrificial system which can permanently remove this curse. For this reason, the Day of Atonement, Yom Kippur, was a repeated ceremony where two male goats could be made as sin offerings to atone for the disobedience of the Jews. Year after year the ceremony of the Day of Atonement took place in the tabernacle and later in the temple, but every year the Jews broke the covenant again as a nation. (Lev. 16:21, 22) If the curse was fully removed by this celebration it would not have to be repeated. It would require a better sacrifice than what is offered by the Torah. Now, there is no temple to even offer provisional sacrifices described by Moses. 

If someone has lied, worked on the sabbath, cursed God, or committed any other sin described in the Torah even once then he is under the curse of Deut. 27:26. He cannot totally remove this curse with the blood of rams because he no longer has a Temple, nor tabernacle, nor Ark, nor priesthood. The Torah promises "eternal life" to those who obey all of the statues it contains, but no man can obey these statues perfectly. (Lev. 18:5; Psa. 133:3) Those who transgress any of the mitzvot come under the curse of Deut. 27:26. How, then, could anyone be saved according to the Torah? None could for no one is perfectly obedient to the statues of the Torah and never sins. The prophet Habakkuk foretold, "the righteous shall live by his faith." (Habakkuk 2:4) Notice, he does not say that the righteous shall live by obeying the laws of the Torah, but they will live by faith. This is a different system of salvation than the one presented in the Torah. The Sinai Covenant does not teach that the righteous will be saved by faith, it teaches salvation by obedience to the ordinances given in the Sinai Covenant, "keep my statutes, and Mine ordinances, which if a man do, he shall live by them: I am the Lord." (Lev. 18:5) Therefore, in Habakkuk 2:4 there is a promise of a new way of salvation which is not found in the Torah, one which depends upon faith and not upon works of law. This new way of salvation must therefore be found in a new covenant, a more gracious covenant, which is essentially the argument given by Saint Paul, 

"For as many as are of the works of the Law are under a curse; for it is written, "Cursed is everyone who does not abide by all things written in the book of the law, to perform them." [Deut. 27:260 Now that no one is justified by the Law before God is evident; for, "The righteous man shall live by faith." [Hab. 2:4] However, the Law is not [of faith; on the contrary, "He who practices them shall live by them." [Lev. 18:5] Christ redeemed us from the curse of the Law, having become a curse for us—for it is written, "Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree" [Deut. 21:23]— 14 in order that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles, so that we would receive the promise of the Spirit through faith." (Gal. 3:10-14) 

An animal could never be a sufficient and complete atonement for the curse of the law, for a man is worth far more than an animal. Only a human life could fully make restitution for the curse of the law, "Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us.’" (Gal. 3:13) By putting faith in this human sacrifice, the curse of the law is taken away, "the righteous shall live by his faith." (Hab. 2:4)