Melchisedec

[BeforeThereWas]

Well, one can lead a horse to water, but can't make it drink. Pride is the most likely malady behind any and all refusal to accept evidence, or lack thereof, that stands upon its own merits within the word of God, contrary to unseemly and illlgocal demands for proof that is right there in front of all our eyes. Strong emotion never proves a thing. Boulstering shelters behind claims that find no support anywhere else in scripture is an exercise in defending falsehood, no matter how emotionally charged one's defense may be. Leveling false accusation against one's opponent is also just another demonstration of a sinful pride in one's illogical, indefensible position. I've seen these tactics many times before, so I hope we can avoid such falacies and march ahead in constructive discussion.

BTW

 

[IgnatiusOfAntioch]

Ok. So most people would say this Melchisedec is Jesus/God.

I don't think anybody whatsoever believes that Meclchisedec was Jesus. Where on earth did you get a notion like that?

 

[BeforeThereWas]

I don't think anybody whatsoever believes that Meclchisedec was Jesus. Where on earth did you get a notion like that?

This is the same kind of nonsense I had addressed earlier in reference to one of the three men who visited Abraham before going down to Sodom. He addressed one of them as deity several times, so I've heard many people assume that this one was the preincarnate Christ. Nothing in the text indicates such a notion, only that Abraham recognized one of the men as a manifestation of God. We're not told what representative form the Lord manifested Himself, but many people presume to be experts on the manifestations the Lord chose at various times when appearing to earthly men and women. Many charismatics are particularly fond of pretending to know more than is really evident. So, it comes as no surprise that there are many people who feel they have license to draw from the text a knowledge of information that simply isn't revealed. Perhaps it makes some people feel that they are more spiritual than otherwise. (shrug) Don't know for sure. As the old saying goes, there's nothing new under the sun.

BTW

 

[cygnusx1]

Melchizedek wasn't Christ .......... he was a type ..... like Noah's ark is a type .


this message has come to you from a ''who cares'' production ...