Melchizedek: Another View

[ischus]

…according to the order of Melchizedek​

The following is not necessarily an alternative view (the title was just to get your attention) as much as it is a broader view of Melchizedek and his Priesthood. I apologize for the length, but I made it as concise as I could. This may not be new to anyone, but I don’t really see it coming out in the recent threads on this topic. So, I thought I might as well put it out there for discussion. Enjoy.



First, some scriptures:

• Gen.14:18ff Notice that Melchizedek is both King and Priest. He is a Gentile priest of God Most High and he ministers to Gentiles as both Priest and King. He ministers in Salem (later Jerusalem).

• II Sam.6:10-19 Notice that David (who is not from the priestly line of Aaron) is in charge of the Ark of Yahweh. Notice in v11 that the Ark stayed in the house of Obed-Edom, the Gentile (Gittite = a Philistine from Gath). Notice in vv13-14,18 that David performs priestly acts while wearing priestly garments (ephod) and giving a priestly blessing. David does this in Jerusalem.

• II Sam.8:18 Notice that the sons of David (including Solomon) were Priests of some sort, though they were not Levitical Priests.

• I Kings 8:41ff Notice that when Solomon (the son of David) is presenting his dedication of the Temple, he expresses a concern for Gentiles (foreigners) to come to Yahweh because of the testimony of Israel.

• Ps.110:4 Notice that as David speaks about the new King (his son, Solomon), he reveals in v4 that Yahweh has also declared that Solomon is a Priest…according to the order of Melchizedek.

• Zech.4:11-14; 6:13-15 Notice in 4:14 that there are two messiahs (anointed ones): Joshua the anointed Priest, and Zerubbabel the anointed Prince (King). Zerubbabel is to take the throne as a descendant of David and Solomon. Notice also in 6:13 that Zerubbabel is to rebuild the Temple, rule on the throne as King, and be a Priest. So, it is shown that there are two Priestly offices—Joshua (the Aaronic Priesthood), and Zerubbabel (a different Priesthood)—and there is to be peace between the two offices (Priesthoods). Notice further in v15 that there is an emphasis on Gentiles once again who are to come and help rebuild the Temple. All of these things mentioned above are conditional, however, depending upon the obedience of Israel and their leaders.

• Acts 2:36 Notice that Peter concludes (after extensive quoting of the OT, including Ps.110) that Jesus is the Ultimate Lord (Sovereign King) and the Ultimate Messiah (Anointed one).

• Heb.5:5-10 Building on Acts 2, the Hebrew writer declares in v5 that Jesus was a God’s SON (descendant of David who has taken the throne as King), as well as a High Priest (v5). But Jesus was not an Aaronic Priest; he was the High Priest according to the order of Melchizedek.

• Heb.7 (and the following chapters) The Hebrew writer expands on this in ch.7. The first ten verses demonstrate the superiority of the Melchizedek Priesthood to the Levitical (Aaronic) Priesthood. Vv11-13 clearly point out that there were in fact two distinct priesthoods—Aaron and Melchizedek. Vv14ff discuss this Priesthood from Judah which Moses did not address, yet it was there. As we read through the next chapters, we see that this Priesthood—of which Jesus is High Priest—was historically pointing (aiming) toward a new covenant with a new Israel (the spiritual Israel, including the Gentiles who are grafted in). [I don’t have the time to make this point in detail, but a thorough study of Romans and Hebrews would be of help here].

• I Pet.2:9; Rev.20:4; Eph.2:6 This one might be a stretch, so don’t include this in the argument if it doesn’t hold true, but there is an element in scripture (these are a few examples) where Christians also are given thrones (Kingship) and a Priesthood.

==

It is my observation (though it did not originate with me) that the Order of Melchizedek was intended to be a Priestly ministry to the Gentiles in order for all peoples—not just the Jews—to live under God’s reign, in His Kingdom. It began with Melchizedek (or before?), and was entrusted to the line of David. When you study the life of David, we see that he was not only a Priest and King, but he was dedicated to Gentile ministry. He defeated his Gentile enemies, then embraced them and won them over to Yahweh. Many of his Mighty Men were Gentiles, and they confessed the name of Yahweh. Even in Gen.49, we see a reference to the obedience of the Gentiles coming about through the descendants of Judah—defeating them, then embracing them so as to bring them to Yahweh in submission and obedience.



This Gentile ministry was then given to Solomon when he became king, with the intention that the line of David would continue this Priesthood to the Gentiles. But Solomon, as we know, turned from God and worshipped other gods. It is at this point that there seems to be a silencing of the Priesthood, in light of the general wickedness of the Davidic kings. But, as the Prophets demonstrate, God’s heart was still for the Gentiles. After exile, God intended to reinstitute the Melchizedek Priesthood in Zerubbabel, but this was conditioned upon obedience of the people. Once again, Israel failed by turning inward; the Gentiles were cast out, rather than invited in. Zerubbabel never became the King/Priest that God desired for him to be. And so we have silence again…until the time of Jesus.



All of this is reversed by Jesus. He fulfilled the Priesthood of Melchizedek by bringing all Gentiles into the house of God. He is thus the High Priest in this way. This does not discount any other tradition interpretations of Hebrews, etc…if anything, it only adds to the depth of who Jesus was and what God did through him on the cross. It is my belief that the whole of scripture speaks to a dual-priesthood: an Aaronic (Levi) Priesthood to the Jews and a Kingly (Judah) Priesthood to the Gentiles.

Finally, all Chirstians are now a part of this Priesthood, this Ministry to the Gentiles, as God has entrusted his church with the ministry. I won't take the time to expand on this.

This short trip through scripture is by no means exhaustive. It would take days to write a post which would fully justify this theme in scripture, but I hope I have given enough to at least introduce the possibility of something deeper in our discussion of Melchizedek and his Priesthood. Please feel free to expand on this, as well as to disagree completely.

 

[hypostatic]

Very well researched, argued, and written. I've always been curious about Melchizedek, and you've offered a great view.

In fact, I've been thinking about what to write about in a major research paper I have due in April, and your post has inspired me to pursue this topic!

 

[ischus]

That is great! I love this topic. There is much more to be discussed too...do well on your paper!

 

[calidog]

…according to the order of Melchizedek​

The following is not necessarily an alternative view (the title was just to get your attention) as much as it is a broader view of Melchizedek and his Priesthood. I apologize for the length, but I made it as concise as I could. This may not be new to anyone, but I don’t really see it coming out in the recent threads on this topic. So, I thought I might as well put it out there for discussion. Enjoy.



First, some scriptures:

• Gen.14:18ff Notice that Melchizedek is both King and Priest. He is a Gentile priest of God Most High and he ministers to Gentiles as both Priest and King. He ministers in Salem (later Jerusalem).

• II Sam.6:10-19 Notice that David (who is not from the priestly line of Aaron) is in charge of the Ark of Yahweh. Notice in v11 that the Ark stayed in the house of Obed-Edom, the Gentile (Gittite = a Philistine from Gath). Notice in vv13-14,18 that David performs priestly acts while wearing priestly garments (ephod) and giving a priestly blessing. David does this in Jerusalem.

• II Sam.8:18 Notice that the sons of David (including Solomon) were Priests of some sort, though they were not Levitical Priests.

• I Kings 8:41ff Notice that when Solomon (the son of David) is presenting his dedication of the Temple, he expresses a concern for Gentiles (foreigners) to come to Yahweh because of the testimony of Israel.

• Ps.110:4 Notice that as David speaks about the new King (his son, Solomon), he reveals in v4 that Yahweh has also declared that Solomon is a Priest…according to the order of Melchizedek.

• Zech.4:11-14; 6:13-15 Notice in 4:14 that there are two messiahs (anointed ones): Joshua the anointed Priest, and Zerubbabel the anointed Prince (King). Zerubbabel is to take the throne as a descendant of David and Solomon. Notice also in 6:13 that Zerubbabel is to rebuild the Temple, rule on the throne as King, and be a Priest. So, it is shown that there are two Priestly offices—Joshua (the Aaronic Priesthood), and Zerubbabel (a different Priesthood)—and there is to be peace between the two offices (Priesthoods). Notice further in v15 that there is an emphasis on Gentiles once again who are to come and help rebuild the Temple. All of these things mentioned above are conditional, however, depending upon the obedience of Israel and their leaders.

• Acts 2:36 Notice that Peter concludes (after extensive quoting of the OT, including Ps.110) that Jesus is the Ultimate Lord (Sovereign King) and the Ultimate Messiah (Anointed one).

• Heb.5:5-10 Building on Acts 2, the Hebrew writer declares in v5 that Jesus was a God’s SON (descendant of David who has taken the throne as King), as well as a High Priest (v5). But Jesus was not an Aaronic Priest; he was the High Priest according to the order of Melchizedek.

• Heb.7 (and the following chapters) The Hebrew writer expands on this in ch.7. The first ten verses demonstrate the superiority of the Melchizedek Priesthood to the Levitical (Aaronic) Priesthood. Vv11-13 clearly point out that there were in fact two distinct priesthoods—Aaron and Melchizedek. Vv14ff discuss this Priesthood from Judah which Moses did not address, yet it was there. As we read through the next chapters, we see that this Priesthood—of which Jesus is High Priest—was historically pointing (aiming) toward a new covenant with a new Israel (the spiritual Israel, including the Gentiles who are grafted in). [I don’t have the time to make this point in detail, but a thorough study of Romans and Hebrews would be of help here].

• I Pet.2:9; Rev.20:4; Eph.2:6 This one might be a stretch, so don’t include this in the argument if it doesn’t hold true, but there is an element in scripture (these are a few examples) where Christians also are given thrones (Kingship) and a Priesthood.

==

It is my observation (though it did not originate with me) that the Order of Melchizedek was intended to be a Priestly ministry to the Gentiles in order for all peoples—not just the Jews—to live under God’s reign, in His Kingdom. It began with Melchizedek (or before?), and was entrusted to the line of David. When you study the life of David, we see that he was not only a Priest and King, but he was dedicated to Gentile ministry. He defeated his Gentile enemies, then embraced them and won them over to Yahweh. Many of his Mighty Men were Gentiles, and they confessed the name of Yahweh. Even in Gen.49, we see a reference to the obedience of the Gentiles coming about through the descendants of Judah—defeating them, then embracing them so as to bring them to Yahweh in submission and obedience.



This Gentile ministry was then given to Solomon when he became king, with the intention that the line of David would continue this Priesthood to the Gentiles. But Solomon, as we know, turned from God and worshipped other gods. It is at this point that there seems to be a silencing of the Priesthood, in light of the general wickedness of the Davidic kings. But, as the Prophets demonstrate, God’s heart was still for the Gentiles. After exile, God intended to reinstitute the Melchizedek Priesthood in Zerubbabel, but this was conditioned upon obedience of the people. Once again, Israel failed by turning inward; the Gentiles were cast out, rather than invited in. Zerubbabel never became the King/Priest that God desired for him to be. And so we have silence again…until the time of Jesus.



All of this is reversed by Jesus. He fulfilled the Priesthood of Melchizedek by bringing all Gentiles into the house of God. He is thus the High Priest in this way. This does not discount any other tradition interpretations of Hebrews, etc…if anything, it only adds to the depth of who Jesus was and what God did through him on the cross. It is my belief that the whole of scripture speaks to a dual-priesthood: an Aaronic (Levi) Priesthood to the Jews and a Kingly (Judah) Priesthood to the Gentiles.

Finally, all Chirstians are now a part of this Priesthood, this Ministry to the Gentiles, as God has entrusted his church with the ministry. I won't take the time to expand on this.

This short trip through scripture is by no means exhaustive. It would take days to write a post which would fully justify this theme in scripture, but I hope I have given enough to at least introduce the possibility of something deeper in our discussion of Melchizedek and his Priesthood. Please feel free to expand on this, as well as to disagree completely.

thank you, I was just thinking about the gentile believers before Jacob came on the scene.

 

[andy153]

Melchizedek was in fact Noah !

with love and respect, andy153

 

[ischus]

Melchizedek was in fact Noah !

with love and respect, andy153

 

[calidog]

Melchizedek was in fact Noah !

with love and respect, andy153

or Christ

 

[MbiaJc]

Melchizedek was in fact Noah !

with love and respect, andy153

Would you be so kind as to give some scripture for that?

 

[andy153]

Melchizedek is described in Hebrews 7 as being without father,without mother, this description fits only one man....... Noah.

with love and respect, andy153

 

[Wisdom's Child]

But Noah did have a father and a mother...

Genesis 5:28-29
And Lamech lived an hundred eighty and two years, and begat a son:
And he called his name Noah, saying, This same shall comfort us concerning our work

 

[andy153]

But Noah did have a father and a mother...

Genesis 5:28-29
And Lamech lived an hundred eighty and two years, and begat a son:
And he called his name Noah, saying, This same shall comfort us concerning our work

Noah is the only person not to be born from the womb as far as this world is concerned.

with love and respect, andy153

 

[Wisdom's Child]

Noah is the only person not to be born from the womb as far as this world is concerned.

with love and respect, andy153

Was he hatched from an egg???

If you are referring to the predeluvian world being different from this one, you need to also remember that his three sons were also born before the great flood. In fact they were born before the Ark was even built.

Genesis 6:32
And Noah was five hundred years old: and Noah begat Shem, Ham, and Japheth.

Genesis 6:9-14
These are the generations of Noah: Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God. And Noah begat three sons, Shem, Ham, and Japheth. The earth also was corrupt before God, and the earth was filled with violence. And God looked upon the earth, and, behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth. And God said unto Noah, The end of all flesh is come before me; for the earth is filled with violence through them; and, behold, I will destroy them with the earth.
Make thee an ark of gopher wood; rooms shalt thou make in the ark, and shalt pitch it within and without with pitch...

andy153, you really need to post your source for this, or fully explain your reasoning for us, because you have made a statement which is totally unfounded and unsupportable from this end.

 

[andy153]

Was he hatched from an egg???

aren't we all ?

If you are referring to the predeluvian world being different from this one, you need to also remember that his three sons were also born before the great flood. In fact they were born before the Ark was even built.

Yes indeed they were, but they brought their ancestry with them. Only Noah could stand on this world and say he had no father or mother pertaining to this earth age.

with love and respect, andy153

 

[Rmered]

Melchizedek is described in Hebrews 7 as being without father,without mother, this description fits only one man....... Noah.

with love and respect, andy153

Gen 5:28-29
Old Lamech is going to be disappointed.
There he was all this time thinking Noah was his son.

 

[andy153]

Gen 5:28-29
Old Lamech is going to be disappointed.
There he was all this time thinking Noah was his son.

Thank you for your contribution.

with love and respect, andy153

 

[Rmered]

Thank you for your contribution.

with love and respect, andy153

Glad to help.

Does this mean you agree Lamech was the Father of Noah, and therefore Noah can't be Melchizidek?

 

[andy153]

Does this mean you agree Lamech was the Father of Noah, and therefore Noah can't be Melchizidek?

Err no, Noah was Melchizedek.

with love and respect, andy153

 

[Rmered]

Err no, Noah was Melchizedek.

with love and respect, andy153

But he had a father.
Surely if sin entered the world through Adam, then he is our father.
Therefore, genetic links, such as the parental link between Lamech and Noah are not impacted at all by the Flood.
And so, Lamech is legitimately Noah's father, and therefore, he cannot be Melchizidek.

 

[andy153]

But he had a father.
Surely if sin entered the world through Adam, then he is our father.
Therefore, genetic links, such as the parental link between Lamech and Noah are not impacted at all by the Flood.
And so, Lamech is legitimately Noah's father, and therefore, he cannot be Melchizidek.

Noah had a father and a mother in the old world which was destroyed by the flood. The waters that destroyed the old gave birth to the new and Noah was given the authority over it. Noah is the only man to have stood in this earth age without being naturally born into it. Hebrews 7 clearly identifies Melchisedec as a man. I would be greatful for your opinion as to who you think this man was.

with love and respect, andy153

 

[MbiaJc]

Melchizedek is described in Hebrews 7 as being without father,without mother, this description fits only one man....... Noah.

with love and respect, andy153

Where in the Bible does it say Noah has no parents?