Melchizedek, is Jesus?

[Adrian Z]

Genesis 14
18 Then Melchizedek king of Salem brought out bread and wine; he was the priest of God Most High. 19 And he blessed him and said:

“ Blessed be Abram of God Most High,
Possessor of heaven and earth;

20 And blessed be God Most High,
Who has delivered your enemies into your hand.” And he gave him a tithe of all.

Hebrews 7
1 For this Melchizedek, king of Salem, priest of the Most High God, who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings and blessed him, 2 to whom also Abraham gave a tenth part of all, first being translated “king of righteousness,” and then also king of Salem, meaning “king of peace,” 3 without father, without mother, without genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life, but made like the Son of God, remains a priest continually.
4 Now consider how great this man was, to whom even the patriarch Abraham gave a tenth of the spoils.

Interesting isn't it?

 

[DamianWarS]

I've always thought of Melchizedek as sort of a messiah in the time of Abraham. Melchizedek is this sort of mysterious figure that just comes out of no where and Abraham even gives him a tithe in almost what seems to a worship type state. The old covenant was established with Abraham and his descendants so it is clear the Melchizedek was not part of this but yet he was still referred to as the "priest of the Most High God".

If we look at a more literal time line of earth, its interesting to see Melchizedek comes up at around 2000 years since creation, than about 2000 years later Jesus came, and 2000 years later it brings us to now. There is a lot of "third day" motifs in the bible and if you do divide the time line up this way these periods all seem to establish new convents (Adam Covenant, Old Covenant established with Abraham, New Covenant established with Jesus) which then brings us to the now, perhaps suggesting a new covenant will begin.

 

[heterodoxical]

Melchizedek was High Priest and King of Peace/shalom/salem.
Jesus is the Prince of Peace.

The scriptures say Jesus priesthood will be in the order of Melchizedek. PSA 110
Melchizedek was High Priest before there were Jews, therefore there were no gentiles.
In Jesus ministry there is neither jew nor gentile.

Melchizedek could have been Shem, begat by Noah's wife. There is no record of him Dying, he was from the time of LONG LIVES, He knew God in a pre-flood more personal way. You can find more detailed explanations many places on the Web. We can't say either way, and it really doesn't matter, but it's a very interesting argument.

Jesus and Mel were not the same people as best I can tell.

I agree with the other Poster, that Melchizedek was a Christ, annointed one, etc... before the jewish priesthood was born. Well before the Jews were gone.

another interesting thing, they sacrificed in appreciation, not for forgiveness. Forgiveness still came by faith, trust in God. Hope it sets your mind to spinning.

 

[Adrian Z]

Melchizedek was High Priest and King of Peace/shalom/salem.
Jesus is the Prince of Peace.

The scriptures say Jesus priesthood will be in the order of Melchizedek. PSA 110
Melchizedek was High Priest before there were Jews, therefore there were no gentiles.
In Jesus ministry there is neither jew nor gentile.

Melchizedek could have been Shem, begat by Noah's wife. There is no record of him Dying, he was from the time of LONG LIVES, He knew God in a pre-flood more personal way. You can find more detailed explanations many places on the Web. We can't say either way, and it really doesn't matter, but it's a very interesting argument.

Jesus and Mel were not the same people as best I can tell.

I agree with the other Poster, that Melchizedek was a Christ, annointed one, etc... before the jewish priesthood was born. Well before the Jews were gone.

another interesting thing, they sacrificed in appreciation, not for forgiveness. Forgiveness still came by faith, trust in God. Hope it sets your mind to spinning.

I never thought about that, good stuff, keep it coming!

 

[heterodoxical]

That is all of the main stuff. But from mel, not sacrificing for forgiveness, it puts the song, nothing bit the blood of Jesus to the test. If seems as a high priest she would be His, no? So in the time of mel they were still.forgiven by faith and confession.

Mirrors the prodigal.son story, where he leaves, sins, gets filthy. In the sense of ritually clean.
The father touchees him hugs him feeds, clothes, and restores. Just as in the time of mel. HE JUST WANTS US TO COME HOME.. the father should have done none of that. The touching him violated about five laws alone.

See, we are dirty, God wants us home to clean rrestore, etc... and in mel's time, no bkood and it was apparently done.

 

[heterodoxical]

I say yes, it is Jesus.

In one of the Gospels Jesus compared Himself to Mel, but didn't claim to be Mel.

 

[ministerfortson]

He's a foreshadow of things to come. It wasn't Jesus but an example of Christ in the OT.

Here is one that applies to Adam. According to 1 Tim. 2:14 Adam was not deceived. That means Adam chose to take Sin upon himself and die for his bride. Christ did the same thing for the Church which is referred to as His bride. Thus Christ is referred to as the 2nd/last Adam in 1 Cor. 15:45

Isaac carried his own wood up a mountain to a place where he was to become a sacrifice. God told Abraham to do this three days prior to the event. According to Hebrews 11, Abraham considered Isaac to be dead at that point. So Isaac (the son) was dead to Abraham (the father) for three days. After three days, according to Hebrews 11, Abraham (the father) received Isaac (the son) back from the dead. Another foreshadow of Christ. The OT is full of them.

 

[Ormly]

Melchizedek was High Priest and King of Peace/shalom/salem.
Jesus is the Prince of Peace.

The scriptures say Jesus priesthood will be in the order of Melchizedek. PSA 110
Melchizedek was High Priest before there were Jews, therefore there were no gentiles.
In Jesus ministry there is neither jew nor gentile.

Melchizedek could have been Shem, begat by Noah's wife. There is no record of him Dying, he was from the time of LONG LIVES, He knew God in a pre-flood more personal way. You can find more detailed explanations many places on the Web. We can't say either way, and it really doesn't matter, but it's a very interesting argument.

Jesus and Mel were not the same people as best I can tell.

I agree with the other Poster, that Melchizedek was a Christ, annointed one, etc... before the jewish priesthood was born. Well before the Jews were gone.

another interesting thing, they sacrificed in appreciation, not for forgiveness. Forgiveness still came by faith, trust in God. Hope it sets your mind to spinning.

He was a type of Christ as Priest, insofar as he had no earthly lineage, no father or mother. Ergo, he could not have been "Shem" or of Shem in any way.

"To whom also Abraham gave a tenth part of all; first being by interpretation King of righteousness, and after that also King of Salem, which is, King of peace;
Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God; abideth a priest continually.
Now consider how great this man was, unto whom even the patriarch Abraham gave the tenth of the spoils." Hebrews 7:2-4 (KJV)

 

[Fireinfolding]

Yes, Jesus, he was called of God such it says, these are great scripts

Heb 5:10 ***Called of God*** an high priest after the order of Melchisedec.

And likewise...

Heb 5:4 And no man taketh this honour unto himself, but he that is ***called of God***, as was Aaron.

And that by an oath (notice how they are quoted together)

Heb 5:5So also Christ glorified not himself to be made an high priest; but ***he that said*** unto him, Thou art my Son, to day have I begotten thee.

Heb 5:6 As ***he saith also*** in another place, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.

The "order" is adressed, speaking not after the "order of Aaron", and that our Lord sprang from Juda of which tribe Moses "spake nothing" concerning the priesthood, He is called of God (and by an oath) a priest forever after the order and its Melchisedec (the priest of the most High God). Who was also before Abraham was even named Abraham (but was Abram at the time). Melchisedec met with Him (Abraham rejoiced to see my day and "was glad" speaks to the bread and the wine served) and blessed Him and Abraham gave him tithe of all. Hebrews wants to convey just how great he was (because Melchisedec serves as "the example" but unto the image of the true) which is Jesus Christ, called (also) the Apostle and **High priest** of our profession. Thats where the oath comes in, the law makes priests without an oath, but Christ with one, as Jesus is the surety of a better covenant and way before Moses come onto the scene we see this Melchisidec (Priest of the most High God) enter into the picture with Abraham.

Psalm 110:4 The LORD hath sworn, and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek.

And Jesus said,


John 8:56 Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad.


Heb 7:1 For this Melchisedec, king of Salem, priest of the most high God, who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings, and blessed him;

And what did he do?

Gen 14:18 And Melchizedek king of Salem brought forth bread and wine:


Psalm 104:15 And wine that **maketh glad** the heart of man, and oil to make his face to shine, and bread which strengtheneth man's heart.


John 8:56 Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and **was glad**


So they are arguing with Him (notice the context is Abraham) and WHO makest thou thyself here...

John 8:53 Art thou greater than our father Abraham, which is dead? and the prophets are dead: whom makest thou thyself?

First of all...

Heb 5:4 And no man taketh this honour unto himself, but he that is ***called of God***, as was Aaron.

And again...

Heb 5:10 ***Called of God*** an high priest after the order of Melchisedec.

So likewise Jesus responds there...

John 8:54 Jesus answered, If I honour myself, my honour is nothing: it is ***my Father*** that honoureth me; of whom ye say, that he is your God:

Likewise again...

Heb 5:5So also Christ glorified not himself to be made an high priest; but ***he that said*** unto him, Thou art my Son, to day have I begotten thee.

Heb 5:6 As ***he saith also*** in another place, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.




So when they are saying are YOU greater then our Father Abraham? In the context of Abraham (along with the context of who Melchisedec represents in truth) Hebrews takes on their arguement... CONSIDER just HOW GREAT this man was! They're asking, "are you greater then HE? Well Abraham (who they though was great) gave this man tithes of all... So he whose descent is "not counted" from any of them received tithes of Abraham, and blessed him that "had the promises". And so Hebrews continues... ***And without all contradiction*** the less is blessed of the better!
And so even as....

Gen 14:18 And Melchizedek king of Salem brought forth bread and wine: and he was the priest of the most high God.

Likewise (fast forward to Jesus)

Luke 22:19 And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me. And he took the cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them: and they all drank of it.

Likewise the Scriptures foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith preached beforehand the gospel to Abraham saying "in you **all nations** shall be blessed".

This is where the greater thans come into play and seen more clearly...

Heb 6:13 For when God made promise to Abraham, because he could swear by no greater, he sware by himself,

John 10:29 My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand.

Heb 6:16 For men verily swear by the greater: and an oath for confirmation is to them an end of all strife.

Heb 6:17 Wherein God, willing more abundantly to shew unto the heirs of promise the immutability of his counsel, confirmed it by an oath:

Heb 6:18 That by two immutable things, in which it was impossible for God to lie, we might have a strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold upon the hope set before us:

Heb 6:19 Which hope we have as an anchor of the soul, both sure and stedfast, and which entereth into that within the veil;

Heb 6:20 Whither the forerunner is for us entered, even Jesus, made an high priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.

Heb 7:21 (For those priests were made without an oath; but this with an oath by him that said unto him, The Lord sware and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec)

Heb 7:22 By so much was Jesus made a surety of a better testament.

Melchisedec speaks of the true

Heb 7:3 Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God;abideth a priest continually!


Melchisedec his name...


Heb 7:2 first being by interpretation King of righteousness, and after that also King of Salem, which is, King of peace;


Romans 3:21 But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;


Ephes 2:14 For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us;

Theres many more references but for brevity (sorry about my colors some folks it drives crazy others like them, it helps me study better). If they bother anyone simply copy past them and select "black" and they will transform to normal on the page.

But I love this study and seeing our Lord Jesus in type and figures and watch how it unfolds in the scriptures, theres nothing more beautiful save Him only

 

[Ormly]

Yes, Jesus, he was called of God such it says, these are great scripts

Heb 5:10 ***Called of God*** an high priest after the order of Melchisedec.

And likewise...

Heb 5:4 And no man taketh this honour unto himself, but he that is ***called of God***, as was Aaron.

And that by an oath (notice how they are quoted together)

Heb 5:5So also Christ glorified not himself to be made an high priest; but ***he that said*** unto him, Thou art my Son, to day have I begotten thee.

Heb 5:6 As ***he saith also*** in another place, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.

The "order" is adressed, speaking not after the "order of Aaron", and that our Lord sprang from Juda of which tribe Moses "spake nothing" concerning the priesthood, He is called of God (and by an oath) a priest forever after the order and its Melchisedec (the priest of the most High God). Who was also before Abraham was even named Abraham (but was Abram at the time). Melchisedec met with Him (Abraham rejoiced to see my day and "was glad" speaks to the bread and the wine served) and blessed Him and Abraham gave him tithe of all. Hebrews wants to convey just how great he was (because Melchisedec serves as "the example" but unto the image of the true) which is Jesus Christ, called (also) the Apostle and **High priest** of our profession. Thats where the oath comes in, the law makes priests without an oath, but Christ with one, as Jesus is the surety of a better covenant and way before Moses come onto the scene we see this Melchisidec (Priest of the most High God) enter into the picture with Abraham.

Psalm 110:4 The LORD hath sworn, and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek.

And Jesus said,


John 8:56 Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad.


Heb 7:1 For this Melchisedec, king of Salem, priest of the most high God, who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings, and blessed him;

And what did he do?

Gen 14:18 And Melchizedek king of Salem brought forth bread and wine:


Psalm 104:15 And wine that **maketh glad** the heart of man, and oil to make his face to shine, and bread which strengtheneth man's heart.


John 8:56 Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and **was glad**


So they are arguing with Him (notice the context is Abraham) and WHO makest thou thyself here...

John 8:53 Art thou greater than our father Abraham, which is dead? and the prophets are dead: whom makest thou thyself?

First of all...

Heb 5:4 And no man taketh this honour unto himself, but he that is ***called of God***, as was Aaron.

And again...

Heb 5:10 ***Called of God*** an high priest after the order of Melchisedec.

So likewise Jesus responds there...

John 8:54 Jesus answered, If I honour myself, my honour is nothing: it is ***my Father*** that honoureth me; of whom ye say, that he is your God:

Likewise again...

Heb 5:5So also Christ glorified not himself to be made an high priest; but ***he that said*** unto him, Thou art my Son, to day have I begotten thee.

Heb 5:6 As ***he saith also*** in another place, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.




So when they are saying are YOU greater then our Father Abraham? In the context of Abraham (along with the context of who Melchisedec represents in truth) Hebrews takes on their arguement... CONSIDER just HOW GREAT this man was! They're asking, "are you greater then HE? Well Abraham (who they though was great) gave this man tithes of all... So he whose descent is "not counted" from any of them received tithes of Abraham, and blessed him that "had the promises". And so Hebrews continues... ***And without all contradiction*** the less is blessed of the better!
And so even as....

Gen 14:18 And Melchizedek king of Salem brought forth bread and wine: and he was the priest of the most high God.

Likewise (fast forward to Jesus)

Luke 22:19 And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me. And he took the cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them: and they all drank of it.

Likewise the Scriptures foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith preached beforehand the gospel to Abraham saying "in you **all nations** shall be blessed".

This is where the greater thans come into play and seen more clearly...

Heb 6:13 For when God made promise to Abraham, because he could swear by no greater, he sware by himself,

John 10:29 My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand.

Heb 6:16 For men verily swear by the greater: and an oath for confirmation is to them an end of all strife.

Heb 6:17 Wherein God, willing more abundantly to shew unto the heirs of promise the immutability of his counsel, confirmed it by an oath:

Heb 6:18 That by two immutable things, in which it was impossible for God to lie, we might have a strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold upon the hope set before us:

Heb 6:19 Which hope we have as an anchor of the soul, both sure and stedfast, and which entereth into that within the veil;

Heb 6:20 Whither the forerunner is for us entered, even Jesus, made an high priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.

Heb 7:21 (For those priests were made without an oath; but this with an oath by him that said unto him, The Lord sware and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec)

Heb 7:22 By so much was Jesus made a surety of a better testament.

Melchisedec speaks of the true

Heb 7:3 Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God;abideth a priest continually!


Melchisedec his name...


Heb 7:2 first being by interpretation King of righteousness, and after that also King of Salem, which is, King of peace;


Romans 3:21 But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;


Ephes 2:14 For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us;

Theres many more references but for brevity (sorry about my colors some folks it drives crazy others like them, it helps me study better). If they bother anyone simply copy past them and select "black" and they will transform to normal on the page.

But I love this study and seeing our Lord Jesus in type and figures and watch how it unfolds in the scriptures, theres nothing more beautiful save Him only

Very Good! It is a keeper for those who have wondered and wish to sort out the mystery that is made known to us. (I will, however, make it all black and without emphasis).... whew!
Thank you

 

[Ormly]

Dear Fireinfolding:

Here are a couple of thoughts I have on Bro. Mel:

The first one is of myself awhile back:

09/10/09 - - Abram, carried in his loins the flesh of Jesus. He was blessed and honored by Melchizedec who in reality was a type of Christ and who Abram as well, blessed and affirmed with his tithes. In effect, it was God receiving back to Himself all that He purposed in man, a precursor of the actuality of it all that would come later in Jesus Christ, son of man; God’s only begotten Son.

This one is from a commentary. I am not sure who:

05/18/11 - - In their meeting, Melchizedec represented the reality of the old and the new [priest and king] coming together in the person of himself. Abram represents the beginning of the working out in actuality, the old and the new [priest and king—Aaron and David] who would eventually come together in one Person, Jesus Christ. It is both an affirmation and a confirmation that Melchizedec blesses Abram. With his blessing, Abram truly begins his journey which culminates in the offering of Isaac. “It is finished”, was the import of the voice of the Angel of the Lord..
By Mechizedec’s blessing was Abram’s seed imputed, by faith, the righteousness of God that it would, “in the fullness of time”, bring forth Him who would redeem him and all his ‘offspring’ to sit with Him upon His Throne.

I trust they will be of value in your studies. . .

 

[Fireinfolding]

Dear Fireinfolding:

Here are a couple of thoughts I have on Bro. Mel:

The first one is of myself awhile back:

09/10/09 - - Abram, carried in his loins the flesh of Jesus. He was blessed and honored by Melchizedec who in reality was a type of Christ and who Abram as well, blessed and affirmed with his tithes. In effect, it was God receiving back to Himself all that He purposed in man, a precursor of the actuality of it all that would come later in Jesus Christ, son of man; God’s only begotten Son.

This one is from a commentary. I am not sure who:

05/18/11 - - In their meeting, Melchizedec represented the reality of the old and the new [priest and king] coming together in the person of himself. Abram represents the beginning of the working out in actuality, the old and the new [priest and king—Aaron and David] who would eventually come together in one Person, Jesus Christ. It is both an affirmation and a confirmation that Melchizedec blesses Abram. With his blessing, Abram truly begins his journey which culminates in the offering of Isaac. “It is finished”, was the import of the voice of the Angel of the Lord..
By Mechizedec’s blessing was Abram’s seed imputed, by faith, the righteousness of God that it would, “in the fullness of time”, bring forth Him who would redeem him and all his ‘offspring’ to sit with Him upon His Throne.

I trust they will be of value in your studies. . .

Yes!! Amen Ormly! Beautiful! Thank you for sharing that with me... I love that Melchizedek brings forth the bread and the wine (but Jesus interprets "this is my body"). But even in respects to His name "The King of righteousness" (and King of peace) of which (as it pertains to "the Kingdom") is not of eating and drinking but righteouesness, peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost And HE ministered it

Now he that ministereth seed to the sower both minister bread for your food, and multiply your seed sown, and increase the fruits of your righteousness) where it says likewise that we are... Being filled with the fruits of righteousness, which are by Jesus Christ, unto the glory and praise of God.

I used to think there was so little to follow up on back there but it does open up

Gal 3:8 And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed.

Likewise...

Romans 15:16 That I should be the minister of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles, ministering the gospel of God, that the offering up of the Gentiles might be acceptable, being sanctified by the Holy Ghost.

Likewise "in thee" I will bless (the faith, the seed, "in thee")

Acts 26:18....that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me.

This is what I am working on now, I love to study these things! But they are always a bit obscure till I can see them much more clearly

For example (trying to see this in Abraham)

Prov 3:9Honour the LORD with thy substance, and with the firstfruits of all thine increase:

Honour of the Son "even as" they Honour Father

John 5:23 That all men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father. He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him.

Likewise we could see a picture of this here as well...

Gen 14:20 And (Melchizedek said) blessed be the most high God, which hath delivered thine enemies into thy hand. And he (Abraham) gave him tithes of all

Reason being is that the begotten Son is equated (and specifically with an oath) to being a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek. Thus the Honour is likewise equal... "The LORD said to MY Lord sit at my right hand until I make your enemies your footstool" even though He is excepted which has put all things under Him. Christ is also the firstfruits as well, gotta hammer it out though, just returned to this the other day, but I find I'll grow in my understanding a little, then set it aside, then return to it later and it will grow again, never fails, God is so good, praise His great name, what an awesome thing to walk with God and learn of Him, its incredible

God bless you

 

[heterodoxical]

He was a type of Christ as Priest,

absolutely.

insofar as he had no earthly lineage, no father or mother.

So, since Jesus had a mother, HE is not a type of Christ? if I take your reasoning here and apply it across the board, that's what you would have to conclude. Mel had no father or mother, therefore he was a type of Christ. Jesus had a mother, and two fathers, therefore he was NOT a type of Christ.

Ergo, he could not have been "Shem" or of Shem in any way.

Since you've never cracked the book to see if He could be or not, I guess I'll forgive the presumptuous smug claim you make here.

SHEM would have existed without lineage to anyone that wrote at him. The few that knew his lineage had already passed. He came from the world before. So, to an author after the flood, He was known as an elder, High Priest, who had no father or mother, no one knew of, and his brother's were already dead. The author would have been perfectly justified in writing it as they did.

if you are going to take the whole bible that literally, and not use common and contextual sense as to the possibilities of what it might mean, then you will cry in 1 john, and several comments from Paul. You'll change those verses to fit your theology.

Shem was alive by the recorded lineages in the Bible, at the time of Abraham. SHEM was one of the few believers pre flood. Shem as a father of the "new world" would have certainly been qualified as the High Priest, after all he spoke personally to Him.

It's a certainly possible claim.

Some things are unqualified and left mysteries.

 

[Ormly]

Yes!! Amen Ormly! Beautiful! Thank you for sharing that with me... I love that Melchizedek brings forth the bread and the wine (but Jesus interprets "this is my body"). But even in respects to His name "The King of righteousness" (and King of peace) of which (as it pertains to "the Kingdom") is not of eating and drinking but righteouesness, peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost And HE ministered it

Now he that ministereth seed to the sower both minister bread for your food, and multiply your seed sown, and increase the fruits of your righteousness) where it says likewise that we are... Being filled with the fruits of righteousness, which are by Jesus Christ, unto the glory and praise of God.

I used to think there was so little to follow up on back there but it does open up

Gal 3:8 And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed.

Likewise...

Romans 15:16 That I should be the minister of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles, ministering the gospel of God, that the offering up of the Gentiles might be acceptable, being sanctified by the Holy Ghost.

Likewise "in thee" I will bless (the faith, the seed, "in thee")

Acts 26:18....that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me.

This is what I am working on now, I love to study these things! But they are always a bit obscure till I can see them much more clearly

For example (trying to see this in Abraham)

Prov 3:9Honour the LORD with thy substance, and with the firstfruits of all thine increase:

Honour of the Son "even as" they Honour Father

John 5:23 That all men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father. He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him.

Likewise we could see a picture of this here as well...

Gen 14:20 And (Melchizedek said) blessed be the most high God, which hath delivered thine enemies into thy hand. And he (Abraham) gave him tithes of all

Reason being is that the begotten Son is equated (and specifically with an oath) to being a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek. Thus the Honour is likewise equal... "The LORD said to MY Lord sit at my right hand until I make your enemies your footstool" even though He is excepted which has put all things under Him. Christ is also the firstfruits as well, gotta hammer it out though, just returned to this the other day, but I find I'll grow in my understanding a little, then set it aside, then return to it later and it will grow again, never fails, God is so good, praise His great name, what an awesome thing to walk with God and learn of Him, its incredible

God bless you

Thanks Fire,

That's the way I do it as well and have never been disappointed except to find there are so few with revelation understanding in which to share. Therefore it is a treat to exchange with someone who has a true hunger and thirst and is reaping a reward.

Try this as a summation:

Melchizedek = The Word glorified in Jesus Christ

Abraham = The whole of the "many Son's brought unto Glory".

"For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God." . . "For it became him [Father], for whom are all things, and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the captain of their salvation [Jesus] perfect through sufferings." Romans 8:19; Hebrews 2:10 (KJV)

Lov'in Jesus

 

[Ormly]

absolutely.

So, since Jesus had a mother, HE is not a type of Christ? if I take your reasoning here and apply it across the board, that's what you would have to conclude. Mel had no father or mother, therefore he was a type of Christ. Jesus had a mother, and two fathers, therefore he was NOT a type of Christ.

Unless He was called of God, as they both were. However, since Mel was flesh, he could have represented the whole of the old creation prier to Abraham becoming the order of the new. In this Mel was a link just as Jesus was, linking humanity to God, and as Father.
FWIW, Jesus was never called Prince of peace, Everlasting Father, Wonderful Counsel or Mighty God, either . . . until ?????? I leave you to guess the answer.

Learn also that the words, "It is finished" carries more than pertaining just to man's salvation.

Since you've never cracked the book to see if He could be or not, I guess I'll forgive the presumptuous smug claim you make here.

What "smug"? You haven't read me when I am smug, so back off.

SHEM would have existed without lineage to anyone that wrote at him. The few that knew his lineage had already passed. He came from the world before. So, to an author after the flood, He was known as an elder, High Priest, who had no father or mother, no one knew of, and his brother's were already dead. The author would have been perfectly justified in writing it as they did.

If he came from the world he had a mother and father.

if you are going to take the whole bible that literally, and not use common and contextual sense as to the possibilities of what it might mean, then you will cry in 1 john, and several comments from Paul. You'll change those verses to fit your theology.

Which verses do you need help with??

Shem was alive by the recorded lineages in the Bible, at the time of Abraham. SHEM was one of the few believers pre flood. Shem as a father of the "new world" would have certainly been qualified as the High Priest, after all he spoke personally to Him.

Chapter and verse, contextual if you wish, otherwise it is all empty speculation?

It's a certainly possible claim.

Some things are unqualified and left mysteries.

Practice that approach and stop with the insults.

 

[heterodoxical]

Unless He was called of God, as they both were. However, since Mel was flesh, he could have represented the whole of the old creation prier to Abraham becoming the order of the new. In this Mel was a link just as Jesus was, linking humanity to God, and as Father.
FWIW, Jesus was never called Prince of peace, Everlasting Father, Wonderful Counsel or Mighty God, either . . . until ?????? I leave you to guess the answer.

my gut is telling me it was post mortem. I agree with what you've said above. I don't see issue there. It also wasn't all you said before..

Learn also that the words, "It is finished" carries more than pertaining just to man's salvation.

Smug again. Why do you presume I don't know. OH you are the only one that can think theological things...? or something like that.

The law was made to define sin.
Christ died, the law's purpose was fulfilled.

The jews needed some way to identify the messiah when it came. With out the law, they didn't know what sin was...




What "smug"? You haven't read me when I am smug, so back off.

Gladly, stop being smug. If you don't like that word, presumptuous, if not that one premature condemnation, this is 2x now you've done it.



If he came from the world he had a mother and father.

Are you deliberately ignoring the point given, or are you past reading and in full time condemnation mode. Nobody else living then would know his mother or father. And from that group of people you received the writings and story he had no father / mother. Why don't you go back and read slower and understand what I said before you snipe off a quick retort that has already been addressed.



Which verses do you need help with??

None. Here, a sample of taking the bible literally.

I'm going to assume you still claim a sinful nature and that you still sin, is that correct?




Chapter and verse, contextual if you wish, otherwise it is all empty speculation?

No, other wise you are too lazy to do it on your own. If I tell it to you, you'll never accept it, true, wrong, or in between. If you work it out on your own, you will own the knowledge. You can cheat and find arguments on the topic all over the net, it's not my idea, but I understand the argument. I don't stick my head in the sand and try to be 100% right on everything, like some do.



Practice that approach and stop with the insults.

Back up your assertion, show me where I insulted you in any way, other than saying you are right. Which to any narcissist would be an insult.

The only smug, snide, insults so far, are from you. So I responded with the same posture.

Enjoy.

 

[Fireinfolding]

Thanks Fire,

That's the way I do it as well and have never been disappointed except to find there are so few with revelation understanding in which to share. Therefore it is a treat to exchange with someone who has a true hunger and thirst and is reaping a reward.

I understand, sometimes your excitement is met with a bucket of dirty water, but thats all a part of it unfortunately, even Paul said some preach Christ from strife and envy (not sincerely) and we know in part prophecy in part but we know the perfect is not that dirty water (stuff) that parades around "as if" its perfect huh?

I love what Elihu says..."I will speak, that I may be refreshed"...

Because those times of refreshing come back to us from the Lord

For we have great joy and consolation in thy love, because the bowels of the saints are refreshed by thee, brother.

Sowing reaping principle, God is not unrighteous to forget the kindness any one of us have shown to his name in ministering to one another

Its God's to repay (both ways for sure)

Prov 18:20 A man's belly shall be satisfied with the fruit of his mouth; and with the increase of his lips shall he be filled.

Well, you know how that goes as Peter said, "If a man wants to see good days he better watch his tongue huh?

Try this as a summation:

Melchizedek = The Word glorified in Jesus Christ

Abraham = The whole of the "many Son's brought unto Glory".

"For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God." . . "For it became him [Father], for whom are all things, and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the captain of their salvation [Jesus] perfect through sufferings." Romans 8:19; Hebrews 2:10 (KJV)

Lov'in Jesus

You know I was just looking at something like that yesterday, what was that? Something about He had magnified His word above all thy name, and I was thinking... I want to look into that, I cant tell yet, well.. you know how He "words things" and at first glance are like the diciples, "what meaneth He when he saith thus and thus" (lol) thats me right now, worth a look though, thank you Ormly you gave me something to think on, blessings to you bro

 

[Ormly]

Back up your assertion, show me where I insulted you in any way, other than saying you are right. Which to any narcissist would be an insult.

The only smug, snide, insults so far, are from you. So I responded with the same posture.

Enjoy.

Show me where I have been "smug" with you . . .in anyway?

Post one of my smug remarks that has caused you to accuse me.

I'm going to assume you still claim a sinful nature and that you still sin, is that correct?

You assume wrongly. My sin nature is dead. I have a new Nature. Thank you.

 

[heterodoxical]

Show me where I have been "smug" with you . . .in anyway?

Post one of my smug remarks that has caused you to accuse me.




You assume wrongly. My sin nature is dead. I have a new Nature. Thank you.

if you have the "new nature" after the sinful nature is gone, scripture says you CAN NOT sin, meaning you can't commit something that is a sin. NOT that God won't consider it a sin. or that its a forgiven sin not held against you.

But you did effectively ruin where I was going. hehe

BTW, notice how you deflected? You can't support that I did it. So you avoid it and try to shift the attention back to me. There's a word for that. There's also a fallacy for that, but heck if I recall the latin required to get it right. BTW I did what you asked of me already. HAD YOU ACTUALLY READ THE POST AND UNDERSTOOD THE WORDS, you would have seen that.

But for the challenged let me help. DO I NEED TO DIAGRAM the sentences to? Or is just explanation good enough?

******Learn also that the words, "It is finished" carries more than pertaining just to man's salvation.*****<<<<< I pointed this out as smug when I responded. You presume I don't know the words. You presume to have superior knowledge than me. You presume you are right. You presumed yourself to the king of the Hill position. If we were on a ladder you'd be staring at.... oh never mind. That's a funny line, but probably not necessary.

You just ignored all of this. I'm assuming you don't or rather can't follow the thinking.

****If he came from the world he had a mother and father.

Are you deliberately ignoring the point given, or are you past reading and in full time condemnation mode. Nobody else living then would know his mother or father. And from that group of people you received the writings and story he had no father / mother. Why don't you go back and read slower and understand what I said before you snipe off a quick retort that has already been addressed.

This line isn't smug, it's straight up snobbishly arrogant....

****Which verses do you need help with??

it started with these....

You made this statement without even doing the math, to see if it had any merit. In other words, you presumed superior knowledge, a fad you embrace whole heartedly. Doncha wish there was a pill for the narcissist. (you are inclined to deflect it back to me as the narcissist, but that is just one of the proofs of a narcissist so I'd avoid that move.)

******He was a type of Christ as Priest, insofar as he had no earthly lineage, no father or mother. Ergo, he could not have been "Shem" or of Shem in any way.**********

Smug, here's why. An argument was presented to you showing the reasoning to my words.

You offer a statement, with the assumption you are right, and do not discredit most of my argument, and the things you did say was presumed and pretty much already preempted in the first comments I made.

I swear, if I introduced myself as Brad, you are likely to say, No you are Jeff, your mother meant to name you Jeff you should be known as Jeff, here's why!

That's the posture you have pulled so far.

there you have smug.

If you come back with anything OTHER than opening with where I was insulting, you are ... disingenuous.

I can't see it. But sometimes we are blind to what we do as being offensive, so I asked. You didn't produce. I have asked again. Stop deflecting, diverting, shifting focus and answer the question mr. intellectual.

Was it where I took your logic, (Mel was a type of Christ because he had no mother or father) And applied your stated standard to Jesus and it made HIM NOT a type of Christ? I mean I can see how that would be embarassing to one with such a high view of themselves, but logic is logic, that would be like getting angry at me for claiming 2x3=6.

If that was what declared MEL as a type of Christ, then it should be consistent with Christ, and it wasn't. "ERGO" (since that word impresses you.) Christ wasn't a Christ. OR you were wrong in your standards.

It's hard for you to admit a mistake, no?

Enjoy it. Sorry this was in a public forum and the embarassment you'll face.

(You ended yours with a deflective cut down, I'm returning the favor, tell me does it seem helpful to you?)

(( I didn't think so, maybe we can avoid that ))

 

[Ormly]

if you have the "new nature" after the sinful nature is gone, scripture says you CAN NOT sin, meaning you can't commit something that is a sin. NOT that God won't consider it a sin. or that its a forgiven sin not held against you.

That's right and if I do I have an advocate with the Father and because of my new Nature, "There is now no condemnation for me". Overcoming my flesh is another issue.

BTW, notice how you deflected? You can't support that I did it. So you avoid it and try to shift the attention back to me. There's a word for that. There's also a fallacy for that, but heck if I recall the latin required to get it right. BTW I did what you asked of me already. HAD YOU ACTUALLY READ THE POST AND UNDERSTOOD THE WORDS, you would have seen that.

No deflection __You are the one who accused me. If, at the first, you would have pointed out what exactly how or what I was being smug, it would given me a chance to apologize. That is now all lost. Perhaps it is you who should examine himself to check for being 'over sensitive'