• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.
  3. Please note there is a new rule regarding the posting of videos. It reads, "Post a summary of the videos you post . An exception can be made for music videos.". Unless you are simply sharing music, please post a summary, or the gist, of the video you wish to share.
  4. There have been some changes in the Life Stages section involving the following forums: Roaring 20s, Terrific Thirties, Fabulous Forties, and Golden Eagles. They are changed to Gen Z, Millennials, Gen X, and Golden Eagles will have a slight change.
  5. CF Staff, Angels and Ambassadors; ask that you join us in praying for the world in this difficult time, asking our Holy Father to stop the spread of the virus, and for healing of all affected.
  6. We are no longer allowing posts or threads that deny the existence of Covid-19. Members have lost loved ones to this virus and are grieving. As a Christian site, we do not need to add to the pain of the loss by allowing posts that deny the existence of the virus that killed their loved one. Future post denying the Covid-19 existence, calling it a hoax, will be addressed via the warning system.

Theory/Proposal about Melchizedek

Discussion in 'General Theology' started by Bob8102, May 12, 2021.

  1. Bob8102

    Bob8102 Member

    136
    +67
    United States
    Christian
    Single
    According to the book of Hebrews, Jesus is a high priest on the order of Melchizedek. In Genesis, Abraham met and paid tithes to Melchizedek. I understand there is controversy about who Melchizedek is. The David Jeremiah Study Bible asserts Melchizedek was not a pre-incarnation of Christ. I agree; Hebrews says M. was "made like the Son of God." Taking that literally, it means M. was created ("made") and had some characteristics similar to the Son of God. Hebrews says M. was without genealogy, without a mother or father, and without beginning of days. "Without beginning of days" makes it sound like he always existed, like Christ. But that could mean there was no day on earth in which he first came into existence. The same is true of the angels. They were created before the earth was. But M. is not an angel, otherwise the Bible would just call him an angel like it calls Michael and Gabriel angels. I have a theory/proposal that Melchizedek is in his own class of beings, neither angel nor human. (He took on human characteristics, like angels sometimes have, and Christ also left heaven to become human.) God, no, created, yes, but of his own type of being. There may or may not be other beings in his class of beings. Who knows, he may even be more powerful than Satan.
     
    We teamed up with Faith Counseling. Can they help you today?
  2. Bob Crowley

    Bob Crowley Well-Known Member Supporter

    +1,056
    Australia
    Catholic
    Married
    Without knowing much about Melchizedek, it is my understanding the only time he's mentioned is in Genesis 14:18-19, where he brings out bread and wine and blesses Abraham. Then he disappears from history until the writer of Hebrews brings him up. Nobody else bothers to mention him.

    "And Melchizedek king of Salem brought forth bread and wine; and he was priest of God the Most High. And he blessed him, and said: 'Blessed be Abram of God Most High, Maker of heaven and earth;[/QUOTE]

    The author of Hebrews was writing to Jewish converts, and in doing so reminded them of their heritage. I assume that Melchizedek figured larger in Jewish tradition that he does in Christian tradition because he blessed Abraham, and it is believed Salem was the precursor of what was to become Jerusalem.

    Our emphasis is on Jesus Christ - I assume their emphas is on Abraham, Moses and David.

    As far as I'm concerned, the writer of Hebrews was appealing to the Jewish mindset. To me, Melchizedek was as human as you or I.

    From Wikipedia for example - Jerusalem - Wikipedia.

     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Useful Useful x 1
    • List
  3. Goodhuman

    Goodhuman Well-Known Member

    557
    +201
    Croatia
    Christian
    Single
    There is no high priests after the order of melchizedek. There is only priests. He is high priest in the aaronic priesthood.
     
  4. Norbert L

    Norbert L Well-Known Member Supporter

    +845
    Christian Seeker
    Single
    You might want to read hebrews 7:11 "Now if there was perfection through the Levitical priesthood (for under it hath the people received the law), what further need was there that another priest should arise after the order of Melchizedek, and not be reckoned after the order of Aaron?"

    Most people reading that would wonder why you are stating "He is high priest in the aaronic priesthood" whereas from the same inspired letter that informs of Melchizedek also states "and not be reckoned after the order of Aaron".

    Perhaps you can explain the discrepancy?
     
  5. 4UallPraise

    4UallPraise disabled entertainment

    80
    +17
    Canada
    Nazarene
    Celibate
    Melchezedec was a type of Christ from whom, because of the mention in Hebrews, much is learned about Christ. Much is learned about Christ through the typology of Isaac and the analogy of the promise child for instance. Typology does not mean that Mechezedec or Isaac were Christ as a pre-incarnation.

    Typology (theology) - Wikipedia

    For example, Jonah may be seen as the type of Christ in that he emerged from the fish's belly and thus appeared to rise from death.

    In the fullest version of the theory of typology, the whole purpose of the Old Testament is viewed as merely the provision of types for Christ, the antitype or fulfillment. The theory began in the Early Church, was at its most influential in the High Middle Ages, and continued to be popular, especially in Calvinism, after the Protestant Reformation, but in subsequent periods has been given less emphasis.[1] In 19th century German protestantism, typological interpretation was distinguished from rectilinear interpretation[clarification needed] of prophecy. The former was associated with Hegelian theologians and the latter with Kantian analyticity. Several groups favoring typology today include the Christian Brethren beginning in the 19th century, where typology was much favoured and the subject of numerous books and the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod.

    Notably, in the Eastern Orthodox Church, typology is still a common and frequent exegetical tool, mainly due to that church's great emphasis on continuity in doctrinal presentation through all historical periods. Typology was frequently used in early Christian art, where type and antitype would be depicted in contrasting positions.

    The usage of the terminology has expanded into the secular sphere; for example, "Geoffrey de Montbray (d.1093), Bishop of Coutances, a right-hand man of William the Conqueror, was a type of the great feudal prelate, warrior and administrator".[2]
     
  6. Maria Billingsley

    Maria Billingsley Well-Known Member Supporter

    +3,577
    United States
    Christian
    In Relationship
    Matthew 3:16 "And the Holy Spirit descended on him in bodily form like a dove. And a voice came from heaven: "You are my Son, whom I love; with you I am well pleased".
    Job 14:2. “Like a flower he comes forth and withers. He also flees like a shadow and does not remain.”
    There are over 600 Hebraic descriptors that use "like". I have pointed out a couple above. A few specifically speak of a Christophany, Hebrews and Daniel for example. If one believes Hebrews is another being, then Daniel was describing the same being and not Christ. The Old Testament is full of Christophanies, no reason to think Meckilzadek is not.
    Daniel 3:25
    “Look!” he answered, “I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire; and they are not hurt, and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God.”
     
    Last edited: May 12, 2021
  7. mkgal1

    mkgal1 His perfect way sets me free. 2 Samuel 22:33 Supporter

    +6,790
    Anglican
    Married
    IsraelTribes.jpg
    That (Aaronic line) would be the opposing priesthood order - one that WAS based on genealogy (see above diagram).

    Interestingly.....the Aaronic line of priests was separate from the royal line of kings (the line of David/line of Judah and Jesus). David is considered a "priestly" king as he served and worshipped God as Melchizedek and the early high priests did.

    I see a similar contrast throughout the new testament about the two women (Hagar and Sarah) and their children from Abraham.

    Galatians 4:23
    His son by the slave woman was born according to the flesh, but his son by the free woman was born through the promise.
    The Meal of Melchizedek | EWTN
     
    Last edited: May 14, 2021
    • Like Like x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
    • List
  8. lsume

    lsume Well-Known Member Supporter

    +542
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    There is no reason to believe that God The Father has ever fully revealed Himself to anything or anyone. He doesn’t show off and He is Wise enough not to reveal unnecessarily more of Himself than is prudent.
     
  9. TedT

    TedT Member since Job 38:7

    572
    +85
    Canada
    Christian
    Married
    When GOD was chastising Job by alluding to his createdness in contrast to GOD's creation ability, HE wrote about creation: Job 38:7...while the morning stars sang together and ALL the SONS OF GOD shouted for joy? it makes it perfectly respectable to consider that ALL the sons of GOD were created before this creation of the physical universe . Historically church dogma has rejected this idea as shown most clearly by the KJV changing the words Sons of GOD to angels to make it easier for us not to accept our existence at that time but to rather accept the dogmatic assertion of our creation on earth at conception or birth, sigh.

    Take the most well known verse that hints at our pre-earth life:
    Jeremiah 1:5 "Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations."

    Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible sums it up well:
    Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee,.... Not merely by his omniscience, so he knows all men before their conception and birth; but with such a knowledge as had special love and affection joined with it; implying a personal relationship with not knowledge about as per:
    Matthew 7:21 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.
    22 Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?’
    23 Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you! Away from me, you evildoers!’


    Obviously He knew all about them but He did not have a personal relationship with them as GOD suggests HE had with Jeremiah.
     
  10. Andrewn

    Andrewn Well-Known Member CF Ambassadors Supporter

    +2,534
    Canada
    Anglican
    Married
    Here is some info about Melchizedek:

    1) His name means "King of Righteousness."

    2) He was king / lord of Salem and, beside Hebrews, he is mentioned in Gen 14:17-20 and in Psa 110:4.

    3) The abruptness of the Genesis account resulted in wide speculation: Rabbinic Jews considered him to be Shem son of Noah and Alexandrian Jews identified him with the Logos / Word of God. Some Church Fathers also identified him with the Logos / Christ.

    4) The language in Heb 7:3 suggests that he is not the Son of God but a type pre-figuring the Son of God. The Greek word used is "aphomoioo" G871, which does not occur anywhere else in the NT or the LXX.

    5) Birds of a feather flock together. Melchizedek and the king of Sodom went together to welcome Abram after a battle. This is another reason to believe that M. was an earthly king, as clearly mentioned in Genesis and Hebrews.

    The above analysis shows that Melchizedek was only an ordinary man, a king or lord of a small town and a priest of El Elyon. The obvious difficulty is that that Gentile lord worshipped the One True God. But nevertheless, there is no evidence that he was anything but a human being.
     
    Last edited: May 12, 2021
  11. 2BeholdHisGlory

    2BeholdHisGlory Still on vacation!

    823
    +403
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    God speaking by the prophet Hosea reveals to us how God has spoken by all the same saying,

    Hosea 12:10 I have also spoken by the prophets, and I have multiplied visions, and used similitudes, by the ministry of the prophets.

    Abraham was a prophet

    Gen 20:7 Now therefore restore the man (Abraham) his wife; for he is a prophet

    Just as in Abraham are shown allegorys (for example) in Galations 4:24 in Hagar and Sarah which are used to show two covenants. Likewise the use of a similitude (where we see one made after the Son of God) Melchisedec. Here shows the priesthoods and how Jesus would fit in between the two

    Hebrews 7:14 For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Juda; of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood. And it is yet far more evident: for that after the similitude of Melchisedec there ariseth another priest

    The latter is being used in the law which can also contain shadows of things to come but are not necessarily the very image of things. Gal 4:21 references the same things shown in the law concerning Abraham and also in Moses in Hebrews 3:5 And Moses verily was faithful in all his house, as a servant, for a testimony of those things which were to be spoken after

    That which would follow, not to mention that if Christ was still on earth he should not be a priest, his one that is for ever and unchangable.

    Edit: typos and let me add in a link to a post I did on him many years ago, maybe it might be helpful

    Melchisedec/Jesus/Son/King/Lord/Priest etc
     
    Last edited: May 12, 2021
  12. ViaCrucis

    ViaCrucis Evangelical Catholic of the Augsburg Confession

    +21,079
    United States
    Lutheran
    In Relationship
    US-Others
    It's important to understand that the Melchizedek's lack of genealogy (significant only in that in order for one to legally be a priest in the Jewish sense requires being of the line of Aaron, and thus genealogy was very important for the Jewish priesthood) is the point being made, not that he didn't have biological parents, or biological lineage. He absolutely did, he was just an ordinary man. The point the author of Hebrews is making is that Melchizedek didn't have the Aaronic priestly lineage--Melchizedek was a high priest outside of the line of Aaron and Levi. Melchizedek is therefor a prefiguring of Christ, who is our Great High Priest, even though He is not of the line of Aaron and Levi. Jesus did not meet the criteria to be high priest under the Torah; and so the author of Hebrews looks beyond to before the giving of the Torah, to the time of Abraham, to the mysterious Melchizedek about whom we know almost nothing. And the author says, in essence, "See here Melchizedek, called a high priest of God even though he did not have the priestly pedigree that the Torah requires; in that same way Christ is our Great High Priest, not in accordance with the Torah and the old Covenant God made at Sinai, but is High Priest of a new and better Covenant"

    -CryptoLutheran
     
    • Winner Winner x 3
    • Like Like x 1
    • List
  13. yeshuasavedme

    yeshuasavedme Senior Veteran

    +709
    Christian
    Married
    Actually, the Greek says Melche Zedek/ King of Righteousness was a facsimile of the Son of God; for the purposes of typing the Son of God, he was not named in the passage, but the ancient texts plainly state he was Shem, who was serving in the office of high priest and high king over earth, for God.
    That is an office that Adam had, lost, and would have had forever over earth if he had not fallen, and sold earth into the powers of the satans.
    FYI: Shem outlived Abraham, and Abraham lived with Shem and Noah from age 10 to age 39, when the Tower of Babel fell.
    Noah died when Abraham was 58, but Shem outlived him.
    The office of firstborn of earth is that of high priest and high king and was held by the patriarchs who could not live forever, because of the fall.
    It went from Adam to Cain, who killed his brother and lost it, then to Seth, and down to Methusaleh, Noah, Shem, and then to Abraham.
    And it was the blessing Shem gave Abraham, after he routed Nimrod (Amraphael) and the kings in Genesis 14.
    The office was given to the tribe of Levi, and Moses had it, then Moses gave the office of high priest to Aaron, but not the office of high king.
    The Office of high king went to David of the tribe of Judah.
    John the Baptist, cousin to Jesus/Yeshua, baptized Jesus back into the office of high priest, and by right of being the Firstborn Son of God since the first, firstborn son Adam, died, Jesus has redeemed the sold into sin and corruption earth back and will take possession of it when He takes that power unto Himself, as seen in Revelation.

    He is High Priest and High King, and will serve earth forever in that office as the never dying Father of the human being race who will never leave us orphans, spiritually, as our father Adam did.
    Read the book of the Upright/Book of Jasher (the real one), for the history, but the Torah tells you why the office is held for the Messiah.
     
    Last edited: May 12, 2021
  14. disciple Clint

    disciple Clint Well-Known Member

    +3,499
    United States
    Christian
    Private
    No he was not of the aaronic priesthood just as Jesus is not of the aaronic priesthood. Which is why it is written that Jesus is a priest in the order of Melchizedek. (king of righteousness)
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • List
  15. Dkh587

    Dkh587 Well-Known Member Supporter

    +1,712
    United States
    Christian
    Private
    I think he is only mentioned to show a prophetic shadow or type of the Messiah, who is part of the priesthood that existed prior to the Levitical priesthood, and to show that there was indeed a priesthood apart from the Levitical.

    this priesthood is a combination of the office of kingly and priestly duties, as Melchizedek was a king and a priest, unlike the Levites, who were priests, while the kings came through the lineage of Judah.
     
Loading...