Guest Posted February 17, 2017 Share Posted February 17, 2017 On 11/30/2015 at 3:47 AM, Ezra said: Blessings flow downwards -- from God to men. When Melchizedek blessed Abraham it showed that he was greater than Abraham, even though Abraham is held in the highest regard as the father of nations, as well as the ancestor of all Hebrews. Melchizedek was in fact a Theophany or Christophany, in that Christ appeared to Abraham and blessed him. And the giving of the tenth of the spoils was in fact an offering of a tithe to God. As you read further in Hebrews, Melchizedek was no ordinary man. Melchizadek was not a pre-incarnate Christ. He was someone though who was outside the priestly line of Aaron, who came before Aaron, who blessed Abraham. The point being made is that Jesus is a priest like Melchizadek, not that Jesus and Melchizadek are one and the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ezra Posted February 17, 2017 Group: Royal Member Followers: 16 Topic Count: 134 Topics Per Day: 0.04 Content Count: 8,142 Content Per Day: 2.35 Reputation: 6,612 Days Won: 20 Joined: 11/02/2014 Status: Offline Share Posted February 17, 2017 3 hours ago, CCole1983 said: The point being made is that Jesus is a priest like Melchizadek, not that Jesus and Melchizadek are one and the same. Many believe that they are one and the same (Hebrews 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jayne Posted February 17, 2017 Group: Royal Member Followers: 16 Topic Count: 106 Topics Per Day: 0.04 Content Count: 3,810 Content Per Day: 1.29 Reputation: 4,793 Days Won: 2 Joined: 03/31/2016 Status: Offline Share Posted February 17, 2017 3 hours ago, CCole1983 said: Melchizadek was not a pre-incarnate Christ. He was someone though who was outside the priestly line of Aaron, who came before Aaron, who blessed Abraham. The point being made is that Jesus is a priest like Melchizadek, not that Jesus and Melchizadek are one and the same. I’m with you on this. I used to believe whole-heartedly that Melchizedek was the pre-incarnate Christ, but I’ve changed my thinking on this. Not that it affects eternity nor is it a hill that I am willing to die on – but I do have different thoughts today. I did a deep study on Melchizedek a while ago when teaching Hebrews and very recently again while teaching Genesis. Here’s what I know now based on everything the Bible says about him. Part I: Genesis 14:17-20. "After his return from the defeat of Chedorlaomer and the kings who were with him, the king of Sodom went out to meet him at the Valley of Shaveh (that is, the King's Valley). And Melchizedek king of Salem brought out bread and wine. (He was priest of God Most High.) And he blessed him and said, 'Blessed be Abram by God Most High, Possessorof heaven and earth;and blessed be God Most High, who has delivered your enemies into your hand!' And Abram gave him a tenth of everything. All we know here is that Melchizedek was the king of Salem and a priest of God Most High. I don't believe that Christ existed and reigned as the king of any city - before or after his incarnation - nor did he exist and live for an extended period of time as a literal priest serving bread and wine to others. Part II: Psalm 110:1-4. This is a psalm of David expressing God the Father's words to Jesus Christ. "The LORD says to my Lord: 'Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies your footstool.' ............ The LORD has sworn and will not change his mind, 'You are a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek.'" God did not say that Jesus Christ WAS Melchizedek, but that he was a priest "forever" and "after the order of Melchizedek". Just as Melchizedek was a king AND a priest on this earth, so is Jesus Christ both king and priest over all there is. This was not so in the limited Levitical priesthood. Part III: Hebrews 5:5-10, 6:20, and 7:15-17. The author of Hebrews quotes a part of Psalm 110 and repeats that Jesus Christ is a high priest “forever” and “after the order of Melchizedek”. Chapters 1-10 of Hebrews is teaching Jewish Christians not to go back and fall of the old covenant’s requirements because Jesus Christ is superior to it all: [1] the OT prophets (chap. 1a), [2] angels (chaps 1b-2), [3] Moses (chaps 3-4a), [4] Aaron and the Levitical priesthood (chaps 4b-7), and [5] the entire OT covenant and practices (chaps 8-10). Part IV: Hebrews 7:1-17. This passage is too long to post, so I'll just cite the relevant parts. This is not a teaching on Melchizedek for Melchizedek's sake, but a teaching of comparing how the Priesthood of Jesus Christ is unlike what the Jewish Christians understand as "priesthood". Verse 3 and 16 - "Melchizedek was without father or mother or genealogy......and became priest not on the legal requirement concerning bodily descent" Levitical priests had to be descendants of Aaron and had to be literal lineage of the priests before them or they were not qualified. We have no idea of the lineage of Melchizedek (well, there are some thoughts on that**) and like Melchizedek, Jesus Christ doesn't have to prove any ties with Aaron to be the Priest of the universe. Verse 3 - "Melchizedek had no beginning of days or end of life" In Numbers 8, the Bible says that Levitical priests began their service at age 25 (probably as an apprentice as in another section it says age 30) and that they could not serve as priests past age 50. So, they have a "beginning" and an "end" of their days. The author of Hebrews says that Melchizedek's priesthood resembles Jesus Christ's divine priesthood as their was none of these legal restrictions on either. Verse 11b - " ......what further need would there have been for another priest to arise after the order of Melchizedek, rather than one named after the order of Aaron?" If Jesus Christ HAD come as a priest "after the order of Aaron", that would not mean that Aaron had been a pre-incarnate Christ. So, being "after the order of Melchizedek" does not mean that Jesus Christ was Melchizedek. **Just my two cents and I think that there is some interesting ideas about Melchizedek perhaps being Shem, the son of Noah, but that's another thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 18, 2017 Share Posted February 18, 2017 8 hours ago, Ezra said: Many believe that they are one and the same (Hebrews 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. In ancient Hebrew understanding that only meant that his family history wasn't known, not that it didn't exist. And it was unclear when he passed away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnD Posted February 18, 2017 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 0 Topic Count: 905 Topics Per Day: 0.19 Content Count: 9,644 Content Per Day: 2.02 Reputation: 5,831 Days Won: 9 Joined: 04/07/2011 Status: Offline Share Posted February 18, 2017 It does, however, open the door to the discussion to... Jesus: the last Prototype. Meaning Mary is his technical mother but that she was actually a surrogate for the Holy Embryo consisting of God the Word in Spirit and the Last Adam in the flesh (with the matching DNA of the line of David through Mary). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnD Posted February 18, 2017 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 0 Topic Count: 905 Topics Per Day: 0.19 Content Count: 9,644 Content Per Day: 2.02 Reputation: 5,831 Days Won: 9 Joined: 04/07/2011 Status: Offline Share Posted February 18, 2017 If this is to hijack the thread, perhaps the mods can make it into it's own thread. Jesus: the last Prototype. ← a great thread title, I think. The language in Hebrews with regard to blessing being from greater to lesser and without parent or end of days is just that... language. Human language is flawed and imperfect and is the explanation why scripture "appears" to contradict itself at some points. ← I say "appears" because the Word of God never contradicts itself. Hebrews for example says the blessing comes from the greater to the lesser and yet there are passages elsewhere telling us to bless the Lord. Or a favorite of mine: Proverbs 26:4–5 (AV) 4 Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him. 5 Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit. Human language is imperfect. God's Word is perfect. In order that the Word of God could be communicated to mankind God condescended to the subjection of his perfect Word to this ambiguous realm of human language to get the meaning out... The point is what does God mean? Not what do we think the Bible says? For this and many other reasons we need the illumination of the Light that created this Word of revelation to mankind, the Holy Spirit (2 Peter 1:20-21) tried and tested by the Bible itself (1 Thessalonians 5:21, 1 John 4:1, Acts 17:11, 2 Timothy 3:16-17). Isaiah 55:8–9 (AV) 8 For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD. 9 For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts. If we followed these biblical guidelines, there would be so much less division and confusion. I hope this contributes to the original post in this thread (I not it was posted a while back...). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts