- Dec 2, 2022
- 5,989
- 347
-
-
-
Desire to be a vessel of honor unto the Lord Jesus Christ?
Join Hidden in Him and For His Glory for discussions on how
https://christianforums.net/threads/become-a-vessel-of-honor-part-2.112306/
The Enigmatic Melchizedek
- Thread starter Follower Of Christ
- Start date
- Dec 2, 2022
- 5,989
- 347
no wings? Isa 6:2
2 Above it stood the seraphims: each one had six wings; with twain he covered his face, and with twain he covered his feet, and with twain he did fly.
thks
- Apr 2, 2003
- 23,242
- 6,330
All believers:
1Pe 2:4 As you come to him, a living stone rejected by men but in the sight of God chosen and precious,
1Pe 2:5 you yourselves like living stones are being built up as a spiritual house, to be a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.
…
1Pe 2:9 But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for his own possession, that you may proclaim the excellencies of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light. (ESV)
- Dec 2, 2022
- 5,989
- 347
you right it is the priesthood of the faithful but it is not a ministerial priesthood,
Christ is priest heb 7:17 and high priest heb 8:1 according to the order of melchisedec so therefore the priests he is over in authority as high priest must be of the same order and must offer the same sacrifice!
thks
- Jul 13, 2012
- 39,639
- 8,298
Yes Melchizedek was a royal priest, being both king and priest.
As we are a royal priesthood.
- Dec 2, 2022
- 5,989
- 347
The Church Fathers interpret the "Order of Melchizedek" to be the eternal, superior priesthood of Jesus Christ, who is not a descendant of Levi but is a priest forever.
“Thou art a priest forever, after the order of Melchizedek” (Heb 7:17). The Messiah is said to be a priest, not after the order of Aaron and the Levites, but according to the order of Melchizedek. Melchizedek is the priest-king of Salem who blesses Abraham and offers up bread and wine to God. Melchizedek is a priest during the age of the patriarchs, before Levi and his descendants are even born. Melchizedek is most likely a priest in the order of the first-born sons.
Jewish tradition and the early Church Fathers believed that Melchizedek (“king of righteousness”) was the throne name of the first-born son of Noah: Shem. According to Shem’s genealogy, he outlives Abraham, and this would explain the passing on of the blessing from Noah to Shem to Abraham. This may also explain why Saint Paul stresses that Jesus is the first-born of many brethren (Rom 8:29). As God’s eternal first-born son (first-born does not necessarily mean that there are subsequent siblings; an only child, for example, is still a “first-born”), Jesus is the eternal high priest of God. Whether or not Melchizedek is Shem, it is clear that the Messiah, according to Psalm 110, would be a priest—not a priest of the order of Levi, but of the order of Melchizedek.
The role of the priest is to offer sacrifices for the atonement of sin. Jesus does not offer up the blood of bulls and goats, but rather He offers His own body and blood on the Cross. The Letter to the Hebrews describes the contrast between the sacrifices of the Old Covenant priesthood with that of Jesus:
“And every priest stands daily at his service, offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. But when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God. . . . For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are sanctified. (Heb 10:11-12, 14)”
1 tim 2:5-6
5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;
6 Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.
thks
“Thou art a priest forever, after the order of Melchizedek” (Heb 7:17). The Messiah is said to be a priest, not after the order of Aaron and the Levites, but according to the order of Melchizedek. Melchizedek is the priest-king of Salem who blesses Abraham and offers up bread and wine to God. Melchizedek is a priest during the age of the patriarchs, before Levi and his descendants are even born. Melchizedek is most likely a priest in the order of the first-born sons.
Jewish tradition and the early Church Fathers believed that Melchizedek (“king of righteousness”) was the throne name of the first-born son of Noah: Shem. According to Shem’s genealogy, he outlives Abraham, and this would explain the passing on of the blessing from Noah to Shem to Abraham. This may also explain why Saint Paul stresses that Jesus is the first-born of many brethren (Rom 8:29). As God’s eternal first-born son (first-born does not necessarily mean that there are subsequent siblings; an only child, for example, is still a “first-born”), Jesus is the eternal high priest of God. Whether or not Melchizedek is Shem, it is clear that the Messiah, according to Psalm 110, would be a priest—not a priest of the order of Levi, but of the order of Melchizedek.
The role of the priest is to offer sacrifices for the atonement of sin. Jesus does not offer up the blood of bulls and goats, but rather He offers His own body and blood on the Cross. The Letter to the Hebrews describes the contrast between the sacrifices of the Old Covenant priesthood with that of Jesus:
“And every priest stands daily at his service, offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. But when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God. . . . For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are sanctified. (Heb 10:11-12, 14)”
1 tim 2:5-6
5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;
6 Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.
thks
- Apr 2, 2003
- 23,242
- 6,330
They must die for everyone's sins? Your point is not clear.
- Dec 2, 2022
- 5,989
- 347
of course not
no new sacrifice and not another sacrifice but one sacrifice
heb 10:10
once for all sacrifice
once bloody on the cross and offered for all
mal 1:11 pure offering, clean oblation, unbloody sacrifice
thks
no new sacrifice and not another sacrifice but one sacrifice
heb 10:10
once for all sacrifice
once bloody on the cross and offered for all
mal 1:11 pure offering, clean oblation, unbloody sacrifice
thks
- Dec 2, 2022
- 5,989
- 347
you right but the royal priesthood is not a ministerial priesthood!
for Christ to be high priest there must be low priests ordained by Him and under His authority in the same ministerial order.
thks
- Apr 2, 2003
- 23,242
- 6,330
What is the function of "low priests"?
- Dec 2, 2022
- 5,989
- 347
the function of any priest: to offer sacrifice!
public worship requires a priest offering sacrifice at an altar!
thks
- Apr 2, 2003
- 23,242
- 6,330
Sacrificing what, exactly? The OT priestly sacrifices were for sin, but that has been done away with:
Heb 10:11 And every priest stands daily at his service, offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins.
Heb 10:12 But when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God,
Heb 10:13 waiting from that time until his enemies should be made a footstool for his feet.
Heb 10:14 For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified.
Heb 10:15 And the Holy Spirit also bears witness to us; for after saying,
Heb 10:16 “This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my laws on their hearts, and write them on their minds,”
Heb 10:17 then he adds, “I will remember their sins and their lawless deeds no more.”
Heb 10:18 Where there is forgiveness of these, there is no longer any offering for sin. (ESV)
As for the sacrifices of believers in general, the royal priesthood:
Rom 12:1 I appeal to you therefore, brothers, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship. (ESV)
Eph 5:2 And walk in love, as Christ loved us and gave himself up for us, a fragrant offering and sacrifice to God. (ESV)
Php 4:18 I have received full payment, and more. I am well supplied, having received from Epaphroditus the gifts you sent, a fragrant offering, a sacrifice acceptable and pleasing to God. (ESV)
Heb 13:15 Through him then let us continually offer up a sacrifice of praise to God, that is, the fruit of lips that acknowledge his name.
Heb 13:16 Do not neglect to do good and to share what you have, for such sacrifices are pleasing to God. (ESV)
- Dec 2, 2022
- 5,989
- 347
the sacrifice of Christ!
- Apr 2, 2003
- 23,242
- 6,330
They're sacrificing Christ again? He was sacrificed once and only once:
Heb 10:12 But when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God, (ESV)
- Dec 2, 2022
- 5,989
- 347
not sacrificing again
not another sacrifice
not a new sacrifice
there is only one sacrifice
Christ is an eternal priest
heb 7:17
the sacrifice of Christ is eternal
thks
- Apr 2, 2003
- 23,242
- 6,330
So, I ask again, what are those priests sacrificing?
- Dec 2, 2022
- 5,989
- 347
offering the once for all sacrifice of Christ!
once bloody on the cross but offered for all
mal 1:11
For from the rising of the sun even unto the going down of the same my name shall be great among the Gentiles; and in every place incense shall be offered unto my name, and a pure offering: for my name shall be great among the heathen, saith the Lord of hosts.
pure offering
clean oblation
unbloody sacrifice
thks
- Aug 14, 2024
- 1,067
- 371
Heb 7.1 This Melchizedek was king of Salem and priest of God Most High. He met Abraham returning from the defeat of the kings and blessed him, 2 and Abraham gave him a tenth of everything. First, the name Melchizedek means “king of righteousness”; then also, “king of Salem” means “king of peace.” 3 Without father or mother, without genealogy, without beginning of days or end of life, resembling the Son of God, he remains a priest forever.
Understanding literary conventions and biblical language-types is important when dealing with passages like this. The Bible is to be literally believed, but not all that is said in the Bible is to be interpreted ultra-literally.
I agree with Beetow that this is spoken to emphasize the comparison of priesthoods, Christ's priesthood with the Levitical/Aaronic priesthood. The language sounds literal, but when the language is used in such an "impossible" way, it obviously draws us to conclude that the language is some kind of figure of speech.
And this is true, I believe, in this case. The author makes it sound as if Melechizedek himself is Christ/divine, but since he cannot be sinless and divine, he is only being used to depict a comparison with Christ's priesthood, which is eternal and divine.
Mel. is not without beginning and end of days--only his priesthood is commissioned without any regard to Mel.'s birth and death, which contrasts with the priesthood under the Law, which is a matter of succession within a particular tribal genealogy.
That is, Mel's priesthood, like Christ's priesthood, is not a priesthood based on succession, but rather, on God's word alone. Mel. did not inherit his priesthood from a predecessor who had died. He was simply commissioned as priest based on God's word alone, and not on any ritual succession.
Mel's priesthood did not continue after his death, but it was not contingent upon a succession of priests to extend it indefinitely into the future. It existed irregardless of Mel's mortality, and took place with no regard for the problem of human sin, which is what the Law and the Aaronic/Levitical priesthood dealt with.
The point in all this is that God provided the great father of our faith, Abraham, with an individual greater than him, whose priesthood Abraham was subjected to and who therefore acknowledged that this priesthood would be greater than anything or any priesthood that would come through him.
Such a person existing indicated that the priesthood coming from Abraham was limited, and had to pay tribute to the priesthood of Christ, whose priesthood is even greater than Melchizedek's, and not just greater than the Aaronic/Levitical priesthood.
Christ's priesthood was not subject to the rules of the Law and its priesthood. His priesthood transcends the succession of priests under the Law, who are born and die, extending their priesthood indefinitely into the future. And Christ was not subject to the Law of Sin, which the Law of Moses and its priesthood dealt with.
By contrast, Christ's priesthood remains his own, without any need for succession after death. He rose from the dead, retaining his priesthood forever, just as Mel's priesthood was not subject to the terms of succession dictated by human mortality, or death.
Being sinless, Christ had no need to rely upon the Law of Moses and its remedy for sin. He provided a priesthood that liberates from sin by a person who was without sin. And so, we are liberated not by the priesthood of the Law, but only in a final way by the priesthood of the sinless Christ. There need be no successor for him since he will never die again.
Understanding literary conventions and biblical language-types is important when dealing with passages like this. The Bible is to be literally believed, but not all that is said in the Bible is to be interpreted ultra-literally.
I agree with Beetow that this is spoken to emphasize the comparison of priesthoods, Christ's priesthood with the Levitical/Aaronic priesthood. The language sounds literal, but when the language is used in such an "impossible" way, it obviously draws us to conclude that the language is some kind of figure of speech.
And this is true, I believe, in this case. The author makes it sound as if Melechizedek himself is Christ/divine, but since he cannot be sinless and divine, he is only being used to depict a comparison with Christ's priesthood, which is eternal and divine.
Mel. is not without beginning and end of days--only his priesthood is commissioned without any regard to Mel.'s birth and death, which contrasts with the priesthood under the Law, which is a matter of succession within a particular tribal genealogy.
That is, Mel's priesthood, like Christ's priesthood, is not a priesthood based on succession, but rather, on God's word alone. Mel. did not inherit his priesthood from a predecessor who had died. He was simply commissioned as priest based on God's word alone, and not on any ritual succession.
Mel's priesthood did not continue after his death, but it was not contingent upon a succession of priests to extend it indefinitely into the future. It existed irregardless of Mel's mortality, and took place with no regard for the problem of human sin, which is what the Law and the Aaronic/Levitical priesthood dealt with.
The point in all this is that God provided the great father of our faith, Abraham, with an individual greater than him, whose priesthood Abraham was subjected to and who therefore acknowledged that this priesthood would be greater than anything or any priesthood that would come through him.
Such a person existing indicated that the priesthood coming from Abraham was limited, and had to pay tribute to the priesthood of Christ, whose priesthood is even greater than Melchizedek's, and not just greater than the Aaronic/Levitical priesthood.
Christ's priesthood was not subject to the rules of the Law and its priesthood. His priesthood transcends the succession of priests under the Law, who are born and die, extending their priesthood indefinitely into the future. And Christ was not subject to the Law of Sin, which the Law of Moses and its priesthood dealt with.
By contrast, Christ's priesthood remains his own, without any need for succession after death. He rose from the dead, retaining his priesthood forever, just as Mel's priesthood was not subject to the terms of succession dictated by human mortality, or death.
Being sinless, Christ had no need to rely upon the Law of Moses and its remedy for sin. He provided a priesthood that liberates from sin by a person who was without sin. And so, we are liberated not by the priesthood of the Law, but only in a final way by the priesthood of the sinless Christ. There need be no successor for him since he will never die again.
- Apr 2, 2003
- 23,242
- 6,330
So, they're re-sacrificing Christ, despite the writer of Hebrews saying that "Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins"?
- Dec 2, 2022
- 5,989
- 347
not possible to re-sacrifice Christ!
Christ is glorified at the right hand of the Father!
the one sacrifice of Christ is offered to the Father by the command of Christ in the power of the Spirit!
1 cor 11:24 And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.
25 After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, this cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as often as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.
thks
Similar threads
