Christ is Melchisedec

[mamre]

Oh, I agree entirely, we should always stick with the scriptures...so let's look at what the scriptures have to say about Melchizedek:

Genesis 14:18-20 "And Melchizedek king of Salem brought out bread and wine; now he was a priest of God Most High. He blessed him and said,
"Blessed be Abram of God Most High,
Possessor of heaven and earth;
And blessed be God Most High,
Who has delivered your enemies into your hand."
He gave him a tenth of all.

Psalm 110:4 'The LORD has sworn and will not change His mind,
"You are a priest forever
According to the order of Melchizedek."'

Hebrews 5:5-10 "So also Christ did not glorify Himself so as to become a high priest, but He who said to Him,
"YOU ARE MY SON,
TODAY I HAVE BEGOTTEN YOU";
just as He says also in another passage,
"YOU ARE A PRIEST FOREVER
ACCORDING TO THE ORDER OF MELCHIZEDEK."
In the days of His flesh, He offered up both prayers and supplications with loud crying and tears to the One able to save Him from death, and He was heard because of His piety. Although He was a Son, He learned obedience from the things which He suffered. And having been made perfect, He became to all those who obey Him the source of eternal salvation, being designated by God as a high priest according to the order of Melchizedek.

Hebrews 6:19-20 "This hope we have as an anchor of the soul, a hope both sure and steadfast and one which enters within the veil,where Jesus has entered as a forerunner for us, having become a high priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek.

Hebrews Chapter 7:1-24
For this Melchizedek, king of Salem, priest of the Most High God, who met Abraham as he was returning from the slaughter of the kings and blessed him, to whom also Abraham apportioned a tenth part of all the spoils, was first of all, by the translation of his name, king of righteousness, and then also king of Salem, which is king of peace.

Without father, without mother, without genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life, but made like the Son of God, he remains a priest perpetually.

Now observe how great this man was to whom Abraham, the patriarch, gave a tenth of the choicest spoils. And those indeed of the sons of Levi who receive the priest's office have commandment in the Law to collect a tenth from the people, that is, from their brethren, although these are descended from Abraham.

But the one whose genealogy is not traced from them collected a tenth from Abraham and blessed the one who had the promises. But without any dispute the lesser is blessed by the greater.

In this case mortal men receive tithes, but in that case one receives them, of whom it is witnessed that he lives on. And, so to speak, through Abraham even Levi, who received tithes, paid tithes, for he was still in the loins of his father when Melchizedek met him.

Now if perfection was through the Levitical priesthood (for on the basis of it the people received the Law), what further need was there for another priest to arise according to the order of Melchizedek, and not be designated according to the order of Aaron?

For when the priesthood is changed, of necessity there takes place a change of law also. For the one concerning whom these things are spoken belongs to another tribe, from which no one has officiated at the altar.

For it is evident that our Lord was descended from Judah, a tribe with reference to which Moses spoke nothing concerning priests.
And this is clearer still, if another priest arises according to the likeness of Melchizedek, who has become such not on the basis of a law of physical requirement, but according to the power of an indestructible life.

For it is attested of Him,
"YOU ARE A PRIEST FOREVER
ACCORDING TO THE ORDER OF MELCHIZEDEK."
For, on the one hand, there is a setting aside of a former commandment because of its weakness and uselessness (for the Law made nothing perfect), and on the other hand there is a bringing in of a better hope, through which we draw near to God.
And inasmuch as it was not without an oath (for they indeed became priests without an oath, but He with an oath through the One who said to Him,
"THE LORD HAS SWORN
AND WILL NOT CHANGE HIS MIND,
'YOU ARE A PRIEST FOREVER'");
so much the more also Jesus has become the guarantee of a better covenant.

The former priests, on the one hand, existed in greater numbers because they were prevented by death from continuing, but Jesus, on the other hand, because He continues forever, holds His priesthood permanently.



These passages contain the sum total of what we can possibly know of Melchizedek. There is nothing more about him within the Scriptures.

What do these passages say about who Melchizedek was?

He was (as the writer of to the Hebrews states) first of all the king of righteousness and the king of Salem (which means peace), he is a priest of God, for the order of his priesthood is forever and he remains a priest perpetually. He has neither the beginning of days nor end of life.(Hebrews 7:3) He is not a mortal man for as it states in Hebrews 7:8 "In this case mortal men receive tithes, but in that case one receives them, of whom it is witnessed that he lives on."

Melchizedek is a priest, not because of law or ordination but because of an indestructible life. Again Hebrews 7:16, "according to the likeness of Melchizedek, who has become such not on the basis of a law of physical requirement, but according to the power of an indestructible life."

Prince is right, there is much more to address, but let's start with these.

And again, Mamre, no one is speaking of reincarnation here except you...no one is indicating that Melchizedek was born, died and was rebirthed as Jesus, but rather that Melchizedek is no ordinary mortal, but someone eternal, someone who is the king of righteousness, the king of Peace, having no beginning nor end of days...

Paul says that Melchisedec was a man. (A man has a father and a mother.)

Therefore, you are truly speaking of reincarnation if you say that Christ was anorher man (Melchisedec) before. There is only one way for Christ to be another man, and that is by reincanation since that man (Melchisedec) lived thousands of years before Christ was born.

So, if you insist in INTEPRETING that Christ is or was another man (Melchisedec) prior, I will have to insist in saying that if you and anyone that believe such a thing believe in reincarnation. Again Paul says Melchisedec was a man (a man has father and mother).

Melchisedec was a King of a place called Salem. Melchisedec was a priest of the Most High God. It doesn't imply he was Christ. It just say this was a righteous man as Paul says. If you interpret more than that you are filling in the blanks. Can you bear the responsibility of filling in the blanks for such an important subject?

(By the way there were other priests that existed parallel to the main characters in the scriptures. For example, Jethro is another example. He was a priest who instructed Moses in administrative matters. Just read the scriptures you will find it. Melchizedek was one of these priests also, way before though.)

Again, when you read Hebrews, Paul says that Melchisedec was a man (a great man). Man, is born of woman, and therefore has a father and a mother.

Therefore, no beginning or ending HAS to refer to something else, or Paul would not call Melchizedek a man.

You cannot attribute mysterious aspects to Melchizedek since Paul already established he was a man (a righteous man).

Can you see how you are filling in the blanks and ignoring other aspects of the whole scripture.

mamre

 

[Prince]

Even the Son of God died.

So, why would Melchizedek have that privilege of not dieing? Show the scriptures that support that please.

Please show the scripture verses where it says CLEARLY that Melchisedec never died.

mamre

Even the Son of God died

Perhaps you misunderstand what dieing is, God is not the God of the dead but of the living.

Luke 20:38 For he is not a God of the dead, but of the living: for all live unto him.

So, why would Melchizedek have that privilege of not dieing

Before Jesus came in the flesh he lived and he was known as Melci.

Why do you think Jesus said this?

King James Bible
Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.

Jesus/Melchi lived before Abraham, but Jesus was born after Abraham died, so how could Jesus be before Abraham?

Jesus was before Abraham because he is and was Melchi.

Please show the scripture verses where it says CLEARLY that Melchisedec never died.

sure

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.

Notice the "No end to life" part?

 

[handy]

Mamre, I can see by your instance about the reincarnation bit that you're truly not open to anything I'm actually saying...

I think most others here will know that I'm not speaking of reincarnation...the only one who keeps bringing it up is you...

Yes, the writer of Hebrews (and no one knows who it was, maybe Paul) did indeed call Melchizedek a great man.

He is a great man, without father, without mother, without beginning of days or end of life, (which knocks out the whole 'reincarnation' thing right there), he was, is and will remain a priest perpetually, he is the king of righteousness and the king of peace.

Mamre, I'm sure that you will remain kind of stuck in your own view about what I'm saying here...mainly because you are misinterpreting what I'm getting at...but, for all others interested in this thread:

I said in a post prior to these that "I believe" Melchizedek is a pre-incarnation physical appearance of the eternal Son of God here on earth. (Wholly different from reincarnation.) Jesus was born of Mary, but the Son of God is eternal and existed long before Mary, Joseph, or even Abraham came on the scene. With God, all things are possible, and I "believe" it is wholly possible that the Son of God met Abraham and received tithes from him.

The reason why I'm stressing "I believe" is because I don't think it is truly possible for us to really fully understand Melchizedek, the Scriptures about him are just too few to fully grasp the totality of who he is. To me, thinking of Melchizedek as Christ Himself (much in the same way the Angel of the Lord, who met with Abraham at a different time was) provides the best explanation of why Melchizedek is referred to as one without beginning of days or end of life, without mother or father, being the king of righteousness and peace, and remaining a priest forever.

 

[Scotth1960]

Christ is Melchisedec, as Paul clearly states in the book of Hebrews!
What other place? Where and when did this happen?


Hebrews, chapter 7:
There are many different interpretations, but the evidence proves Melchisedec to be God; not having a beginning or ending of life, just like Christ!


Who liveth? Melchisedec? It is witnessed that who liveth? If not Melchisedec/Christ?


Which is a very good question! Why, after the order of Melchisedec, and not the order of Aaron, or another order?


I don't see any where in this text, another priesthood other than Melchisedec's, to replace Aaron's levitival priesthood. Go figure!

What Scripture says Christ is Melchisedec? And if not, what Scripture says there are 2 gods? Are you talking about another messiah besides Christ, or about Christ Himself? I believe you are reading Hebrews out of context. Melchisedec was an OT priest, and was not Jesus Christ. I believe you read too much into this, unfortunately!
PS Of course there are not 2 gods! There is only one God. But if there is someone besides Christ who had no beginning of days, is that what you are saying? There is no prophecy in the OT that the Messiah will be called Melchisedec. Only to be called Immanuel, God is with us. In Erie PA Scott Harrington



God can swear by no higher than himself. Christ was ordained from creation (the tree of life) as our high priest and healer! Christ is God, and God is Christ, the reason for the trinity and the doctrine of Christ, the begotten son of God, hidden from the devil and the angels from creation.

Which man, if not Melchisedec/Christ?

Which high priest became man, if not God's heavenly high priest?

Melchisedec came as the "son," "consecrated" into a newer, greater, testament and priesthood, forever more. A new heaven since the fall of man from the "tree of the knowledge of good and evil," a new earth, a new heavenly Jerusalem, and a new testament! The work of God!

This why Christ said:[

 

[Prince]

Christ is Melchisedec, as Paul clearly states in the book of Hebrews!
What other place? Where and when did this happen?


Hebrews, chapter 7:
There are many different interpretations, but the evidence proves Melchisedec to be God; not having a beginning or ending of life, just like Christ!


Who liveth? Melchisedec? It is witnessed that who liveth? If not Melchisedec/Christ?


Which is a very good question! Why, after the order of Melchisedec, and not the order of Aaron, or another order?


I don't see any where in this text, another priesthood other than Melchisedec's, to replace Aaron's levitival priesthood. Go figure!

What Scripture says Christ is Melchisedec? And if not, what Scripture says there are 2 gods? Are you talking about another messiah besides Christ, or about Christ Himself? I believe you are reading Hebrews out of context. Melchisedec was an OT priest, and was not Jesus Christ. I believe you read too much into this, unfortunately!
PS Of course there are not 2 gods! There is only one God. But if there is someone besides Christ who had no beginning of days, is that what you are saying? There is no prophecy in the OT that the Messiah will be called Melchisedec. Only to be called Immanuel, God is with us. In Erie PA Scott Harrington



God can swear by no higher than himself. Christ was ordained from creation (the tree of life) as our high priest and healer! Christ is God, and God is Christ, the reason for the trinity and the doctrine of Christ, the begotten son of God, hidden from the devil and the angels from creation.

Which man, if not Melchisedec/Christ?

Which high priest became man, if not God's heavenly high priest?

Melchisedec came as the "son," "consecrated" into a newer, greater, testament and priesthood, forever more. A new heaven since the fall of man from the "tree of the knowledge of good and evil," a new earth, a new heavenly Jerusalem, and a new testament! The work of God!

This why Christ said:[

I dont have enough time to go into the priesthood fully although it being one of my favorite subjects.. I will say this, Christ birth joined the King line coming from Judah and the priest line coming form Levi as Christ was the High priest/King of Kings...

High priest/King of kings = Melchizedek

 

[handy]

PS Of course there are not 2 gods! There is only one God. But if there is someone besides Christ who had no beginning of days, is that what you are saying? There is no prophecy in the OT that the Messiah will be called Melchisedec. Only to be called Immanuel, God is with us. In Erie PA Scott Harrington

Naturally there are not 2 gods, I'm sure all of us Christians agree there is but one God.

But if there is someone besides Christ who had no beginning of days, is that what you are saying? Melchizedek had no beginning of days nor end of life. This is what Hebrews 7:3 states and states it quite clearly!

If no One besides Christ has no beginning nor end then Melchizedek must be Christ.

As far as there being no prophesy in the OT that states that Christ would be called Melchizedek, 2 things...One, there is no prophesy in the OT that He would be called Jesus, nor is there any prophesy that states the Messiah would be called the Son of God. Two, Jesus isn't called Melchizedek.

But, this does not mean that Melchizedek was not a physical appearance of Christ in the OT.

 

[Asyncritus]

I'm afraid this is getting quite silly.

The point Paul makes in the whole letter to the Hebrews is a quite simple one, really.

Christ is superior to the Law of Moses, so don't go back to it.

Why not?

Because Christ is a greater H Pr that Aaron, and has credentials which precede and exceed Aaron's.

What are those credentials?

He is AFTER the ORDER of Melchizedek. Who's that, and what kind of a person is he?

Melchizedek is clearly described as a MAN:

4 Now consider how great this man was, to whom even the patriarch Abraham gave the tenth of the spoils.

Therefore he WAS NOT GOD.

He also has a DESCENT, or genealogy:

7.6 But he (i.e. Melchizedek) whose descent (= Gk genealogy) is not counted from them (i.e. from Levi/Aaron) received tithes of Abraham, and blessed him that had the promises.

If he had a genealogy, then he had father and mother.

Therefore, when Hebrews says '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'

He means:

3 Without father, without mother, (= of the tribe of Levi)

without descent (i.e genealogy = from Levi),

having neither beginning of days, nor end of life (recorded in scripture);

but made like unto the Son of God; abideth a priest continually.

The 'like unto' makes it clear that he WASN'T the Son of God.

Ps 110.1 says very clearly that Jesus was not God. 'Sit thou at my right hand' is God granting Jesus permission to do so.

'Till I MAKE thine enemies the footstool of thy feet' is telling us who is doing the making - and it isn't Jesus.

Given all that, and there's more beside, can we stop this silly arguing that Melchizedek was Jesus in some kind of previous incarnation?

And I again raise the unanswered question: Which High Priest was ever equal to the God he served?

 

[mamre]

Mamre, I see we are both responding at the same time, so after this, I'll take a break so as to see all you have to say now.

But, I do want to address this:
You say, "Melchizedek's birth is not mentioned in the scriptures, period. The fact that it is not mentioned doesn't mean he didn't have a father and a mother (you are extrapolating, reading something in it that is not there). It just means that the scriptures doesn't mention it, that is all there is to it."

I disagree, Hebrews 7:3 specifically states that Melchizedek had "neither beginning of days nor end of life, but made like the Son of God, he remains a priest perpetually."

Your disagreement is not entirely based on the scriptures. There is no evidence that "neither beginning of days nor end of life...." refers to Melchizedek proper. That argument can't stand because of the second part "...but made like the Son of God..." and because Hebrews says Melchizedek was a man.

The Son of God had a beginning of days and an end of life on this earth. And has indeed a Father and a mother.
Also, Melchizedek is refered as: "Now consider how great this man was" Heb 7:4

Therefore that argument can't be valid unless you tweak the scriptures.

To say that the Scriptures simply do not "mention" his birth is not correct, the Scriptures state that he had no birth, nor death, but remains a priest perpetually. Frankly, after what the writer of Hebrews has to say, to insist that he did have a natural birth is to extrapolate.

Again, not an extrapolation because Paul (or the author of Hebrews) says that Melchizedek was a man (consider how great was this man). That means he had a father and a mother, a beginning and a ending of life.

As for being a priest perpetually, anyone that receives the priesthood and is righteous to the end keeps the priesthood perpetually. See the example of the original Apostles ordained by Jesus. Didn't they keep the priesthood perpetually, and many others did also?

The only way for Melchizedek not have a beginning of ending is to INTERPRET the word "man" as something else. Which would be an extrapolation.

The terms "neither beginning of days nor end of life..." must, by necessity, refer to something else because it would be in conflict with the fact that Hebrews call Melchizedek a man and the fact that Jesus, the Son of God, had indeed a beginning and an ending of life (on this earth).


Please notice I am using only what the scriptures say here. I am not interpreting them. I am just showing that your interpretation doesn't agree with other parts of the same scriptures you quote.

have a great day,
mamre

 

[mamre]

One more quick response:

Hebrews 7...read through the passages, they state it quite clearly.

(Enoch didn't die either.)

I read the whole chapter, it doesn's say that Melchizedek didn't die.

Please, show me the specific verse were it says he didn't die. You are referring generally to the chapter, please be more specific.

However, it says in Heb 7:4 that Melchizedek was a great man, though. A man means he had a beginning. At least we know by that he had a father and a mother. Now, whether he was translated as Elijah was, that is not in the scriptures.

mamre

 

[mamre]

Perhaps you misunderstand what dieing is, God is not the God of the dead but of the living.

Luke 20:38 For he is not a God of the dead, but of the living: for all live unto him.

I am not sure where that scripture fits but:

I am pretty sure I know what dieing is. My mother died recently. When a person dies the spirit of that person leaves the physical body and the body is buried and deteriorates, eventually, reintegrating the dirt.

Jesus Christ, was born of a human woman having a Celestial Father. Jesus was nailed to the cross and left to die. At the last moment Jesus said to the Father: "into thy hands I commend my spirit." Luke 23:46. That means His spirit left His body. He was, then, buried. Then, three days later His spirit entered His body again and He was resurrected.

So, the theory of Melchizedek not having a father and a mother is Jesus cannot have basis of comparison because Jesus (the Son of God) was born and died on this earth and has a Father and a mother.

Before Jesus came in the flesh he lived and he was known as Melci.

Please, you will need to provide me with the specific scripture for this assertion.

Why do you think Jesus said this?

King James Bible
Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.

Jesus/Melchi lived before Abraham, but Jesus was born after Abraham died, so how could Jesus be before Abraham?

Jesus was before Abraham because he is and was Melchi.

Jesus would say that because He was with the Father before this earth was created (John 1:1). Jesus existed before the creation of the earth as a spirit (remember he said in Luke "into thy hands I commend my spirit?").

Since, per scripture, He really existed before anyone else as a spirit, He indeed was before Abraham, but not necessarily as Melchizedek.

Therefore that He was Melchizedek is your interpretation (extrapolation), which is not found in the scriptures.

sure
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.

Notice the "No end to life" part?

[/quote]

Well, Jesus cannot be compared in that regard to Melchizedek because Jesus has a Father and a mother. So, if indeed Melchizedek was without a father and a mother he wouldn't compare because JESUS HAS A MOTHER (Mary) and a FATHER (Heavenly Father).

Since Jesus has a mother and a Father, it stands to reason, by your own argument, that if you attribute that passage to Melchizedek (not having father and mother), he CANNOT be Jesus.

mamre

 

[Asyncritus]

Hi mamre

Thanks for making this point, I hadn't registered it before:

Since Jesus has a mother and a Father, it stands to reason, by your own argument, that if you attribute that passage to Melchizedek (not having father and mother), he CANNOT be Jesus.
mamre

However, you spoil it with this:

Jesus would say that because He was with the Father before this earth was created (John 1:1). Jesus existed before the creation of the earth as a spirit (remember he said in Luke "into thy hands I commend my spirit?").

Since, per scripture, He really existed before anyone else as a spirit, He indeed was before Abraham, but not necessarily as Melchizedek.

Don't you think this is a bit far-fetched?

As I asked before, and only got a few mumblings in response - like, 'it's too deep/profound etc for us, and is none of our business anyway' or words to that effect, perhaps you might like to attempt a response using the same powerful logic that you have exhibited above.

These days, we can transplant a fertilised ovum (or zygote, if you like) taken from woman A, into the womb of woman B.

Woman B then carries the child to full term and it is born normally.

Woman B can in no circumstances be said to be the genuine 'mother' of the child, but the 'surrogate mother'.

The child cannot, in any circumstances, be said to have been conceived by woman B. The child is certainly NOT 'her son'.

It is an 'implantation' or a 'transplantation', whichever is the correct technical term.

Therefore, if Jesus existed as a spirit before He was born of Mary, then there are at least 4 consequences.

Consequence 1:

He was 'implanted' or 'transplanted' into her womb. He was certainly not 'conceived'.

Consequence 2:

Luke, the doctor, was completely mistaken when he recorded the angel as saying: Lk 1. 31 And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS.

Consequence 3:

Jesus is not 'her son', and Luke is again mistaken.

Consequence 4:

Isaiah is also mistaken when he says:

7. 14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.

The fact that the virgin (Mary) 'shall call his name Immanuel' is proof positive that she is his real mother - because she names him, which is the parent's prerogative.

Notice that it is not Joseph who would name him Jesus - because Joseph was not his father, but Mary was his genuine mother, and had that right.

Quite incidentally, the fact that Melchizedek did not exist from all eternity, is another proof that Jesus didn't either.

All of which casts considerable doubt on your understanding of John 1, and the interpretation which you have put on it.

 

[handy]

Your disagreement is not entirely based on the scriptures. There is no evidence that "neither beginning of days nor end of life...." refers to Melchizedek proper. That argument can't stand because of the second part "...but made like the Son of God..." and because Hebrews says Melchizedek was a man.

The Son of God had a beginning of days and an end of life on this earth. And has indeed a Father and a mother.
Also, Melchizedek is refered as: "Now consider how great this man was" Heb 7:4

Therefore that argument can't be valid unless you tweak the scriptures.



Again, not an extrapolation because Paul (or the author of Hebrews) says that Melchizedek was a man (consider how great was this man). That means he had a father and a mother, a beginning and a ending of life.

As for being a priest perpetually, anyone that receives the priesthood and is righteous to the end keeps the priesthood perpetually. See the example of the original Apostles ordained by Jesus. Didn't they keep the priesthood perpetually, and many others did also?

The only way for Melchizedek not have a beginning of ending is to INTERPRET the word "man" as something else. Which would be an extrapolation.

The terms "neither beginning of days nor end of life..." must, by necessity, refer to something else because it would be in conflict with the fact that Hebrews call Melchizedek a man and the fact that Jesus, the Son of God, had indeed a beginning and an ending of life (on this earth).


Please notice I am using only what the scriptures say here. I am not interpreting them. I am just showing that your interpretation doesn't agree with other parts of the same scriptures you quote.

have a great day,
mamre

You seem to be making a point that Melchizedek cannot be the Son of God, because he was a man...I'm not sure why that's such a big deal...Jesus was a man as well and is referred to as a man many times. There is no reason why being a man automatically means that Melchizedek cannot be a pre-incarnation of Christ here on earth.

Also, Jesus had an earthly mother, but not an earthly Father. So, the point about Melchizedek having to have a "father and mother" because he was a man...falls short as well, especially since the Scriptures explicitly state that he had no father and mother. If the Son of God, Christ, can come to earth once without an earthly Father, and yet walk fully as a man, then it's no stretch to my faith that He could have come prior to His birth by Mary and walked as a man without earthly father or mother as well.

Perhaps you are one who denies the virgin birth of Christ...I know some do.

All I really have time for today...

 

[n2thelight]

Who was
MELCHIZEDEK?

​

Melchizedek is not so much a name as it is a title or designation of honor. It is a position or office that has to be filled by a worthy candidate. The term is a transliteration of two Hebrew words, melek and tsedeq. The Hebrew melek means king and tsedeq means righteousness. Therefore, the term "melchizedek" means literally, "king of righteousness." Because a king is always preeminent in his jurisdiction, whoever Melchizedek was, he had to be preeminent in righteousness. He had to be the "king" of righteousness.

What is Righteousness?

In Psalm 119:172, David equates the keeping of God's commandments with righteousness. On the other hand, the apostle John relates unrighteousness to sin (1John 5:17). Therefore, since sin and righteousness are opposites, complying with God's commandments defines righteousness and violating His commandments defines sin.

"Whoever commits sin also commits lawlessness, and sin is lawlessness." (1John 3:4, NKJV) "If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar, and His word is not in us." (1John 1:9-10, NKJV)
​

Paul said that it is not possible for the carnal [the natural] mind to be subject to God's law (Romans 8:7). Because the law cannot produce righteousness in us, in that it is weak through the flesh, God sent His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, to condemn sin in the flesh so that the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in those who do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit (Romans 8:3-4).
Paul said that the law is not against the promises of God, for if there had been a law which could have given life, righteousness should then have come by the law. But, the Scripture, he said, has concluded all under sin so that the promise, by faith in Jesus Christ, might be given to those who believe (Galatians 3:21-22).
Paul also said that it has been proven that both Jews and Gentiles are under sin. No human is inherently righteous – no, not one (Romans 3:9-10). All have sinned and have come short of the glory of God (Romans 3:23). All of our righteousness' are as filthy rags (Isaiah 64:6).
God described three men: Noah, Daniel, and Job as being righteous. But, He said that their righteousness could not be extended or imputed to others (Ezekiel 14:14-16). Not one of the three was a source of righteousness for others, and God never referred to any one of the three as being the King of Righteousness.
None righteous, no not one

Jesus said no one, including Himself, is inherently good [righteous] (Matthew 19:17, Luke 18:19). Paul explained that it was only through the power of the indwelling presence of God's Spirit that Jesus was able to offer Himself to God without spot (Hebrews 9:14). In other words, God's Spirit was the source of Jesus' righteousness.
Since "Melchizedek" was the epitome of righteousness, and no human including Noah, Daniel, and Job is inherently righteous, it is evident that the King of Righteousness could not have been human. Had He been human, Melchizedek would have been the same as Aaron or anyone else, i.e. a sinner.
As the King of Righteousness, Melchizedek was the image of God's Spirit (see Colossians 1:15 and Hebrews 1:3).

 

[n2thelight]

Without Father or Mother

Malachi said that the Sun of Righteousness would arise with healing in His wings (Malachi 4:2). Malachi was precluded from using the word "son" because that would have implied that the One who became Jesus was someone other than Melchizedek. The term "Son" would have suggested that Jesus was in some way a son or a descendant of Melchizedek. Actually, the prophetic Sun of Righteousness and the King of Righteousness is the same person, Jesus Christ. Malachi said the Sun of Righteous would arise, and he meant that in a literal sense. Christ will descend from the sky, but before He descends, He will have to ascend (see Psalm 82:8).
In Hebrews 7:3, Paul says that Melchizedek was without father or mother, i.e. He had no parents. Paul's statement should be taken literally because he was, in fact, emphasizing the deity of Melchizedek.
Every human, including Adam, has had a father (Luke 3:38). All the angels have the same father as Adam, and they are referred to many times in Scripture as sons of God. The One who became Jesus Christ is the father of all life except for one human life, His own. The Most High God is the Father of Jesus (Luke 1:32). But, God WAS NOT the father of Melchizedek. Paul is clearly saying that Melchizedek, like the Most High God, was without parents. Neither of them had beginning of days nor end of life. The two of them had always lived and there had never been a time that each of them had not lived. Melchizedek had always possessed life inherent. Life was not given to Him, He was not anyone's son.
Micah said,

“But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of you shall come forth to Me the One to be Ruler in Israel, whose goings forth are from of old, from everlasting.†(Micah 5:2, NKJV). ​

However, Melchizedek was willing to relinquish His immortality (John 10:18) so that He could become not only the King of Righteousness, but also the Lamb of God. Jesus succinctly put it this way,

"Jesus said to them, 'Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM.' †(John 8:58, NKJV). ​

In order to serve as God's Priest, Melchizedek presented Himself in a form similar to what would later be His human form (Hebrews 7:3). Before His birth, however, He was not the Son of God. He looked like the Son of God would later look, but He was not the Son of God until He became human.
Today I have begotten you

In the year 6 B.C., Gabriel appeared to Mary in the sixth month of the Hebrew year to inform her that she had been chosen by God to bear a son. She was told that she should name her son, Jesus (Luke 1:26-31). Mary consented (Luke 1:38). Jesus was conceived on the first day of the seventh month, Tishri 1, 6 BC. This date corresponds to late September of our calendar. Jesus was born nine months later in June of 5 BC.
Jesus' human conception was the fulfillment of prophecy (Psalm 2:7, Hebrews 1:5). Because the Son promoted God's righteousness and hated iniquity, God said to Him,

"'Your throne, O God, is forever and ever; a scepter of righteousness is the scepter (symbol) of Your kingdom.' " (Hebrews 1:8-9, NKJV). ​

Melchizedek, who had been the King of Righteousness, became the Son of God and the fulfillment of the scepter promise of Genesis 49:10.
God has anointed you

Every priest taken from among men is ordained to serve on behalf of men in things pertaining to God so that he may offer gifts and sacrifices for sin. No one takes this honor to himself, he must be called of God, as Aaron was (Hebrews 5:1, 4). So also, Christ did not glorify Himself to be made a high priest, but He who said to Him,

“'You are My Son, today I have begotten You.' As He also says in another place: 'You are a priest forever, according to the order of Melchizedek . . . ' " (Hebrews 5:5-6, NKJV)​

Melchizedek served as the Priest of the Most High God. Because He had loved righteousness and hated iniquity, God made Him a Son and anointed Him with the oil of gladness above His brethren (Hebrews 1:9). The word translated "anointed" is the Greek χρίω or chrio (Strong's Concordance Number #G5548) which refers to contact between the one being anointed and the one doing the anointing. The Greek word Christos, translated "Christ" is derived from chrio.
The Christ

The contact (anointing) is described in Luke 3:22 as the Holy Spirit (the One who fathered Jesus, Luke 1:35) descending upon Him in a bodily shape like a dove. The Son was anointed to become the author of salvation to all who obey Him, being called of God as High Priest after the order of Melchizedek (Hebrews 5:9-10). Jesus Christ became God's High Priest after [like] Melchizedek because perfection and salvation were not attainable through the Levitical priesthood (Hebrews 7:11).
Christ was made a Priest forever by an oath of the Most High God (Hebrews 7:20-21). It is His righteousness which is manifested in God's saints (Romans 8:4). The church shares in the priesthood of Christ and the resurrected saints will, like Him, forever be kings and priests after the order of Melchizedek (Revelation 5:10).
He Lives

Jesus Christ is the Sun and the King of Righteousness, HE IS THE MELCHIZEDEK, the one and only King of Righteousness.

"Now consider how great this man was, to whom even the patriarch Abraham gave a tenth of the spoils. And indeed those who are of the sons of Levi, who receive the priesthood, have a commandment to receive tithes from the people according to the law, that is, from their brethren, though they have come from the loins of Abraham; but he whose genealogy is not derived from them received tithes from Abraham and blessed him who had the promises.
"Now beyond all contradiction the lesser is blessed by the better. Here mortal men receive tithes, but there he receives them, of whom it is witnessed that HE LIVES." (Hebrews 7:4-8, NKJV)
"Now on the first day of the week, very early in the morning, they, and certain other women with them, came to the tomb bringing the spices which they had prepared. But they found the stone rolled away from the tomb. Then they went in and did not find the body of the Lord Jesus. And it happened, as they were greatly perplexed about this, that behold, two men stood by them in shining garments.
"Then, as they were afraid and bowed their faces to the earth, they said to them, 'Why do you seek the living among the dead?' " (Luke 24:1-5, NKJV)
​

Melchizedek is He who lives.
Written by: Jim Bowen
edited by BibleStudy.org


Who was MELCHIZEDEK?

 

[precepts]

Question, who was the heavenly Jerusalem's temple high priest before Christ?

 

[dadof10]

Yep! Posts from the past:

Melchisedec was a type for Christ, not Christ himself. Believe it or not, but some people actually worshiped God before the time of Moses and the law. The Jews needed to be reminded of this as they did not believe a priest who didn't fulfill the hereditary requirements of the law (i.e. Levite etc.) was valid

Yes, this is the point of this chapter. Thanks for injecting sense into this mess.

Hebrews 7 shows that Jesus is the head of a priestly order superior to that of the Jews because it was based on Faith rather than heredity.

It is not the flesh nature of a priestly order that matters, but the sacrifice the priestly order offers. In our case Jesus came in the flesh and offered up Himself as a perfect uncorrupted sacrifice, instead of the insufficient animals etc. that both the Levitical order and Melchisedec order (prior to Christ) were only able to offer.

A stumbling block the Jews have is that Jesus was not a Levite, so he could not lawfully be a Jewish priest. The Book of Hebrews explains that though Jesus was not a Levitical priest, He is the High Priest nonetheless of an order both older and superior to that of the Levites in that membership is based on Faith in God rather than heredity.

Precepts, please read the above again. It's important.

If heredity determines one's qualification for the priesthood instead of one's Faith, then the potential exists for non-believers to be priests. This naturally resulted in the repeated corruption within the Jewish nation as attested to in Malachi-2 and Ezekiel-44, as well as throughout the New Testament.

Good explanation, Sinthesis. The only thing I would add is that Hebrews TELLS US WHY Jesus is being compared to Melchizedek.

Now the point in what we are saying is this: we have such a high priest, one who is seated at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven, 2 a minister in the sanctuary and the true tent which is set up not by man but by the Lord. (Hebrews (RSV) 8)

The point is NOT to argue the point that Jesus IS Melchizedek, but to argue that Jesus IS a High Priest.

 

[precepts]

Question, who was the heavenly Jerusalem's temple high priest before Christ?

 

[handy]

Dad,

I'm not sure that just because Hebrews tells us why Jesus is being compared to Melchizedek is reason enough to state that Melchizedek isn't a pre-incarnate appearance of Jesus.

To me, only Melchizedek being a pre-incarnate appearance of Jesus fully explains the text...how someone could be without father or without mother, how someone could have no beginning of days or end of life, why is he called "king of righteousness" and "king of peace" and that he is a priest forever...

Unless we want to say that the writer to the Hebrews was being deliberately misleading as to the nature of Melchizedek to make some kind of point about Christ, these statements don't make sense.

 

[Elijah674]

It never ceases to amaze me with the ream & reams of paper put forth into trying to complicate who Melchisedec [King of Salem is suppose to be other than that of 'A Priest of God's appointment!? It just seems that the whole Eternal Gospel point of Rev. 14:6 has been missed from Adam on up to the call of the Jews! God spoke to His own (even Cain in Gen. 4:7, huh?) in person up until the Mount Sinai request for Him not to do so. And in between Adam & the forming of Israel's priesthood God still had everything else that was REQUIRED & Conditionally structured!

Even the pre/flood ones ALL had Noah's Eternal Gospel 'Message' of Christ's Righteousness being preached for 120 years with the Striving of the Holy Spirit! Abe had SOULS won to Christ in Gen. 12:1-5, and have you ever not wondered how long it took to win over even one soul to Christ?? And these were ALL Gentiles as was Noah, Adam,+ Abe!

And what did God have in place from the 'required' Lamb offering on?? He leaves NO ONE IGNORANT on that! In Gen 26:1-5 we see God appearing to Isaac & in verse 5, and we see DOCUMENTATION of God for why He called Abe in the First Place.... + there was also a 'priest of the most high God' even then! But here is the point that is passed over by this constant satan's side/track!
Gen. 26:5
[5] Because that Abraham [obeyed my voice,] and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws.

(And NO, Christ was not the King per/say of Salem!)


Eccl. 1
[9] The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun.
[10] Is there any thing whereof it may be said, See, this is new? it hath been already of old time, which was before us.
+
Eccl. 3
[14] I know that, whatsoever God doeth, it shall be for ever: nothing can be put to it, nor any thing taken from it: and God doeth it, that men should fear before him.
[15] That which hath been is now; and that which is to be hath already been; and God requireth that which is past.

In other words, people search & search for what God has not 'openly' revealed, they spend hours & hours of valuable time while missing out on the Vitals of what God has required from day one on, to the giving of His Eternal Heb. 13:20 Covenant on Mount Sinai. And the forth Commandment started with REMEMBER! Remember from where? Most still do not get it, huh?

--Elijah

 

[precepts]

Question, who was the heavenly Jerusalem's temple high priest before Christ?