Melchizedek?

Did you read Gen. 14?

Melchizedeck was a type of Christ as priest - someone who foreshadowed Christ. Undoubtedly, he did have parents but the Bible does not record who they are.

 

He was the priest of the Most High God (El Elyon), which is the name by which the non-elect knew God. He was a man, but was, as stated above, a type of Christ. Melchizedek's priesthood is an eternal, universal priesthood.

Constrast that with the Levitical pristhood, which had a beginning, an end, and was not universal. Christ is not a priest after the order of Aaron, which was established by a carnal commandment, but after the order of Melchizedek, which abides by the power of an endless life.

Christ's priesthood is superior to that of the Levitical priesthood, yet some look forward to the Levitical being reestablished.

 

...or Messianic Psalm 110:

Jehovah hath sworn, and will not repent: Thou art a priest for ever After the order of Melchizedek. Ps 110:4

Aaron, IMO, you're right on in your post. But, your use of the term 'non-elect' befuddles me. Do you mind to elaborate some on what you mean by this?

 

Simply, the non-chosen under the O.T.

I didn't use the word Gentile, because now, there is no Jew nor Greek, but there are the elect and the non-elect.

The one who enlightened me on the significance of this name (God Most High) was Andrew Jukes in his book, The Names of God in Holy Scripture. I highly recommend this book.

 

I choose to simply believe the Bible, and have always seen Melchizedeck, as the preincarnate Christ.

And Baptist4life, you bring up a good point.
If indeed Melchizedeck was regular a human being, that was a great king and priest, then certainly there would have been some “historical” record of him.
--------------------------------------------------
It is just like those people, who want to deny that the 4th man in the furnace, was Christ.

If you find yourself having to jump through hoops, to explain away the Scriptures that point out Melchizedeck’s divine identity, than you need to ask yourself, why your are so anxious to reject it.

 

I don't believe you would have seen Mel as a preincarnate Christ unless you were told he was.

That's a non sequitur.

 

I'm writing off the top of my head right now (which can get hairy, if I'm not careful :applause: )

I think it was not Josephus, but a Josephus scholar whom I read that said he thought Mechizedek was Shem because Shem would have been the oldest living male of the family (which is some kind of ancient tradition). In any case, Shem was still alive and was the oldest male of all of the families and nations on earth.

Nothing concrete here, but some momentarily interesting speculation...

 

I wonder if one took Egyptian legend of the founder of Jerusalem (which I know exsists) and ditched all of the chronological presuppositions (which are quite numerous, I believe) if one might find some very interesting parallels to consider.

Just a thought.

 

Hi Aaron

You said..........
"I don't believe you would have seen Mel as a preincarnate Christ unless you were told he was."

To tell you the truth, I don’t believe anybody, has ever told me anything about Melchizedeck:
Although I have had a lot of people ask me about him.

I recall back in the mid-1980's, while out knocking on doors in Oklahoma, a man refused me entrance, until I told him who Melchizedeck was.

And way back then, my answer was the same as it is today.
I think he was the preincarnate Christ!
--------------------------------------------------
I do not claim to have all the truth here:
But what convinces me about him more than anything else, is this statement, in God’s Holy Word........
“...having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God;” (Hebrews 7:3)

Now you can try to explain away this statement if you want to, but it sure seems like the LORD is making it clear, to anyone that has ears to hear.

Don’t get me wrong; If I am missing something about Melchizedeck, I am anxious to hear about it.

 

Hello Rubato

I said........

Then you responded..........

And you are right.

I think Aaron called my statement, a non sequitur.
And I think he was right too.
--------------------------------------------------
The point that I was making, was that it appears from history, that Melchizedeck’s appearance and then disappearance, was quick and mysterious.
But this is a flawed statement, because that doesn’t prove anything.

 

That's fine. Receiving the teaching of spiritual men is no less a spiritual mode of learning than divine revelation.

 

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.

If he had parents then he had beginning of days and end of life which contradicts the above.

 

I do not think he is the preincarnate Christ because he is presented as separate from Christ in Hebrews. If Jesus is a priest according to the order of Melchizedek, he cannot be Melchizedek. It is deceptive to present Jesus with another name and as a another person. Melchizedek was a real person.

This is a part on Melchizedek from my NT2 seminary paper on the High Priestly Ministry of Jesus in the Book of Hebrews, which I just got back the other day (and I got an A on it).