Melchizedek; a preincarnate Christ?

[Wannabee]

Well said Patrick. I think you're right on the money.

Another observation.

Heb 6:20 where Jesus entered as forerunner for us, having become a High Priest forever, according to the order of Melchizedek.

I didn't check the Greek, but if this is translated correctly then Jesus "BECAME" a High Priest forever, saying that it was after Melchizedek that he became a High Priest. Bears more study.

 

[matthew11v25]

I am still studying this.

Wasnt there only one High Priest at "a time"? In the Levitical prieshood there was to be only one High Priest until replaced. So I am wondering if Christ is High Priest of OT and a high priest of the order of Mel, than it would seem that Christ was either Mel, or not high priest of the Old Covenant...since it was not a shared office.

Doesn't Salem mean "peace"? there are few verses that speak of this city (unless it is the real Jerusalem)...could it not be figurative? It is never mentioned in great detail.

"In Salem also is his tabernacle, and his dwelling place in Zion." (psalm 76)

"To whom also Abraham gave a tenth part of all; first being by interpretation King of righteousness, and after that also King of Salem, which is, King of peace" (heb 7:2)


Feed back please.

[Edited on 5-15-2005 by matthew11v25]

 

[matthew11v25]

This is what A.W. Pink writes on Mel...Hendriksen seems to have similiar thoughts.

"For this Melchizedek, king of Salem, priest of the most high God". Two things are here affirmed of Melchizedek: be was king, and he was priest. Almost endless conjectures have been made as to the identity of Melchizedek. Questions have been raised as to what order of beings he belonged to. Some have insisted that he was a Divine person, others that he was an angel, still others that he was Christ Himself in theophanic manifestation "” as when He appeared to Joshua (Josh. 5:14), or in Babylon´s furnace (Dan. 3:25), etc. Others, allowing that he was only a man, have speculated as to his nationality, family connections, and so on. But as the Holy Spirit has not seen fit to give us any information on these points, we deem it irreverence (Deut. 29:29) to indulge in any surmises thereon.

 

[Scott Bushey]

Originally posted by matthew11v25
This is what A.W. Pink writes on Mel...Hendriksen seems to have similiar thoughts.

"For this Melchizedek, king of Salem, priest of the most high God". Two things are here affirmed of Melchizedek: be was king, and he was priest. Almost endless conjectures have been made as to the identity of Melchizedek. Questions have been raised as to what order of beings he belonged to. Some have insisted that he was a Divine person, others that he was an angel, still others that he was Christ Himself in theophanic manifestation "” as when He appeared to Joshua (Josh. 5:14), or in Babylon´s furnace (Dan. 3:25), etc. Others, allowing that he was only a man, have speculated as to his nationality, family connections, and so on. But as the Holy Spirit has not seen fit to give us any information on these points, we deem it irreverence (Deut. 29:29) to indulge in any surmises thereon.

This is my position. Theophonic manifestation!

 

[WrittenFromUtopia]

Originally posted by Scott Bushey
Theophonic manifestation!

Sounds like a case for the Ghostbusters!

 

[biblelighthouse]

Originally posted by puritansailor

I do find it interesting that he brings Abraham "bread and wine." Wonder if there's any intentional foreshadowing there to the "bread and wine" of the Lord's Supper the next preist in the order of Melchezidek would provide.

Originally posted by WrittenFromUtopia
Wow, the bread and wine thing is interesting... Very interesting, indeed.

Yes, I do believe this was a precursor to the Lord's Supper.
I wrote an article about this sometime back:

http://www.biblelighthouse.com/sacraments/communion-genesis14.htm

 

[matthew11v25]

Originally posted by matthew11v25
I am still studying this.

Wasnt there only one High Priest at "a time"? In the Levitical prieshood there was to be only one High Priest until replaced. So I am wondering if Christ is High Priest of OT and a high priest of the order of Mel, than it would seem that Christ was either Mel, or not high priest of the Old Covenant...since it was not a shared office.

Doesn't Salem mean "peace"? there are few verses that speak of this city (unless it is the real Jerusalem)...could it not be figurative? It is never mentioned in great detail.

"In Salem also is his tabernacle, and his dwelling place in Zion." (psalm 76)

"To whom also Abraham gave a tenth part of all; first being by interpretation King of righteousness, and after that also King of Salem, which is, King of peace" (heb 7:2)


Feed back please.

[Edited on 5-15-2005 by matthew11v25]

Any feed back? does this make sense?

 

[matthew11v25]

Originally posted by matthew11v25
This is what A.W. Pink writes on Mel...Hendriksen seems to have similiar thoughts.

"For this Melchizedek, king of Salem, priest of the most high God". Two things are here affirmed of Melchizedek: be was king, and he was priest. Almost endless conjectures have been made as to the identity of Melchizedek. Questions have been raised as to what order of beings he belonged to. Some have insisted that he was a Divine person, others that he was an angel, still others that he was Christ Himself in theophanic manifestation "” as when He appeared to Joshua (Josh. 5:14), or in Babylon´s furnace (Dan. 3:25), etc. Others, allowing that he was only a man, have speculated as to his nationality, family connections, and so on. But as the Holy Spirit has not seen fit to give us any information on these points, we deem it irreverence (Deut. 29:29) to indulge in any surmises thereon.

Calvin and Gill (from what I read) do not consider Mel to be Christ in theophanic manifestation. I have not found a commentator yet, that has dogmatically supported Mel as a pre-incarnate Christ.

 

[Arch2k]

Edward Reynolds -

Some heretics of old affirmed that he was the Holy Ghost. Others, that he was an angel. Others, that he was Shem, the son of Noah. Others, that he was a Canaanite, extraordinarily raised up by God to be a priest of the Gentiles. Others, that he was Christ himself, manifested by a special dispensation and privilege unto Abraham in the flesh, who is said to have seen his day, and rejoiced, Joh 8:56. Difference there is also about Salem, the place of which he was king. Some take it for Jerusalem, as Josephus and most of the ancients. Others for a city in the half tribe of Manasseh, within the river Jordan, where Hierom reports that some ruins of the palace of Melchizedek were in his days conceived to remain. Tedious I might be in insisting on this point who Melchizedek was. But when I find the Holy Ghost purposely concealing his name, genealogy, beginning, ending, and descent, and that to special purpose, I cannot but wonder that men should toil themselves in the dark to find out that of which they have not the least ground of solid conjecture, and the inevidence whereof is expressly recorded, to make Melchizedek thereby the fitter type of Christ's everlasting priesthood.

 

[Arch2k]

Condensed from John Owen -

These things concerning are certain: First, That he was a mere man, and no more; for,


1. "Every high priest" was to be "taken from among men, " Heb 5:1; "”so that the Son of God himself could not have been a priest had he not assumed our nature:


2. That if he were more than a man, there would be no mystery in his being introduced in Scripture as, "without father, without mother, without pedigree, "for none but men have such:


3. Without this conception of him there is no force in the apostle's argument against the Jews.


Secondly, That he came not to his office by the right of primogeniture (which includes a genealogy) or by any way of succession, but was raised up and immediately called of God thereunto; for in that respect Christ is said to be a priest after his order. Thirdly, That he had no successor on the earth, nor could have; for there was no law to constitute an order of succession, and he was a priest only after an extraordinary call. These things belong unto faith in this matter, and no more... The first personal instituted type of Christ was a priest; this was Melchizedek. There were before real instituted types of his work, as sacrifices; and there were moral types of his person, as Adam, Abel, and Noah, which represented him in sundry things; but the first person who was solemnly designed to teach and represent him, by what he was and did, was a priest. And that which God taught herein was, that the foundation of all that the Lord Christ had to do in and for the church was laid in his priestly office, whereby he made atonement and reconciliation for sin. Everything else that he doth is built on the supposition of his priesthood. And we must begin in the application where God begins in the exhibition. An interest in the effects of the priestly office of Christ is that which in the first place we ought to look after. This being attained, we shall be willing to be taught and ruled by him. It may not be amiss to observe the likeness between Melchizedek and Christ. As for our Lord;


1. He was said to be, and he really was, and he only, first the king of righteousness, and then the king of peace, seeing he alone brought in everlasting righteousness and made peace with God for sinners. In his kingdom alone are these things to be found.


2. He was really and truly the priest of the most high God; and properly he was so alone. He offered that sacrifice, and made that atonement, which was signified by all the sacrifices offered by holy men from the foundation of the world.


3. He blesseth all the faithful, as Abraham, the father of the faithful, was blessed by Melchizedek. In him were they to be blessed, by him are they blessed, "”through him delivered from the curse, and all the fruits of it; nor are they partakers of any blessing but from him.


4. He receive, all the homage of his people, all their grateful acknowledgments of the love and favour of God, in the conquest of their spiritual adversaries, and deliverance from them, as Melchizedek received the tenth of the spoils from Abraham.


5. He was really without progenitors or predecessors in his office; nor would I exclude that mystical sense from the intention of the place, that he was without father as to his human nature, and without mother as to his divine.


6. He was a priest without genealogy, or derivation of his pedigree from the loins of Aaron, or any other that ever was a priest in the world, and moreover, mysteriously, was of a generation which none can declare.


7. He had, in his divine person, as the high priest of the church, neither beginning of days nor end of life, as no such thing is reported of Melchizedek; for the death which he underwent, in the discharge of his office, being not the death of his whole person, but of his human nature only, no interruption of his endless office did ensue thereon. For although the person of the Son of God died, whence God is said to "redeem his church with his own blood, "Ac 20:28; yet he died not in his whole person: but in his divine nature was still alive. Absolutely, therefore, and in respect of his office, he had neither beginning of days nor end of life.


8. He was really the Son of God, as Melchizedek in many circumstances was made like to the Son of God.


9. He alone abideth a priest forever; whereof we must particularly treat afterwards.

Taken from A Treasury of David.