Who was Melchiz'edek?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bwtby
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
B

Bwtby

Guest
Does anybody have any knowledge or teaching of/on him?
We have this as a sure and steadfast anchor of the soul, a hope that enters into the inner shrine behind the curtain, where Jesus has gone as a forerunner on our behalf, having become a high priest for ever after the order of Melchiz’edek.
(Hebrews 6:19-20)
For this Melchiz’edek, king of Salem, priest of the Most High God, met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings and blessed him; and to him Abraham apportioned a tenth part of everything. He is first, by translation of his name, king of righteousness, and then he is also king of Salem, that is, king of peace. He is without father or mother or genealogy, and has neither beginning of days nor end of life, but resembling the Son of God he continues a priest for ever. See how great he is! Abraham the patriarch gave him a tithe of the spoils. And those descendants of Levi who receive the priestly office have a commandment in the law to take tithes from the people, that is, from their brethren, though these also are descended from Abraham. But this man who has not their genealogy received tithes from Abraham and blessed him who had the promises. It is beyond dispute that the inferior is blessed by the superior. Here tithes are received by mortal men; there, by one of whom it is testified that he lives. One might even say that Levi himself, who receives tithes, paid tithes through Abraham, for he was still in the loins of his ancestor when Melchiz’edek met him. Now if perfection had been attainable through the Levit’ical priesthood (for under it the people received the law), what further need would there have been for another priest to arise after the order of Melchiz’edek, rather than one named after the order of Aaron? For when there is a change in the priesthood, there is necessarily a change in the law as well. For the one of whom these things are spoken belonged to another tribe, from which no one has ever served at the altar. For it is evident that our Lord was descended from Judah, and in connection with that tribe Moses said nothing about priests. This becomes even more evident when another priest arises in the likeness of Melchiz’edek, who has become a priest, not according to a legal requirement concerning bodily descent but by the power of an indestructible life. For it is witnessed of him, “Thou art a priest for ever, after the order of Melchiz’edek.” On the one hand, a former commandment is set aside because of its weakness and uselessness (for the law made nothing perfect); on the other hand, a better hope is introduced, through which we draw near to God. And it was not without an oath. Those who formerly became priests took their office without an oath, but this one was addressed with an oath, “The Lord has sworn and will not change his mind, `Thou art a priest for ever.’” This makes Jesus the surety of a better covenant.
(Hebrews 7:1-22)
It was shortly after the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah that Machiventa decided to end his emergency bestowal on Urantia. Melchizedek’s decision to terminate his sojourn in the flesh was influenced by numerous conditions, chief of which was the growing tendency of the surrounding tribes, and even of his immediate associates, to regard him as a demigod, to look upon him as a supernatural being, which indeed he was; but they were beginning to reverence him unduly and with a highly superstitious fear. In addition to these reasons, Melchizedek wanted to leave the scene of his earthly activities a sufficient length of time before Abraham’s death to insure that the truth of the one and only God would become strongly established in the minds of his followers. Accordingly Machiventa retired one night to his tent at Salem, having said good night to his human companions, and when they went to call him in the morning, he was not there, for his fellows had taken him.
The Urantia Book
When I read he was indeed a supernatural being, I assumed maybe an angel? But in Hebrews it says he has neither beginning of days nor end of life… so was he God?!? He resembles a priest forever like Jesus?!

I don’t understand what ‘‘his fellows had taken him’’ means either?

Anybody could help here? This man sounds like Jesus.
 
Does anybody have any knowledge or teaching of/on him?

When I read he was indeed a supernatural being, I assumed maybe an angel? But in Hebrews it says he has neither beginning of days nor end of life… so was he God?!? He resembles a priest forever like Jesus?!

I don’t understand what ‘‘his fellows had taken him’’ means either?

Anybody could help here? This man sounds like Jesus.
Foreshadowing.

Others will explain, but you need to understand that there are other places in the bible where no one but God could be possible.

The firery furnace is symbolic of the trinity.
 
MELCHIZEDEK
A king of Salem and a priest. When Abraham returned from battle after rescuing Lot, Melchizedek greeted him and gave him a blessing in honor of his victory (Genesis 14:18-20). In return Abraham offered him tithes because of his priesthood. In a Psalm devoted to the dual role of priest and king, David exclaimed, “Yahweh has sworn an oath which he never will retract, You are a priest of the order of Melchizedek and forever” (Psalm 110:4). There are only two references to this priest-king in the Old Testament. In the New Testament the Epistle to the Hebrews associates Christ’s priesthood with Melchizedek’s by quoting in three successive chapters the invocation from Psalm 110: “You are a priest of the order of Melchizedek and forever.” This is also the biblical basis for the Catholic doctrine that, once a man is ordained a priest, his priesthood, like Christ’s “in the line of Melchizedek,” is forever (Hebrews 5, 6, 7).
I don’t know why you would quote the The Urantia Book:shrug:
 
I don’t know why you would quote the The Urantia Book:shrug:
Who cares, if anything it makes your job easier to know that upfront. Why be evasive or mocking, just answer the freaking question for the love of truth? To the best of your ability?
 
He was Priest King of Salem (later Jerusalem) in the time of Abraham. He assissted Abraham when his belongings were pilfered by the King of Sodom and gave him a blessing. It was to him that the tithe was initiated.

See Gen. 14.
 
He was Priest King of Salem (later Jerusalem) in the time of Abraham. He assissted Abraham when his belongings were pilfered by the King of Sodom and gave him a blessing. It was to him that the tithe was initiated.

See Gen. 14.
See that? No mocking and lots of information.

Again, this will be the second time I say it today- it may be that many topics make the Eastern Orthodox look very darn good. This is only one of many examples I have seen.
Not that I am trying to look at this as a football game.
 
Who cares, if anything it makes your job easier to know that upfront. Why be evasive or mocking, just answer the freaking question for the love of truth? To the best of your ability?
Thank you! Remarks like…Originally Posted by adrift
I don’t know why you would quote the The Urantia Book… is extremely annoying to read. :crying:
 
Who cares, if anything it makes your job easier to know that upfront. Why be evasive or mocking, just answer the freaking question for the love of truth? To the best of your ability?
I was neither evasive or mocking. I answered the question to the best of my ability. Why did you ignore the definition I provided? Why the attack on me?
Thank you! Remarks like…Originally Posted by adrift
I don’t know why you would quote the The Urantia Book… is extremely annoying to read. :crying:
It is extremely annoying to read comments like yours an attack without substance.
 
Thank you! Remarks like…Originally Posted by adrift
I don’t know why you would quote the The Urantia Book… is extremely annoying to read. :crying:
It is extremely annoying to read comments like yours an attack without substance. I wanted to know why he choose to use this book.
 
A Brief Description of The Urantia Book
The Urantia Book, first published by Urantia Foundation in 1955, claims to have been presented by celestial beings as a revelation to our planet, Urantia.
When I read he was indeed a supernatural being, I assumed maybe an angel? But in Hebrews it says he has neither beginning of days nor end of life… so was he God?!? He resembles a priest forever like Jesus?!
You do not read this in the Bible but a source that is dubious at best.
 
In discussing the following verse
3Without 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.
I remember in a seminary class that the professor and everyone else seemed to believe he was a man. In other words, my fellow fundamentalists did not take the the verse as literally as I did.
However, I did not see anything in the text to** not** believe that he was in some way special. Perhaps an angel. In my research of Judaism, they at the time of the writing of Hebrews believed that he was perhaps an angel as well. Since Paul was writing to an audience with these beliefs, I would take it at face value. Although what exactly he was is not exactly known.
 
Blame Wikipedia.

:rotfl:
.
OKEY DOKEY THEN. This is an interesting subject. I have had some say they believe he was Jesus. I do not. However, for his one appearance in scripture he has such an impact.
The Catholic Encyclopedia has an article on him.
The silence of Scripture about the facts of Melchisedech’s birth and death was part of the divine plan to make him prefigure more strikingly the mysteries of Christ’s generation, the eternity of His priesthood. Abraham, patriarch and father of nations, paid tithes to Melchisedech and received his blessing. This was all the more remarkable since the priest-king was a stranger, to whom he was not bound to pay tithes, as were the children of Israel to the priests of the Aaronic line. Abraham, therefore, and Levi “in the loins of his father” (Heb. vii, 9), by acknowledging his superiority as a type of Christ (for personally he was not greater than Abraham), thereby confessed the excellence of Christ’s priesthood. Neither can it be fairly objected that Christ was in the loins of Abraham as Levi was, and paid tithes to Melchisedech; for, though descended from Abraham, he had no human father, but was conceived by the Holy Ghost. In the history of Melchisedech St. Paul says nothing about the bread and wine which the “priest of the most High” offered, and on account of which his name is placed in the Canon of the Mass. The scope of the Apostle accounts for this; for he wishes to show that the priesthood of Christ was in dignity and duration superior to that of Aaron, and therefore, since it is not what Melchisedech offered, but rather the other circumstances of his priesthood which belonged to the theme, they alone are mentioned.
 
In discussing the following verse

I remember in a seminary class that the professor and everyone else seemed to believe he was a man. In other words, my fellow fundamentalists did not take the the verse as literally as I did.
However, I did not see anything in the text to** not** believe that he was in some way special. Perhaps an angel. In my research of Judaism, they at the time of the writing of Hebrews believed that he was perhaps an angel as well. Since Paul was writing to an audience with these beliefs, I would take it at face value. Although what exactly he was is not exactly known.
You believe it could of been an angel too?

Yeah, I agree with you, I think it seems pretty literal 🤷.
 
Wow, so he was conceived by the Holy Ghost too? Interesting.
I am not sure who you are saying was conceived by the Holy Ghost but the article is referring to Jesus not Melchizedek.
 
One Jewish tradition is that Melchizedek is Shem (Noah’s son).

From the Jewish Encyclopedia:
“The rabbis of later generations, rather antagonistic to the cosmopolitan monotheism of Alexandria, identified Melchizedek with Shem, the ancestor of Abraham …”

jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=383&letter=M
(See the final paragraph titled “Melchizedekites”)
 
^ But that would mean he had a father, Noah.
I am not sure who you are saying was conceived by the Holy Ghost but the article is referring to Jesus not Melchizedek.
My bad.

Now stop proving me illiterate.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top