14Welcome
Prayer
Song
Silence
Okay we left off with Melchizedek entering the scene and we gave those passages a cursory look.
I want to dive in a bit more about this Old Testament figure now, and all that is said about him here and in the Apostolic Record.
We read in Genesis 14:18-20
18 And Melchizedek king of Salem brought forth bread and wine: and he was the priest of the most high God.
19 And he blessed him, and said, Blessed be Abram of the most high God, possessor of heaven and earth:
20 And blessed be the most high God, which hath delivered thine enemies into thy hand. And he gave him tithes of all.
In order to begin to round out who this Melchizedek was we must turn to the Book of Hebrews chapter 7 and read from verse 1 where it says
Genesis 14.18-20
Part I
August 21 2022
Hebrews 7:1 For this Melchisedec, king of Salem, priest of the most high God, who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings, and blessed him;
2 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;
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.
Now, at the end of chapter 6 of Hebrews the writer ended the chapter with the following:
And then we read the first three verses of Hebrews 7, which say:
1 For this Melchisedec, king of Salem, priest of the most high God, who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings, and blessed him;
2 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;
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.
When we read the Old Testament, it is vital to understand the use of “types” throughout many of the stories.
Most of you know that a type is a figure or representation of something to come.
For example, the COI in “Egyptian bondage” was a type for the bondage of sin all people – to some extent – are in until lead out by Christ. So Moses was a type for the Messiah.
The Passover Lamb was a type for the shed blood of Jesus which would save the firstborn sons.
And the Exodus was a type for leaving the world behind. And then there are all sorts of types in their journey in the wilderness
The Pillar of Fire – Jesus
Manna from Heaven – Jesus
Water from the Rock – Jesus
The Flesh Pots – type for sin
The Sacrificial Offerings – Jesus
The Festivals and Feasts -Jesus
The Brazen Serpent – Jesus
Look at the Old Testament Tabernacle.
There were three entrances to it – all typifying of Him. There was a
A gate – Jesus
A door – Jesus
And a veil – Jesus flesh
Inside there were seven Articles of Furniture:
Brazen Altar type of the cross
Laver: Washed clean by Christ
Golden Lamp: Christ is the Light
Table of bread: Jesus bread of life.
Altar of Incense: Jesus our intercessor!
The Mercy Seat
One of my favorite types in the OT represents Jesus as all Man and all God.
What is the type?
The Ark of the Covenant.
In Exodus 25:10-11 we read:
“And they shall make an ark of acacia-wood . . . And you shall overlay it with pure gold. You shall overlay it inside and out, and shall make on it a crown of gold all around.”
Now acacia-wood is gnarled and thorny, representing man.
And gold was pure and costly, representing God.
The Ark was wood. The Ark was Gold
Jesus was Man. Jesus was God with us.
Contents of the Ark? Manna, The Law, Aaron’s Blossoming Rod – and we will get to all of these types as we move on. Now back to Melchizedek?
He was another TYPE of Jesus Christ, not of a priesthood to be handed down like the Levitical priesthood – there is no mention of any Melchizedek priesthood, just a figure named Melchizedek who was such an imposing high priest that even Abraham, the father of our faith, paid him respect and homage and what are called, tithes.
He was a powerful and mysterious High Priest and when fulfilled in Christ He is shown to be a high priest forever and ever.
Now, prior to Sinai, the patriarchs (or fathers of each family) were the established priests of the land. Then at Sinai, God established a priesthood based on the heritage of Aaron.
Melchizedek was a great high priest prior to the establishment of the priesthood based on heritage.
So, when we combine the fact that
1) Melchizedek was a high priest prior to the establishment of the Levitical priesthood . . .
AND
That what he was a figure for our final high priest Jesus Christ . . .
. . . we can then begin to understand what Melchizedek was biblically.
Admittedly, many Christians believe he was an actual man. There are Jewish Rabbins who think he was possibly Shem, who was the son of Noah. But real or not, the writer of Hebrews makes it clear that he was a type of Jesus Christ.
Then, let’s look closely at his name
“Melchizedek . . .”
As stated Melchizedek’s name in Hebrew is
“Malki – tsedek,” and it clearly means “my righteous king”, or “king of righteousness.”
We might assume that he bore this name due to the fact that He had a pure and righteous administration of his government.
Obviously, this is yet another characteristic of the Lord – actually, a characteristic which can only be applied to Him only, as he alone is essentially the only righteous Potentate.
As a type of Christ, we know that the type must be righteous. In Melchizedek’s case, even His name speaks to this.
Then we know that He is called (first in Genesis) “. . . king of Salem . . .”
Where was Salem? Massachussets? No.
We know that it was Jeru”salem?”
Psalms 76:1,2: “In Judah is God known; his name is great in Israel. In SALEM also is his tabernacle, and his dwelling place in Zion.”
“Shalam” signifies, “to make whole, complete, or perfect, to bring peace.”
Christ is called the Prince of peace, because, by his incarnation, sacrifice, and mediation, he procures and establishes peace between God and man.
Remember . . .???
“Peace on earth good will toward men!”
The Lords residence is peace and quietness and assurance for ever, in every believing upright heart.
He governs as the Prince and Priest of the most high God, ruling in righteousness, mighty to save; and he ever lived to make intercession for His bride, and to save to the uttermost all who come unto the Father by faith in him.
Extrapolated out, there is truly only one KING of SALEM – Jesus. If Melchizedek was a real man, we would, in my opinion, have to say that there have been two.
And what does scripture say Melchizedek brought to Abraham?
“Bread and wine!”
The very same elements Jesus established communion upon in the upper room.
Think of it so far.
Melchizedek, a name that means “king of righteousness,” whose reigned over a kingdom known as peace, brought bread and wine, the elements of communion in anticipation of the sacrifice of the Lamb, as refreshment to Abraham after a battle made victorious by the True and Living God!
Are you seeing the type?
Then let look at Melchizedek’s office –
We know he was a king of righteousness, but He was also
“a priest of the most high God.”
The word “Nhk” or “cohen,” signifies an office of both “prince” and “priest” because the patriarchs sustained such a double office at this time in the world.
Cohen has its root in the Arabic word, “kahana” which signifies “to approach, draw near, have intimate access to; and from hence to officiate as priest before God, and thus have intimate access to the Divine presence.”
Melchizedek, being a priest of the most high God, predated and typified Christ in his priestly duties of approaching the throne of God on our behalf, and of “entering into the Divine Presence.”
What other evidences point to Melchizedek and how can we decide if this Old Testament person was actual or someone heavenly making a visit?
Let’s sort of skim over Hebrews 7 – and let’s actually read verses 1-4 again, which say:
1 For this Melchizedek, king of Salem and priest of the Most High God, met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings and blessed him.
2 To him Abraham also gave a tenth of all. He was first by interpretation king of righteousness, and after that also king of Salem, which is king of peace.
So, in addition to all we have talked about even Abraham paid tithes to Melchizedek!
What is the purpose of this? Abram is certainly at the top of the heap in authority among the Jews, isn’t he?
Absolutely. Remember how the Jews regarded Abraham at the time of Jesus?
When John the Baptist preached repentance to the Jews, they would say to him
“We have Abraham for our father.”
And remember what Jesus said to them about Abraham
“Verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.”
This all speaks to the fact that when Abraham paid tithes to Melchizedek it was an indication that Jesus’ position of authority and power were far above even Father Abraham. You get it?
Then, verse three in Hebrews 7 says, speaking of Melchizedek, that he was
3 without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days nor end of life, but made like the Son of God, he remains a priest continually.
Now, we’ve really gotta get real here . . . about this character Melchizedek as a type of Jesus.
Where Jesus had a Father (God) did the pre-incarnate Word of God have a Father?
No! There was not father of the Word – the Word had no father, nor mother!
How could a man in the 14th chapter of Genesis not have a father or mother? It’s impossible if he was actual and real, right?
And then the writer says (in the King James) that He was without descent.
The Greek word for “without Descent” is “agenealogetos.”
Genealogetos means with a record of birth or beginnings. Agenealogetos means without any record or descent.
This also is true of the Word – who was not created nor had a beginning like all other men.
But how can this description be assigned to a man named Melchizedek? Are you beginning to wonder if this being was even human?
Additionally, we read that Melchizedek was not only without father or mother or genealogy but that . . .
“having neither beginning of days nor end of life, but made like the Son of God, he remains a priest continually.”
David gives us some insight into Melchizedek when he writes:
Psalm 110:4 The LORD hath sworn,
and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek.
Where other priests (of the Levitical order were merely high priests while alive) Christ would perform His sacerdotal duties beyond this life and into the ages.
Later on in this chapter in Hebrews, the connection between the figure Melchizedek and Jesus is made more clear in relation to their priestly duties as we will read beginning at verse 22 which says:
22 By so much was Jesus made a surety of a better testament.
23 And there truly were many priests, because they were not suffered to continue by reason of death:
24 But this man (Jesus), because he continueth ever, hath an unchangeable priesthood.
25 Wherefore he is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them.
26 For such an high priest came to us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens;
27 Who needeth not daily, as those first high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people’s: for this he did once, when he offered up himself.
Okay. So there are some biblical thoughts on this mysterious character names Melchizedek.
Let’s hit on what chapter seven is all about – sort of as a deeper preface to our study.
In Hebrews chapter five (verses 10-11) the writer first mentions the name of Melchizedek, and said “that Christ was made an high priest after the same order as this figure” but also says at that point in the epistle that there was a lot he could write about concerning him but that the readers were in a state of mind that they wouldn’t be able to understand it.
From there, he sort of rebukes them for their lack of progress in obtaining “Christian knowledge,” and in remaining milk drinkers of the word and not eaters of meat.
Then in chapter six exhorts them to go on and make advancements in the acquisition of knowledge because this would aid them in turning to apostasy.
Well, it appears that after having laid all of these observations on them that he is ready to get back to the subject of
Melchizedek and to begin to discuss him.
And I would suggest that like he has done with angels, and prophets, and the Law, and even the Hebrew way of life, the writer of Hebrews object is to show that Jesus is a better (or superior) High Priest that the Jewish High Priest – and he does this by likening Him to Melchizedek.
He does this by showing that the whole Jewish priesthood and community (which sprouted from Abraham) even bowed (so to speak – paid tribute) to this Melchizedek.
If Christ was of the order of Melchizedek, as was prophesied by David He is therefore superior to the Jewish priesthood.
Hear that clearly.
If Christ was of the order of Melchizedek, as was prophesied by David He is therefore superior to the Jewish priesthood.
So first we see that the writer describes Melchizedek as a person or being.
Then he reminds us of his history and interaction with Abraham, then he explains that it is impossible for “perfection” to rise out of the rites and rituals of the Levitical priesthood . . . and that a priesthood that represented a perfect state (and was held only by one – the author and finisher of the faith) must be superior to what they had as Jews.
Therefore, the writer argues, there must be a change of administration to accomplish God’s will among men. A change that would take a priesthood of genealogies and priests that were continually making animal and therefore blood sacrifices to appease God to a priesthood that is NOT transferable, a priesthood held only by one (Jesus Christ) after the order of this mysterious Old Testament character all Jews were familiar with.
Then the writer proves the superiority of Christ and His High Priest position to the former priesthood of men, and the last argument presented is that under the Levitical priesthood the high priest had to offer sacrifice for his own sin but this high priest (Christ) was holy, harmless, and undefiled and that He had no need to offer sacrifices for his own sins, and therefore, in this respect there was a vast superiority of the Christian High Priest over the Jewish.
So, let’s reread at verse one through chapter seven.
Hebrews 7:1 For this Melchisedec, king of Salem, priest of the most high God, who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings, and blessed him;
In this very first line of verse one we are provided with three major insights into this being:
His Name
His Kingship over Salem
And His priesthood
Let’s return to his name for a second as repetition is the mother of memory.
Recall that his name is literally a compound of two Hebrew terms and LITERALLY takes these two words:
“king and righteousness”
And combines them together into one – Melchizedek. Isn’t that amazing! People think this Bible is fiction but the thread of continuity are relentless and perfect. Praise God.
In any case, names, as we know, were at times given in the Bible on account of the quality or characteristic of the man in question.
Again, whether he existed or not is not the question. Of course, he existed – but in my opinion it is clear who He was – a pre-incarnate Christophany of the Messiah to come. To me the person Melchizedek is a proof of the pre-incarnate Christ to come.
Again, the Jews typically think he was Shem, and Josephus suggested that he was a Canaanitish prince; a personage eminently endowed by God, and who acted as the priest of his people.
We might all be wrong – so I suppose the parallels between this Old Testament character and Jesus are the important part to consider. Not a hill folks, not a hill, but something to consider.
The writer also notes that he was King of Salem. As we have noted, the Hebrew word Salem means, peace.
Because of the name Jeru”salem” is it accepted by most that He was King over that amazing vicinity – which was NOT known as Jerusalem at that time.
How did Jerusalem get its name?
Before it was called Jerusalem the land (known only as Salem) was inhabited by a people called the Jebusites.
The Jebu was over time morphed into JERU! Add Salem to it and you get “Jeru-SALEM.”
Geographically, when we take the “slaughter of kings” that Abraham was involved in to retrieve the booty and Lot who was taken captive, he would have passed through Salem on his return.
Not by mistake, I might add. And then, “priest of the most-high God.”
Now, the main duty of a priest in the Old Testament was to offer sacrifice.
And as we stated this duty was probably first performed by the father of the family, (we can read about this in Job 1:5, Genesis 8:20, and Genesis 22:2) and then once the father died or fell from his place due to sin the duty transferred to the eldest son. Have you ever heard that a man is king of his castle?
Well, back in the day if a man was the priest offering sacrifice for his family he was typically thought of as a king too.
In some ways that model applies to good fathers today, where they ought to serve their family as Christ – sacrificing for them and leading them in righteousness.
(But that is a whole other subject but the principle ought not be lost on believers today – in my humble estimation).
In any case, it was not a remarkable thing for Melchizedek, “King of Salem,” to also be called “a priest.”
It is also noteworthy that all the way back to Genesis, prior to Abraham, notions of God were present among peoples outside of Abraham, which we have seen evidence of in our short sojourn through the Old Testament.
Finally, here in the first verse, the author describes an action this Melchizedec takes, saying
“who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings, and blessed him . . .”
Now, we can see this in a number of ways. First, in the cultural and physical.
Abraham had gone to war against oppressive forces and overwhelmed them.
Out of respect and in harmony in a culture that places a lot of value on hospitality, Abraham could have been greeted by Melchizedek simply out of gratitude and the need to be hospitable since he was passing through, Salem.
Additionally, the fact that he provided Abraham with bread and wine COULD have simply just been what was customary.
I mean serving bread and wine is almost proverbial in biblical times. And I say this because this is how most biblical pragmatists see this exchange. Admittedly, I am a bit more mystical in my thinking.
I believe firmly that the living God, being the great creator, infuses through his dealings with human kind meaning, threading through history connections of the past to the present.
Admittedly, this perspective can be abused and has the potential to really get out of hand, so I could be wrong, but I see in this offering a type of the Messiah to come who would offer Himself up as the bread of life by shedding His own sacred blood for the world.
Certainly, if Melchizedek was a human being, the bread and wine could have been seen as commonplace in that day, but I still maintain it pictured the bread of life shedding His blood in the future and works as a type for us today.
Something to consider.
Finally, we have a picture of Melchizedek meeting Abraham and both refreshing him (with bread and wine) and then “blessing him.”
How did he do this? Through words.
What was the occasion? Abraham, according to verse one, was returning from
“the slaughter of the kings.”
From what I could tell, there were four:
Amraphel, king of Shiner
Arioch, king of Ellasar
Chedorlaomer, king of Elam,
Tidal, king of nations
These guys were marauders who had invaded the valley where Sodom and Gommorah were located, took the wealth (along with Lot and his family) and Abraham pursued them beyond Dan, into Damascus, and after smiting them, returned with all the spoils that were taken.
I find it also significant, as a type, that this forerunner of the Messiah was the one who appeared and rewarded Abraham for His service – for resisting these invaders who plummeted the valley, and in so doing freed the land of fear and apprehension of future invasions, and bringing back all the treasure to its rightful owners.
To me the picture is obvious.
The true King of Righteousness, and Prince of Peace, will likewise meet and refresh and nourish all “people of faith” represented by Abraham who also seek to set people free from marauding bands of earthly kings that prey upon the weak and unsuspecting.
This picture or type must certainly be seen in spiritual terms in this day and age of Christianity, not one where Christians take up physical arms to slaughter the invading Kings of this world as a means to overcome them.
This is supported by the fact that it was the father of faith who waged the slaughter in this picture, and not a “father of the flesh.”
We’ve already talked about verse one (and actually verses 2-3) but there is one line (in verse 2) that launches us into this discussion on tithes that Abraham paid to Melchizedek. It says:
2 To whom also Abraham gave a tenth part of all . . .
This is referring to one tenth of all the spoils which Abraham had taken from the various marauding Kings.
When a person pays a tithe to another there is an implied hierarchy present.
We are not sure the intent of Abraham in paying this tithe. Certainly, it could have been because he recognized how holy and righteous Melchizedek was relative to his own person (which also leads me to believe Abraham knew Melchizedek was a truly holy apparition rather than an actual man) OR Abraham could have paid the tithe to Melchizedek as a symbol of gratitude to God for having been delivered (which would mean Melchizedek could have then been a regular old flesh and blood person).
But here is the big point of the act people use today as many Christian apologists and pastors say the following (rather conveniently, I might add):
Giving a tenth part (tithe) of income or increase or apparently of booty recollected from robbers existed well BEFORE the establishment of the Law (remember, Moses didn’t go to Sinai and receive the Law for another 600 or so years if my math is right.
The thinking or argument is then that since giving tithe was established prior to the Law, then it is a practice that ought to be maintained today – because it is NOT part of the Law – it is part of how God works.
This is the same argument some people use for the Sabbath day – that it was instituted by God at the creation and therefore should still be observed today!
Using this argument Pastors feel vindicated of heaping the word tithe on people as a means to bind them to at least pay 10% of their increase to the church.
And let me tell you right now, if you can get 90% of people to cough up ten percent of their income to your church it works out wonderfully when compared to 10% of the people giving one half a percent of theirs.
Since this was prior to the establishment of the law proponents of “the tithe” believe that devoting a tenth part to God is like a universal truth, tied to sacrifice and other pre-law practices.
Obviously, they will say, “some kind of practice or custom caused Abraham to demonstrate this kind of generous giving and obviously, ten percent did NOT just pop up out of nowhere.
So, before we go on and learn the point the writer is making let’s examine the idea of tithe, and more particularly, this (pre-law) example of it existing some 600 plus years before the Law.
Are believers – Christians – expected by God to pay ten percent of their annual income in order to be worthy enough to be called “the people of God?”
We will cover this line next week.
Questions/Comments
Prayer
