The Order Of Melchizedek
In Genesis 14 this man appeared to Abram, blessed him, received a tithe in return, and then disappeared again. Though he made just a brief appearance, we shall find that he is an important individual in the Bible narrative. He is only mentioned in the Old Testament twice, but nine times in the New Testament.Who Is Melchizedek?
Hebrews 7:1-3 calls Melchizedek the
...king of Salem, priest of the Most High God...
The writer translates "king of Salam" as,
"king of righteousness," and then also ... "king of peace."
Many have speculated on who Melchizedek is. Wesley rightly notes,
The Rabbins say, that Melchizedek was Shem the son of Noah... Many Christian writers have thought that this was an appearance of the Son of God himself, our Lord Jesus... But as nothing is expressly revealed concerning it, we can determine nothing.
It is intriguing to read that Melchizedek was
...without father, without mother, without genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life, but made like the Son of God...
A Type Of Christ
Though we can't know for certain who Melchizedek was, we know that he is presented as a type of Christ. He is:
- the king of righteousness. No one exceeds Jesus' righteousness;
- the king of peace. We can have peace with God because of Jesus;
- of unknown ancestry. Jesus was not born of man & woman, but of the Holy Spirit;
- contrasted with mortal men. Though in a body of flesh, Jesus was not a mere mortal;
- said to be alive. At the tomb, an angel stated of Jesus, "He is alive!" Indeed, He lives!
“...he is presented as a type of Christ.”
That the link between Melchizedek and Jesus exists can be affirmed by Psalm 110:4, the only other mention of him in the Old Testament.
The LORD has sworn and will not relent, 'You are a priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek.'
This being a messianic Psalm, we can know that it was Jesus who would be called in the order of Melchizedek. Over half the New Testament texts mentioning him quote this text.
Why Is He Important?
So, there are some real neat things mentioned about Melchizedek, but why is it important for us to study about him and the "order of Melchizedek"?
Do not miss the significant exchange between Abraham, the father of the nation Israel and of all the faithful, and this Melchizedek. Abraham received a blessing, and Melchizedek received a tithe in return. Hebrews points out,
...beyond all contradiction the lesser is blessed by the better. (Hebrews 7:7)
As great as Abraham was, here was one who was greater. If the patriarch failed in greatness to this man, then the priesthood which came from his loins would fail next to the One who came in the order of Melchizedek.
The Levitical priests received tithes through their lifetime, but they were subject to death. They were mortal men who received tithes for a time (Hebrews 7:8), but the Lord, being of the Melchizedek order did not come
...according to the law of a fleshly commandment, but according to the power of an endless life. (Hebrews 7:16)
Having shown that the order of Melchizedek exceeds that of Aaron, the writer asks,
...if perfection were through the Levitical priesthood (for under it the people received the law), what further need was there that another priest should rise according to the order of Melchizedek, and not be called according to the order of Aaron? (Hebrews 7:11)
His coming in the order of Melchizedek required a change of law. Moses' law no longer governs, but now the gospel of Christ. With this better priesthood, there comes a better law, with better promises and a better hope (Hebrews 7:19)!
Article Navigation:
Answering The Atheist
Complaint:
When did Saul meet David? Was it before David slew the giant (1 Samuel 6:21-23) or was it after David slew the giant (1 Samuel 17:55-58)? Is there a contradiction?
Response:
The questioner has assumed that all the details given in the history of Israel are given chronologically. If this were true, then we'd have a discrepancy here, but that is not the case.
For the most part, the books of Samuel, Kings, and Chronicles are written chronologically, but it must be acknowledged that some sections are topical. We especially see this in the time of the divided kingdom. At times, the writer follows the history of one nation, and then gives the info for the other nation after.
Starting in 1 Samuel 13 we see the beginning of the end of Saul's reign. He made poor decision after poor decision, the eventual end being the loss of the kingdom. In telling of his fall, the writer goes on to tell us how Saul soothed himself when his spirit was troubled - hearing David play his harp. It is a topical inclusion, not chronological.
As the texts show, at the end of 1 Samuel 17 Saul did not know who David was. At the end of 1 Samuel, he does. He didn't forget, it's not a mistake - it's a matter of how it's recorded.
There is no contradiction.
This article is in response to Skeptics Annotated Bible.