Quote:Previous topic somebody brought up Melchizdek.


Here is what we know about him from the Bible:


We see in Gen 14 the following:


<b>18 Then Melchizedek king of Salem brought out bread and wine; he was the priest of God Most High. 19 And he blessed him and said: </b>


“ Blessed be Abram of God Most High,


Possessor of heaven and earth;


20 And blessed be God Most High,


Who has delivered your enemies into your hand.”


And he gave him a tithe of all.


We are introduced to Melchizedek. His name literally means, "king of righteousness". The introduction of him emphasizes that he was a king as a well as a priest. This mirrors the nature of Christ very closely as Christ is also a king and our high priest. The fact that Melchizek blessed Abram made the writer of Hebrews indicate that he was greater than Abraham.


Hebrews 7, the other place where we get a glimpse of Melchizedek says the following:


<b> 1 For this Melchizedek, 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 translated “king of righteousness,” and then also king of Salem, meaning “king of peace,” 3 without father, without mother, without genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life, but made like the Son of God, remains a priest continually.</b>


4 Now consider how great this man was, to whom even the patriarch Abraham gave a tenth of the spoils. 5 And indeed those who are of the sons of Levi, who receive the priesthood, have a commandment to receive tithes from the people according to the law, that is, from their brethren, though they have come from the loins of Abraham; 6 but he whose genealogy is not derived from them received tithes from Abraham and blessed him who had the promises. 7 Now beyond all contradiction the lesser is blessed by the better. 8 Here mortal men receive tithes, but there he receives them, of whom it is witnessed that he lives. 9 Even Levi, who receives tithes, paid tithes through Abraham, so to speak, 10 for he was still in the loins of his father when Melchizedek met him.


11 Therefore, 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? 12 For the priesthood being changed, of necessity there is also a change of the law. 13 For He of whom these things are spoken belongs to another tribe, from which no man has officiated at the altar.


14 For it is evident that our Lord arose from Judah, of which tribe Moses spoke nothing concerning priesthood.[a] 15 And it is yet far more evident if, in the likeness of Melchizedek, there arises another priest 16 who has come, not according to the law of a fleshly commandment, but according to the power of an endless life. 17 For He testifies:


The belief that Melchizedek was like Christ rests on three erroneous assumptions about Hebrews 7:3.


The first is the argument that since Melchizedek is said to be without father, mother, and genealogy, he has to be eternal and therefore the Son of God. However, many have failed to see that the author does not use the terms "without father" (apatoor), "without mother" (ametoor), and "without genealogy" (agenealogetos) literally in this passage.


The concept presented by the author is not that Melchizedek lacked an actual father, mother, or family tree, but that there is no record of his parents and lineage. The Mosaic law required that all priests be descendants of the tribe of Levi. Those who were not Levites could not be priests under the law. Melchizedek is introduced in Genesis 14:18-20 as priest of the Most High God, but no details are given about him. Under the law, he was not qualified to be a priest.


<strong> “ You are a priest forever</strong>

<strong>
According to the order of Melchizedek.”</strong>

<strong>
Nehemiah 7:61-64 shows that priests had to be able to trace their lineage when the priesthood was reestablished after the Babylonian captivity. Those who were unable to do so were disqualified from the priesthood</strong>

<strong>
</strong><b><strong>NEHEMIAH 7:61 And these were the ones who came up from Tel Melah, Tel Harsha, Cherub, Addon, and Immer, but they could not identify their father's house nor their lineage, whether they were of Israel: 62 the sons of Delaiah, the sons of Tobiah, the sons of Nekoda, six hundred and forty-two; 63 and of the priests: the sons of Habaiah, the sons of Koz, the sons of Barzillai, who took a wife of the daughters of Barzillai the Gileadite, and was called by their name. 64 These sought their listing among those who were registered by genealogy, but it was not found; therefore they were excluded from the priesthood as defiled. </strong></b><strong> </strong>

<strong>
The second mistaken assumption is that Melchizedek had no beginning or end, and therefore must be the immortal Son of God. The term "beginning of days and end of life" refers to the lack of information in the Scriptures regarding his origin or demise. The Abingdon Bible Commentary says that in Hebrews 7:3, the author "makes a very remarkable use of the argument from silence. Nothing is said in Genesis about the parentage of Melchizedek. We are not told anything about his father or his mother. There is no reference to the beginning of his life or to its end - to his birth or to his death . . . In view of the writer the silences of Scripture are as significant as its statements . . ." </strong>

<strong>
The third erroneous assumption is that Melchizedek continues as a priest to this day. One might conclude from the statement "Melchizedek remains a priest continually" that he is still alive and holding the office of priest. Again, this is not the point the author of Hebrews is trying to make. In effect, he is using the argument from silence to say that "since the Bible is silent about the death of Melchizedek, we can figuratively contend that he is alive and remains in the office of priest." In this way he is an appropriate type of the priesthood of the Jesus Christ. </strong>

<strong>
It's plain from the original Greek text, from an understanding of rabbinical forms of argument, and from what the Bible reveals elsewhere, that Melchizedek was not Christ before his human birth. Melchizedek was a historical figure, the priest of Almighty God who lived in the days of Abraham. Very little is known about him other than the fact he was the priest-king of Salem (Jerusalem). Obviously he was named to the office of priest by God and not by the requirements of the law. Therefore, he is a fitting type of the spiritual priesthood of Christ.</strong>

<strong>
</strong><strong>link to note</strong>

<strong>
</strong>

Quote:Seriously?


If you have red Hebrews 7:3 by yourself, will you come up with this 'impossible' interpretation?


If the author of this article is claiming that there was <b>no details are given about him
</b>, then why we don’t use the Catholic Bible which does say exactly the same in simple plain English i.3 <b>NO DETAILS GIVEN ABOUT HIM</b>.. So you are saying in other words that the Catholic Bible is more accurate than any other version, Or else the above interpretation is based on just imagination to suite people’s desire.


how is it be possible for the author of the Bible to declare that this person have no beginning of days nor end of life, and at the same time you are telling me <b>'No the author of the Bible does not really mean what he says but he meant something else </b>' which is really impossible.


Anyway, thanks for your research about this subject, but it is totally far from what was written or meant by the author of the Bible.


Salam


Wael.

Quote:OK so who do YOU think Melchizedek was?

Quote:Bismillah:


<b>I
</b> don’t know who he was CC, but the Bible attributed to him the quality of God Almighty, who else CC <b>does not have beginning of days nor end of life</b>? <b>ONLY GOD
, </b> yet the Bible said <b>NO</b> there is someone else processes these same qualities. And that is <b>Melchizedek</b>.


So it is either the Bible <b>contains grave error </b> or Melchizedek is<b> another name for God Almighty according to the Bible</b> “which is doubtful of course because Hebrews 7 says that he is considered to be the priest of the most high God” then <b>how can God be the priest of God. its confusing.</b>


So I agree with the first option. i.e <b>the Bible does contain grave error</b>.



Salam


Wael.

Quote:Have you read the book of Hebrew's as a whole? :unsure:

Quote:Bismillah:


Just try to tell me what is the point you are trying to make... I already told you that am student of comparative religion and I’ve read the whole Bible. BIBLES I mean.


Salam


Wael.

Quote:The writer of Hebrews continually makes mention of the superiority of Christ in both His personage and in His ministering work. In the writings of the Old Testament, we understand the rituals and ceremonies of Judaism symbolically pointed to the coming of Messiah--in other words, the rites of Judaism were but shadows of things to come. Hebrews tells us that Christ Jesus is better than anything mere religion has to offer. All the pomp and circumstance of religion pales in comparison to the person, work, and ministry of Christ Jesus. It is the superiority of our Lord Jesus, then, that remains the theme of this eloquently written letter.

Quote:Then you could agree that the theme of the Book of Hebrews could be summarized with the following:


I think my explanation is very clear given the context of the letter.


Hebrews 1 says the follwing:


<b>1 God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, 2 has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the worlds; 3 who being the brightness of His glory and the express image of His person, and upholding all things by the word of His power, when He had by Himself[a] purged our sins, sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, 4 having become so much better than the angels, as He has by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.</b>


You can see that my explanation makes plain sense given the introduction to the letter of Hebrews provided by the auther above.


That is all.