The Mystery of Melchizedek
Melchizedek, whose name means “king of righteousness,” was a king of Salem and priest of the Most High God (Genesis 14:18–20; Psalm 110:4; Hebrews 5:6–11, 20; Hebrew 7:1-28). Melchizedek’s sudden appearance and disappearance in the book of Genesis is somewhat mysterious.
For this, various opinions have been expressed concerning Melchizedek; some have thought him to be more than a man; some, that he was an angel; others, that he was the Holy Ghost; and others, that he was a divine person superior to Christ; others have supposed that he was the Son of God himself: but he is expressly said to be like unto him, and Christ is said to be of his order; which manifestly distinguish the one from the other; so who was Melchizedek?
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, who hath delivered thine enemies into thy hand.” And he gave him tithes of all. Genesis 14:18–20
Melchizedek and Abraham first met after Abraham’s defeat of Chedorlaomer and his three allies. Melchizedek presented bread and wine to Abraham and his weary men, demonstrating friendship. He bestowed a blessing on Abraham in the name of El Elyon (“God Most High”) and praised God for giving Abraham a victory in battle (Genesis 14:18–20).
Abraham presented Melchizedek with a tithe (a tenth) of all the items he had conquered. By this act Abraham indicated that he recognized Melchizedek as a priest who ranked higher spiritually than he. But who was Melchizedek?
Psalm 110:4
4 The Lord hath sworn and will not repent: “Thou art a priest for ever, after the order of Melchizedek” Psalm 110:4
In Psalm 110, a Messianic Psalm written by David (Matthew 22:43), Jesus, being the Son of God, was presented as coming “after the order of Melchizedek.” If Christ was a priest after the order of Melchizedek, then Christ wasn’t Melchizedek, so they are two separate beings. Was Melchizedek another divine being? No, that couldn’t be, the Divine Beings are only the Father and Son; so who was Melchizedek?
Hebrews 7:1-28
1 For this Melchizedek, king of Salem, priest of the Most High God, met Abraham, who was returning from the slaughter of the kings, and blessed him. — this seems to be reinstating Genesis 14:18–20; where Melchizedec met Abraham when returning from the rescue of Lot;
— Jewish authorities, Josephus and the earliest of the Targums, say Melchizedek was Shem, son of Noah, who lived 600 years; this name occurs in the Bible only in Genesis 14, Psalm 110:4, and in this Hebrew. Nothing else is certainly known of him;
— excerpts from Genesis 11:10-27— Shem was a hundred years old, and begot Arpachshad two years after the flood. … Arpachshad lived five and thirty years, and begot Shelah. … Shelah lived thirty years, and begot Eber. … Eber lived four and thirty years, and begot Peleg. … Peleg lived thirty years, and begot Reu. … Reu lived two and thirty years, and begot Serug. ‘… Serug lived thirty years, and begot Nahor. … Nahor lived nine and twenty years, and begot Terah. … Terah lived seventy years, and begot Abram — Shem100 + Arpachshad35 + Shelah30 + Eber34 + Peleg30 + Reu32 + Serug30 + Nahor29 + Terah70 = 390; and since Abraham lived 175 before he died, hence Shem outlived Abraham by about 210 years!
— if the Masoretic numbers are correct then Jewish authorities that Melchizedek was Shem, who was also king of Salem could have a possibility; but the Q. is why was he there, and how was he made a priest?
— from the Septuagint — Shem100 + Arpachshad135 + Cainan130 + Shelah130 + Eber134 + Peleg130 + Reu132 + Serug130 + Nahor129 + Terah70 = 1220; a difference of 828 years! So this is a mystery! Who is right; surprisingly the Targum agrees with the Masoretic Text! But the Septuagint largely agrees with the Samaritan Pentateuch!
— the Samaritan Pentateuch — Shem100 + Arpaxad135 + Salah130 + Eber134 + Peleg130 + Reu132 + Serug130 + Nahor79 + Terah70 = 1038; a difference of 646 years!
2 To him also Abraham gave a tenth part of all, Melchizedek first being by interpretation “king of righteousness,” and after that also king of Salem, which means “king of peace.” — “a tenth” generally means a tithe in the Levitical sense, but it may not be; it could even mean a portion of the the booty taken, so we need to have our option what it means;
— a tithe in the Levitical sense always comes from crops and animals increase; never from booty taken.
3 Without father, without mother and without descent, having neither beginning of days nor end of life, but made like unto the Son of God, he abideth a priest continually. — if Melchizedek was “without father, without mother and without descent,” then this description doesn’t fit Shem, since his father was Noah, and his children, Elam and Asshur, and Arphaxad and Lud and Aram (Genesis 10:22); hence the mystery remains!
— “made like unto the Son of God” so this is close to or another “Son of God” as if Jesus has a brother? If so where is the proof? (More at the end)
4 Now consider how great this man was, unto whom even the patriarch Abraham gave a tenth of the spoils. — as stated above “a tenth” generally means a tithe in the Levitical sense, but it may not be; it could even mean a portion of the the booty taken, so it does’t prove anything;
5 And verily, those who are of the sons of Levi, who receive the office of the priesthood, have a commandment to take tithes from the people according to the law — that is, from their brethren — though they come out of the loins of Abraham. — these have a commandment to take tithes of the people according to the law; Numbers 18:20, these they took of all the people of Israel in the rest of the tribes, by the commandment of God, on account of their service in the tabernacle; and because they had no inheritance in the land; and to show that the Israelites held their land of God himself.
6 But Melchizedek, whose descent is not counted from them, received tithes from Abraham and blessed him that had the promises.
7 And beyond all contradiction, the lesser is blessed by the greater. — the conclusion, that Melchizedek in this act appears as Abraham’s superior, so who was he?
8 And here men who die receive tithes; but there he receiveth them, of whom it is witnessed that he liveth.
PHILLIPS Now notice the greatness of this man. Even Abraham the patriarch pays him a tribute of a tenth part of the spoils. Further, we know that, according to the Law, the descendants of Levi who accept the office of priest have the right to demand a “tenth” from the people, that is from their brothers, despite the fact that the latter are descendants of Abraham. But here we have one who is quite independent of Levitic ancestry taking a “tenth” from Abraham, and giving a blessing to Abraham, the holder of God’s promises! And no one can deny that the receiver of a blessing is inferior to the one who gives it. Again, in the one case it is mortal men who receive the “tenths”, and in the other is one who, we are assured, is alive. One might say that even Levi, the proper receiver of “tenths”, has paid his tenth to this man, for in a sense he already existed in the body of his father Abraham when Melchizedek met him.
9 And, as I may so say, Levi also, who receiveth tithes, paid tithes through Abraham,
10 for he was yet in the loins of his father when Melchizedek met Abraham.
MSG You realize just how great Melchizedek is when you see that Father Abraham gave him a tenth of the captured treasure. Priests descended from Levi are commanded by law to collect tithes from the people, even though they are all more or less equals, priests and people, having a common father in Abraham. But this man, a complete outsider, collected tithes from Abraham and blessed him, the one to whom the promises had been given. In acts of blessing, the lesser is blessed by the greater.
11 If therefore 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, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.
13 For He of whom these things are spoken pertaineth to another tribe, of which no man gave attendance at the altar.
PHILLIPS We may go further. If it be possible to bring men to spiritual maturity through the Levitical priestly system (for that is the system under which the people were given the Law), why does the necessity arise for another priest to make his appearance after the order of Melchizedek, instead of following the normal priestly calling of Aaron? For if there is a transference of priestly powers, there will necessarily follow an alteration of the Law regarding priesthood. He who is described as our High Priest belongs to another tribe, no member of which had ever attended the altar! For it is a matter of history that our Lord was a descendant of Judah, and Moses made no mention of priesthood in connection with that tribe.
14 For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Judah, of which tribe Moses spoke nothing concerning priesthood.
15 And this is yet far more evident when there ariseth another priest according to the similitude of Melchizedek,
16 who is made not according to the law of a carnal commandment, but according to the power of an endless life.
MSG If the priesthood of Levi and Aaron, which provided the framework for the giving of the law, could really make people perfect, there wouldn’t have been need for a new priesthood like that of Melchizedek. But since it didn’t get the job done, there was a change of priesthood, which brought with it a radical new kind of law. There is no way of understanding this in terms of the old Levitical priesthood, which is why there is nothing in Jesus’ family tree connecting him with that priestly line.
17 For He testifieth: “Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek.”
18 For there is verily an annulling of the former commandment because of the weakness and unprofitableness thereof. — the law being obsolete? If so, Jesus never teach this for he said, “Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law: judgment, mercy, and faith. These ought ye to have done and not to leave the other undone.” Matthew 23:23
19 For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did, by which we draw nigh unto God. — the Levitical, ceremonial law. It did not produce a perfect state; it did not do what was desirable to be done for a sinner; but like the Passover it was a foreshadow of things to come; it was to forshadow Christ’s death and sacrifice;
— or like Yum Kippur, the day of Atonement, where Christ’s blood was offered before the Father as an atonement for sin; again, it was a foreshadowing.
20 And inasmuch as it was not without an oath that He was made priest
MSG The old priesthood of Aaron perpetuated itself automatically, father to son, without explicit confirmation by God. But then God intervened and called this new, permanent priesthood into being with an added promise: God gave his word; he won’t take it back: “You’re the permanent priest.” This makes Jesus the guarantee of a far better way between us and God—one that really works! A new covenant.
21 (for those priests were made without an oath, but He with an oath by Him who said unto Him: “The Lord swore and will not repent, ‘Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek.’”),
22 by so much more was Jesus made a surety of a better testament.
PHILLIPS And he is, by virtue of this fact, himself the living guarantee of a “better” agreement. Human High Priests have always been changing, for death made a permanent appointment impossible. But Christ, because he lives for ever, possesses a priesthood that needs no successor. This means that he can save fully and completely those who approach God through him, for he is always living to intercede on their behalf.
23 And those priests truly were many, because they were not suffered to continue by reason of death;
24 but this Man, because He continueth forever, hath an unchangeable priesthood.
25 Therefore He is able also to save to the uttermost those who come unto God by Him, seeing He ever liveth to make intercession for them.
PHILLIPS And he is, by virtue of this fact, himself the living guarantee of a “better” agreement. Human High Priests have always been changing, for death made a permanent appointment impossible. But Christ, because he lives for ever, possesses a priesthood that needs no successor. This means that he can save fully and completely those who approach God through him, for he is always living to intercede on their behalf.
26 For such a High Priest who is befitting for us, holy, undisposed to harm, undefiled, separated from sinners, and made higher than the heavens,
27 who needeth not, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice daily first for His own sins and then for the people’s; for this He did once when He offered up Himself.
28 For the law maketh men high priests who have infirmity; but the word of the oath, which came since the law, maketh the Son, who is consecrated for evermore.
MSG So now we have a high priest who perfectly fits our needs: completely holy, uncompromised by sin, with authority extending as high as God’s presence in heaven itself. Unlike the other high priests, he doesn’t have to offer sacrifices for his own sins every day before he can get around to us and our sins. He’s done it, once and for all: offered up himself as the sacrifice. The law appoints as high priests men who are never able to get the job done right. But this intervening command of God, which came later, appoints the Son, who is absolutely, eternally perfect.
— most Christian commentators assert that Melchizedek was the Son of God himself: but proof are scarce and weak. He is expressly said to be like unto Christ and said to be of Melchizedek’s order; which should manifestly distinguish the one from the other; so who was Melchizedek?
Is Melchizedek another Son of God? Is he a brother of the Logos? Is he worthy of being worshipped? If he is then perhaps God has three “Son” (Lucifer, Logos and Melchizedek?). This rhymes with Adam and Noah both had three sons! Are these just mere coincidences??
But when John was taken in a vision into heaven and there, seeing the throne of the Father, the four beasts, the seven angels and finally the Lamb, nowhere did Melchizedek made his presence there!
So the Mystery of Melchizedek remains mysterious! for Christ says, “If I have told you earthly things and ye believe not, how shall ye believe if I tell you of heavenly things?”
Joel Huan
The Mystery of Ephraim 