Melchizedek

In Genesis 14 we find...

And Melchizedek king of Salem brought forth bread and wine: and he was the priest of the most high God. And he blessed him, and said, Blessed be Abram of the most high God, possessor of heaven and earth: And blessed be the most high God, which hath delivered thine enemies into thy hand. And he gave him tithes of all. (Genesis 14:18-20 KJV)

I would be particularly interested in hearing input from sonship, suzianne, checkbaiter on what you know about this figure. No links please, I can do that on my own, what do you think?

Originally posted by kd2acz
In Genesis 14 we find...

And Melchizedek king of Salem brought forth bread and wine: and he was the priest of the most high God. And he blessed him, and said, Blessed be Abram of the most high God, possessor of heaven and earth: And blessed be the most high God, which hath delivered thine enemies into thy hand. And he gave him tithes of all. (Genesis 14:18 ...[text shortened]... n what you know about this figure. No links please, I can do that on my own, what do you think?

Melchizedek was a high priest, he is also mentioned in Hebrews.
In Hebrews 7, it says he was without father or mother.......
Hebrews 7:3
Without father or mother, without genealogy, without beginning of days or end of life, like the Son of God he [Melchizedek] remains a priest forever. (NIV)

There are some Trinitarians who teach that Melchizedek was actually Jesus Christ because this verse says he was without Father or mother, beginning or end of life, etc. This cannot be the case, and misses the point of this entire section of Scripture. Knowing the Old Testament, specifically the Law of Moses, and then knowing about the genealogy of Jesus, the Jews did not believe that Jesus could be a high priest. The Law of Moses demanded that priests be descendants of Aaron and of the tribe of Levi. Of course, Jesus Christ came from the tribe of Judah. This “problem” is actually clearly set forth in the book of Hebrews itself: “For it is clear that our Lord descended from Judah, and in regard to that tribe Moses said nothing about priests” (vs. 14).

What is the solution to this problem? This section of Hebrews shows that if Melchizedek can be a priest recognized by the great patriarch Abraham, and he had no priestly genealogy, then Christ can be a priest when he has no priestly genealogy. The Jews were very aware of the “qualifications” for the priesthood, and if someone claimed to be a priest but could not produce the required genealogy, he was disqualified (see Ezra 2:62). Thus, when this verse says Melchizedek had no genealogy or beginning or end, the Jews understood perfectly that it meant he did not come from a line of priests. They never thought, nor would they believe, that he had no father or mother or birth or death. They understood that if Melchizedek could be a priest to Abraham without being a descendant of Aaron, the first priest, then so could Jesus Christ.

Jesus Christ cannot be Melchizedek. Hebrews 7:3 says that Melchizedek was without Father or mother and without genealogy (i.e., without one given in Scripture). However, Jesus did have a father, God, and a mother, Mary. He also had a genealogy, in fact, two—one in Matthew and one in Luke. Furthermore, this verse says that Melchizedek was “like the Son of God.” If he was “like” the Son, then he could not “be” the Son of God.

Originally posted by kd2acz
I would be particularly interested in hearing input from sonship, suzianne, checkbaiter on what you know about this figure. No links please, I can do that on my own, what do you think?

There are some who compare Melchizedek and Shem, son of Noah, and claim they are one and the same. One reason is that the scriptures give us the details of Shem's birth and ancestry but are silent as to his ministry and later life. Of Melchizedek, however, the opposite is true. Nothing is recorded about his birth or ancestry, yet concerning his ministry and life we have several interesting and important facts.

I'll spare you the details, unless, of course, there is interest. There are those here who enjoy nothing more than 'proving' how the Bible is wrong.

Originally posted by checkbaiter
Melchizedek was a high priest, he is also mentioned in Hebrews.
In Hebrews 7, it says he was without father or mother.......
Hebrews 7:3
Without father or mother, without genealogy, without beginning of days or end of life, like the Son of God he [Melchizedek] remains a priest forever. (NIV)

There are some Trinitarians who teach that Melchizedek wa ...[text shortened]... dek was “like the Son of God.” If he was “like” the Son, then he could not “be” the Son of God.

"Jesus Christ cannot be Melchizedek. Hebrews 7:3 says that Melchizedek was without Father or mother and without genealogy (i.e., without one given in Scripture). However, Jesus did have a father, God, and a mother, Mary."

The Word became flesh...that occured with Jesus being born into this life
as a man. The Word, before that occured could have been Melchizedek
for all I know, at that time the Word didn't have the title Son of Man yet.
Thinking out loud here not trying to start an argument.

Kelly

Originally posted by KellyJay
"Jesus Christ cannot be Melchizedek. Hebrews 7:3 says that Melchizedek was without Father or mother and without genealogy (i.e., without one given in Scripture). However, Jesus did have a father, God, and a mother, Mary."

The Word became flesh...that occured with Jesus being born into this life
as a man. The Word, before that occured could have been Mel ...[text shortened]... e the title Son of Man yet.
Thinking out loud here not trying to start an argument.

Kelly

I see where you are going here, but it would make sense only, if the "logo" or "word" refers to Jesus the man and not God's plan, which is what logo means.
If what you are thinking is true, then the bible becomes full of contradictions.

I believe God's plan or purpose, became flesh in Jesus Christ. He was created in the womb of a virgin (Mary). God is indeed his father, but Jesus is a man, 100%. This is one place I disagree with the JW's ( as well as other ares). Jesus did not pre-exist, other than in the mind of God.
His plan was to make a second Adam, without a sin nature. Also with the free will to obey or disobey God. The second Adam came through with flying colors, if you will.
He obeyed and was the first human to love God back fully.
If people were to grasp this truth, Jesus becomes so much more than a "godman".
I cannot identify with a "godman", but I could identify with a human Jesus, 100% fleshly human, who obeyed God.
If Jesus is God, I have a problem with his suffering, i.e. did he really suffer as a human would?
You see, if Jesus is a man and not a god, then he becomes much more of a hero to me, which he is.
Then he can lead the way in a way I can relate to.
He was tempted in all points as we can be, does not the bible say God cannot be tempted?
Jesus is the first human to obey God perfectly, the first human raised from the dead and ascend into the heavens.
God was so pleased with his son, He highly exalted him to sit at his right hand. (Like Joseph, another type of Christ, was exalted by Pharoah to sit at his right hand.)
Jesus did not raise himself from the dead, God raised him. His father raised him, like he will raise us someday.
The Trinity is so full of holes, it is very difficult for me to grasp, not to mention make sense.

Originally posted by checkbaiter
Melchizedek was a high priest, he is also mentioned in Hebrews.
In Hebrews 7, it says he was without father or mother.......
Hebrews 7:3
Without father or mother, without genealogy, without beginning of days or end of life, like the Son of God he [Melchizedek] remains a priest forever. (NIV)

There are some Trinitarians who teach that Melchizedek wa ...[text shortened]... dek was “like the Son of God.” If he was “like” the Son, then he could not “be” the Son of God.

Also some wack job on YouTube named Clinton aka word prophet says that he is JC.

The spirit of Christ the holy spirit and the spirit of God are the same entity and the terms are interchanged often in the NT. The spirit of Christ is eternal and is active in the OT (see 1 Peter 1:10-11) and revealed himself as Melchizedek.

I'm open to other ideas on this but, one doesn't need to be trinitarian to see god in Melchizedek. I'm not trinitarian.

Originally posted by checkbaiter
I see where you are going here, but it would make sense only, if the "logo" or "word" refers to Jesus the man and not God's plan, which is what logo means.
If what you are thinking is true, then the bible becomes full of contradictions.

I believe God's plan or purpose, became flesh in Jesus Christ. He was created in the womb of a virgin (Mary). God i ...[text shortened]... is so full of holes, it is very difficult for me to grasp, not to mention make sense.

I don't see an issue of the Word of God, becoming the Son of Man and
as a man defeated Satan. I don't see Jesus doing anything as God while
He was living His life with us as a man either, He obeyed the Father in all
He did, just as those who were filled with God's Spirit on Pentecost also did.
I also don’t see any issues with God the Father raising him from the dead
too. I guess this conversation is a deep one that more than a few people do
indeed disagree on the points.
Kelly

Originally posted by KellyJay
I don't see an issue of the Word of God, becoming the Son of Man and
as a man defeated Satan. I don't see Jesus doing anything as God while
He was living His life with us as a man either, He obeyed the Father in all
He did, just as those who were filled with God's Spirit on Pentecost also did.
I also don’t see any issues with God the Father raising him ...[text shortened]... versation is a deep one that more than a few people do
indeed disagree on the points.
Kelly

Many Trinity people define their idea of a Trinity in many different ways.
The most common, I believe, is God=Jesus=Holy Spirit. They are all the same.
And yes, very confusing to me. God died? Then God raised him from the dead? God the man was tempted but God cannot be tempted? Jesus god spoke to God in the garden of Gethsemane? Did he speak and obey himself?
Where is the separation and why?
Why is the trinity not ever explained clearly anywhere in the bible, other than some mistranslated verses or additions by bias scribes?
Why did Jesus-god say the Father is greater than I? Why is Jesus called my brother? Is God my brother?
There are so many silly questions, I have a hard time understanding how Christians fell for this hook line and sinker.
God is three in one? I thought there was ONE God? One Lord?
Why is God shown as ruling in the book of Revelations, and Jesus as 2nd in command. What happened to Holy Spirit? He doesn't rule?
If God is in Christ and Christ in me, am I God too?
It is no wonder the Jews ridicule Christianity.
I think most Christians go to their local churches and check in their brain at the door, instead of their hats.
We need to study the scriptures. Look at the clear verses that say Jesus is the son of God and take that at face value. Then deal with a few more difficult verses that have been repeated and explained on this forum over and over.
There is nothing wrong with questioning yours or my understanding of the scriptures. Ask God, pray for him to show you. But let me warn you, you will have to let go of preconceived beliefs that don't line up with the bible.
Ask God or Jesus to reveal the deeper meanings of scripture.
I worship God and his son.
Someone will probably come back with some comments from my words here, but I will say ahead of time, God has highly exalted his son and set him as head of his church.
So yes, I worship God through Jesus Christ.

Originally posted by checkbaiter
Many Trinity people define their idea of a Trinity in many different ways.
The most common, I believe, is God=Jesus=Holy Spirit. They are all the same.
And yes, very confusing to me. God died? Then God raised him from the dead? God the man was tempted but God cannot be tempted? Jesus god spoke to God in the garden of Gethsemane? Did he speak and obey h ...[text shortened]... xalted his son and set him as head of his church.
So yes, I worship God through Jesus Christ.

Jesus became the Son of Man, He died and rose from the dead as a man.
The reason Jesus did it all as a man including all of His walk as one of
us was that if He acted as God when He was a man He could not have been
tempted as we were in every point, if He could turn on and off Godhood
when things got nasty or He desired something He couldn’t do as a man.
Jesus took on our nature and with that our relationship with Him is now
something much deeper than it was before, our brother.

I do believe the Trinity is confusing for us, very difficult to wrap our minds
around how we describe and picture an Eternal Infinite God who fills the
Universe and for that matter that the Universe cannot even contain.
Kelly

Originally posted by checkbaiter
[b]Melchizedek was a high priest, he is also mentioned in Hebrews.
In Hebrews 7, it says he was without father or mother.......

Orphan?

Originally posted by whodey
Orphan?

No, scripture simply does not name the parents. We can only know what we are shown.

Originally posted by KellyJay
Jesus became the Son of Man, He died and rose from the dead as a man.
The reason Jesus did it all as a man including all of His walk as one of
us was that if He acted as God when He was a man He could not have been
tempted as we were in every point, if He could turn on and off Godhood
when things got nasty or He desired something He couldn’t do as a man ...[text shortened]... te God who fills the
Universe and for that matter that the Universe cannot even contain.
Kelly

Look, if people want to hang on to a trinity, that is fine with me. I still consider a brother in Christ as a brother.
I just do not believe the bible teaches a trinity. Jesus does not have to be God to redeem us, just his sinless son. It makes a whole lot more sense. I do not believe in turning "godhood" on and off, that too is illogical...🙂

Originally posted by Suzianne
There are some who compare Melchizedek and Shem, son of Noah, and claim they are one and the same. One reason is that the scriptures give us the details of Shem's birth and ancestry but are silent as to his ministry and later life. Of Melchizedek, however, the opposite is true. Nothing is recorded about his birth or ancestry, yet concerning his ministry and nterest. There are those here who enjoy nothing more than 'proving' how the Bible is wrong.

I am interested.

Originally posted by checkbaiter
I see where you are going here, but it would make sense only, if the "logo" or "word" refers to Jesus the man and not God's plan, which is what logo means.
If what you are thinking is true, then the bible becomes full of contradictions.

I believe God's plan or purpose, became flesh in Jesus Christ. He was created in the womb of a virgin (Mary). God i is so full of holes, it is very difficult for me to grasp, not to mention make sense.

If Jesus did not pre-exist then what did He mean by this..........?

John 8:58
Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am.”
John 8:57-59