Was Melchisedec the Pre-incarnate Christ?

Dondi

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,615
Reaction score
9
Points
36
Location
Southern Maryland
"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

"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;
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; 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." - Hebrews 7:1-3

"For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Juda; of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood.
And it is yet far more evident: for that after the similitude of Melchisedec there ariseth another priest,
Who is made, not after the law of a carnal commandment, but after the power of an endless life.
For he testifieth, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.
For there is verily a disannulling of the commandment going before for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof.
For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did; by the which we draw nigh unto God.
And inasmuch as not without an oath he was made priest:
(For those priests were made without an oath; but this with an oath by him that said unto him, The Lord sware and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec), By so much was Jesus made a surety of a better testament." - Hebrews 7:14-22

One of the most unusual events in the life of Abram (Abraham) was this meeting with this King of Salem (Jerusalem) after Abram battlled several surrounding kings in a successful effort to bring back the kidnapped Lot back. What is interesting is that there is no mention of the King of Salem at the beginning of the chapter, so what dealing does Melchisedec have with Abram anyway?

But I want to examine what this Melchisedec has in relation to Jesus Christ, who is "a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek" (Psalm 110:4), according to the writer of Hebrews. Is Melchisedec an example of a pre-incarnate Christ?
 
Dondi said:
Is Melchisedec an example of a pre-incarnate Christ?
Can you explain what you mean by a pre-incarnate Christ? The King of Peace as the story goes was real, without beginning and without end...and predated the Prince of Peace. But I'm not sure I understand completely the question.
 
wil said:
Can you explain what you mean by a pre-incarnate Christ? The King of Peace as the story goes was real, without beginning and without end...and predated the Prince of Peace. But I'm not sure I understand completely the question.

Sure.

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made....
And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us..." - John 1:1-3,14

"Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son:
In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:
Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:
For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: And he is before all things, and by him all things consist." - Colossians 1:13-17

From these verses we learn that Jesus Christ has been since the beginning and that He created all things.

There are several places in the OT that suggest that Christ possibly made appearances before He came to earth in the form of a Babe in the NT, born of Mary.

For example, in Daniel 3, when Nebuchadnezzar tossed Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego into the fiery furnace (seven time hotter than normal), he exclaimed, "Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God." (Daniel 3:25)

In Joshua 5:13-15, as the Israelites were preparing to conquer Jerico, he encounters a stranger with a sword in His hand. When Joshua inquires if this stanger is for Israel or against them, the stranger says, "Nay; but as captain of the host of the LORD am I now come." Now this could be just an angel, but Joshua falls down to worship and is not rebuked (as John is by an angel in Revelation). and notice what this stranger says, "Loose thy shoe from off thy foot; for the place whereon thou standest is holy.", which is very remincent of what God in burning bush told Moses back in Exodus 3:5.

There are more examples, but I think you get the idea. I'm merely contending that Melchisedec might be another one of these encounters with Christ before the manger.
 
Dondi said:
I'm merely contending that Melchisedec might be another one of these encounters with Christ before the manger.
There are a number of people I know that believe/think this. To me it falls under one of the many things I could accept, and understand, but can't state as fact one way or the other.

Does G-d making an appearance in human form on earth prior to Jesus birth affect Christian thought negatively or positively? Once, twice, twenty, twenty billion times?

To me, no, but I'm very interested in others thoughts.
 
i think he was a priest that came into being for a specific reason, that is to show that a new order of priest would be coming that would be superior to the levites. at the same time, because melchizedek had no geneaology traced to levi which by tradition makes one defiled and not suitable as a priest; however, melchizedek was a priest nonetheless appointed not by law but probably by god, and abraham certainly recognized his superiority. so melchiziedek takes abrahams tithe in accordance to the law, but christ would come later to fulfill the law and bring an even greater grace. christ later comes in with a geneaology from david and the tribe of judah and not levi, as well as the holy spirit overshadowing mary. here christs geneaology is known, unlike melchizedek, but is merely like melchizedek in the fact that they were not from levi but appointed higher than levi.

so it is my understanding that melchizidek's purpose was to setup that which would come and be greater than him, and that is christ. it also paralleled with moses who was a type of saviour and prophet for freeing his people from pharoah and giving the law to the jews, but christ would come later and be an even greater saviour over all mankind and free all people from sin and death and actually fulfill the law and not just of prophet of truth, but truth itself.
 
BlaznFattyz said:
.... melchizedek had no geneaology traced to levi which by tradition makes one defiled and not suitable as a priest...christ later comes in with a geneaology from david and the tribe of judah and not levi,
can you expound on that, the Tribe of Levi deifiled and wasn't Joseph who wasn't the father in David's lineage, can we trace Mary to David as well?
 
if one could not trace the geneaology to the tribe of levi, then one could not be a high priest by the law and was considered unsuitable. so we see melchizedek not coming from the tribe of levi, nor was jesus who was of the tribe of judah and who came in the order of melchizedek (a high priest appointed by god yet not being a levite).
 
BlaznFattyz said:
if one could not trace the geneaology to the tribe of levi, then one could not be a high priest by the law and was considered unsuitable. so we see melchizedek not coming from the tribe of levi, nor was jesus who was of the tribe of judah and who came in the order of melchizedek (a high priest appointed by god yet not being a levite).
I get that, what I was wondering about was the defiling of the tribe of Levi and them not being suitable priests...and the geneology of Mary...as Jesus is not kin to Joseph who was descended from David. Sorry I wasn't clear.
 
wil said:
I get that, what I was wondering about was the defiling of the tribe of Levi and them not being suitable priests...and the geneology of Mary...as Jesus is not kin to Joseph who was descended from David. Sorry I wasn't clear.
no, not the defiling of the tribe of levi, but rather priests being regarded as unsuitable and defiled because they were not from the tribe of levi. the tribe of levi was it, but melchizedek was the shift from that. im not sure on the last part... perhaps mary was also part of the line of david somehow.. im not to sure if the bible is really clear on that, other than just saying it is what it is.
 
wil said:
I get that, what I was wondering about was the defiling of the tribe of Levi and them not being suitable priests...and the geneology of Mary...as Jesus is not kin to Joseph who was descended from David. Sorry I wasn't clear.
Check out geneology in Luke.
 
BlaznFattyz said:
melchizedek had no geneaology traced to levi which by tradition makes one defiled and not suitable as a priest

Levites didn't exist during the time of Melchizedek, neither did the law, I think the link between Jesus and Melchizedek is less to do with lineage and more to do with their dual-function as Priest AND King.
 
aburaees said:
Levites didn't exist during the time of Melchizedek, neither did the law, I think the link between Jesus and Melchizedek is less to do with lineage and more to do with their dual-function as Priest AND King.
the lineage is very important in hindsight and in gods plan and ways, and the dual function you mentioned is equally as important.
 
Dondi said:
Is Melchisedec an example of a pre-incarnate Christ?
Ok so we cleared up the contention that it had anything to do with the lineage of Levi or David, back to our original programming and Dondi's original question.
 
Kindest Regards, wil!
wil said:
I get that, what I was wondering about was the defiling of the tribe of Levi and them not being suitable priests...and the geneology of Mary...as Jesus is not kin to Joseph who was descended from David. Sorry I wasn't clear.
Like Dor pointed to, Mary was directly related to the trive of Levi. Her aunt (I believe it was) was married to a Levitical priest. Elizabeth was three months pregnant with John the Baptist (as he would be later known) when Mary conceived. A really wonderful story in itself.

I can see challenging the tradition of Jesus being "King," as the Davidic lineage of Judah was through his "step-daddy" so to speak. But it seems difficult using the texts to challenge Jesus' acceptability for priesthood, especially since it is the maternal lineage in Judaism by which hereditary claims are made.

My two cents, as a non-Jew.
 
Kindest Regards, Blazn!
BlaznFattyz said:
because melchizedek had no geneaology traced to levi which by tradition makes one defiled and not suitable as a priest; however, melchizedek was a priest nonetheless appointed not by law but probably by god, and abraham certainly recognized his superiority.
I think it was Wil that hit on the point that Melchizedek predated Levi. I wonder about the priest thing though, goodness knows I have used this same argument in the past...

But the thought hit me...Wasn't Sampson a priest? Specifically, a Nazarite priest? What relation did the Nazarites have with the Levites? Didn't Paul mention something about the Nazarites in the N.T. somewhere? (forgive my failing memory...)

so it is my understanding that melchizidek's purpose was to setup that which would come and be greater than him, and that is christ. it also paralleled with moses who was a type of saviour and prophet for freeing his people from pharoah and giving the law to the jews, but christ would come later and be an even greater saviour over all mankind and free all people from sin and death and actually fulfill the law and not just of prophet of truth, but truth itself.
I like this. I have long thought similar. :D
 
A very interesting thread. I have three items to throw into the soup.

First, I believe that the head priest in Mormon hierarchy is known as the Melchizedek Priest. Anyone know why this is ? Is this some sort of priority claim on Priesthood rights on the part of the Mormon Religion ? I'm ignorant on what lies behind all of this, I only recall the name of their head priest.

Second, who were the Zadokites ? Melchizedek was designated a Zadokite priest if I remember correctly. Was this the tribal designation of those that inhabited Jerusalem at that time ? I also strongly believe that the very mount in Jerusalem that is held to be sacred by all three branches of the Abrahamic Religions is key to understanding things about the holiness of that place, and why it is one of the only things that Judaism, Islam, and Christianity seem to agree upon, and of course fight over.

Third and last, as I mentioned elsewhere sometime ago, the Deity is thought to be a shape-shifter in many cultures, and many prominent modern-day theologians still hold that this is likely true even today. Might this not explain our difficulty in fixing the nature and identity of this special Priest, and even Jesus himself? There is a special name for the Deity, IMHO, that is used in the Bible, and that is "Ancient of Days". In this sense I view the Deity as a spiritual being who has the ability and mission to travel throughout time and space to assume the persona, form, and identity that is needed in the historical timeline that He/She has created and is bound to maintain for the benefit of the human race and the earth. A bit of a grandiose viewpoint and explanation probably, but it works for me.

flow....;)
 
juantoo3 said:
Kindest Regards, Blazn!

I think it was Wil that hit on the point that Melchizedek predated Levi. I wonder about the priest thing though, goodness knows I have used this same argument in the past...
priesthood could have easily been established with the line that melchizedek was from, but it was not, for he had no known father or mother. high priests later came about through levites according to the law, but christ did not. my point is there are 2 that were high priests (and kings)-- M and J, but they were not levites.
 
If Melchizedek wasnt Christ Himself.. He certainly was a strong foreshadow of whats to come...

Was a King ...was a Priest.. served BREAD and WINE... Abraham tithed to him. He was the King of Righteousness and the King of Peace. No beginning of days no end of life.. no geneology and to Jews geneology was EVERYTHING....

This is my thought on the subject... Melchizedek was brought up in Genesis 14 and in Genesis 18 the Lord was visiting Abraham like it had happened before... and certainly Abraham knew it was the Lord... how would Abraham know it was the Lord and the men with him were angels?? If it was the first time The Lord had visited Abraham as such Im certain the bible would make issue of that fact.. Maybe it was made issue in Gen 14 when we met this Priest of the Most High God... Something to ponder. :)

Hebrews 7:1-10 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. 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.
 
Back
Top