because there is such a small amount of information available on this king, being the verses
found in Genesis 14. He is only mentioned in two other books of the Bible, and Christ is
described as being a priest according to the order of Melchizedek in Psalm 110, and this is
reaffirmed in Hebrews 7:17. Whether he was the preincarnate Christ, a high-priest, or a godly
king, has been discussed among scholars for many years, but an answer can be found by
examining the person of Melchizedek closer in the Scriptures.
One view of the person of Melchizedek is that he is a christophony, or a reincarnate
Christ. Rick Van de Water believes that one of the most obvious reasonings is Melchizedek's
very name. He believes that there “is much to suggest that, rather than referring to the priest of
Gen. 14.18, 'Melchizedek' alludes to the priest like Melchizedek in Ps. 110.4, who is called 'my
Lord' and is invited to sit at the right hand of the Lord.”1 He believes that because he is
portrayed as a heavenly priest it “bolsters the argument for his being the agent of the expiation
achieved on the Day of Atonement (1 lQMelch 2.7-8) in inauguration of the tenth jubilee (Lev.
25.9). Though it was traditionally the high priest who performed the atonement rite on that day
(Lev. 16)... it is Yhwh who not only avenges, but also atones.”2 Van de Water ponders: “Since
Melchizedek performs Yhwh's roles in liberating, judging, avenging and ruling, is it
unreasonable to conclude that it is also his act of atonement that delivers those 'of his lot' from
the vengeance?”3 He also associates the death of Melchizedek with the death of Christ, and that
“he is said to be the Anointed One 'cut off (Dan. 9.26), moreover, implies his death,”4 and since
the “'cutting off' of Daniel's Messiah is associated with 'atonement for sin' it is not
inconceivable that the death of Melchizedek was taken to be the act of expiation delivering
'those of his lot' from the vengeance."5
Another view of the person of Melchizedek is that he was the first in the line of high
priests. In the account of Abraham's meeting with Melchizedek in Genesis he is “noted in
Genesis as a righteous king and a priest of God Most High (El Elyon), blesses Abraham and
then blesses God Himself both with the same designation.”6 Moshe Reiss believes that
Melchizedek is the first in the long line of high priests. Reiss says that although this presents a
problem for traditional jewish teachings, being that Melchizedek is not in the line of Levi and
that “he is not a descendant of Aaron, from whom according to the Torah all priests are
descended—in fact he pre-dates both Aaron and Levi—yet he is described as a priest.”7 The
rabbis teach that Melchizedek acted as a priest and handed down Adam’s robes to Abraham;
and instructed Abraham in the Torah and passed on the priesthood to Abraham.”8 The criticism
for Melchizedek is that “God intended to bring forth the priesthood through Melchizedek’s
descendants, but because Melchizedek blessed Abraham before he blessed God (in Gen 14,19-
20), God brought the priesthood forth from Abraham’s descendants.”9 Reiss believes that the
“text suggests that a non-Levite could be a High Priest; thus Jesus from the tribe of Judah to be
a heavenly High Priest (Heb 8,3). The early church considered that Jesus was a priest for the
uncircumcised. In this line of thinking, one “could argue that the main thesis of Hebrew’s
epistle is the supremacy of Jesus, and the emphasis on his high priesthood.”10
The final argument put forth for the person of Melchizedek is that he was a type of
priest-king. T.K Thomas puts forward this idea of the two titles working together in the same
person of Melchizedek stating that he is both king and priest, and that in “being eternally king
and priest, he reinterprets kingship and priesthood. That he radically redefines kingship is the
thrust of Psalm 110, where the emphasis is on political power.”11 Thomas views that even
Melchizedek's name “means means king of uprightness or righteousness, and Salem means
peace. He was king and priest, in fact the first priest we meet in the Bible, the 'progenitor of all
priesthood.'”12 The two offices are not mutually exclusive in Thomas' eyes, which takes a
different stance than reversing the role and mostly priest and partly king. Thomas even points to
the “royal Psalm which celebrates the primordial priesthood of Melchizedek challenges the
pretensions of all rulers, political and religious, which distance and separate them from
people.”13
While all three are compelling arguments, I must agree with the statement that
Melchizedek is brought to our attention to show the beginnings of the office of the high-priest.
While there are compelling arguments that he was the preincarnate Christ, I believe that more of
an emphasis on this would have been placed in scripture if this were true. He might have been a
“type of Christ”, but not actually Christ himself. The fact that he was an earthly being with the
office of king and priest is evidence to me against this being a preincarnate Christ, as the
appearance of Christ in the Old Testament is usually for a short period of time with a specific
purpose. If this were Christ, then more information would have been given about him, I believe.
I think also that the fact that he was a priest outside of the typical Levitical line is what is
referenced by the author of Hebrews, showing that Christ was also a high-priest outside of this
lineage.
BIBLOGRAPHY
Reiss, Moshe, "The Melchizedek Traditions." SJOT: Scandinavian Journal Of The Old Testament 26, no. 2, 2012.
Thomas, T.K., "Melchizedek, King and Priest." Ecumenical Review 52, no. 3, 2000.
Van de Water, Rick, "Michael or Yhwh? Toward Identifying Melchizedek in 11Q13." Journal For The Study Of The Pseudepigrapha 16, no. 1, 2006.
1 Rick Van de Water, "Michael or Yhwh? Toward Identifying Melchizedek in 11Q13." Journal For The Study Of The Pseudepigrapha 16, no. 1, (2006) 80.
2 Ibid.,80.
3 Ibid., 80.
4 Ibid., 83.
5 Ibid.,83.
6 Moshe Reiss, "The Melchizedek Traditions." SJOT: Scandinavian Journal Of The Old Testament 26, no. 2 (2012) 261.
7 Ibid., 261.
8 Ibid., 261-262.
9 Ibid., 262.
10 Ibid., 265.
11 T.K. Thomas, "Melchizedek, King and Priest." Ecumenical Review 52, no. 3 (2000) 408.
12 Ibid., 403-404.
13 Ibid., 408.
priests. In the account of Abraham's meeting with Melchizedek in Genesis he is “noted in
Genesis as a righteous king and a priest of God Most High (El Elyon), blesses Abraham and
then blesses God Himself both with the same designation.”6 Moshe Reiss believes that
Melchizedek is the first in the long line of high priests. Reiss says that although this presents a
problem for traditional jewish teachings, being that Melchizedek is not in the line of Levi and
that “he is not a descendant of Aaron, from whom according to the Torah all priests are
descended—in fact he pre-dates both Aaron and Levi—yet he is described as a priest.”7 The
rabbis teach that Melchizedek acted as a priest and handed down Adam’s robes to Abraham;
and instructed Abraham in the Torah and passed on the priesthood to Abraham.”8 The criticism
for Melchizedek is that “God intended to bring forth the priesthood through Melchizedek’s
descendants, but because Melchizedek blessed Abraham before he blessed God (in Gen 14,19-
20), God brought the priesthood forth from Abraham’s descendants.”9 Reiss believes that the
“text suggests that a non-Levite could be a High Priest; thus Jesus from the tribe of Judah to be
a heavenly High Priest (Heb 8,3). The early church considered that Jesus was a priest for the
uncircumcised. In this line of thinking, one “could argue that the main thesis of Hebrew’s
epistle is the supremacy of Jesus, and the emphasis on his high priesthood.”10
The final argument put forth for the person of Melchizedek is that he was a type of
priest-king. T.K Thomas puts forward this idea of the two titles working together in the same
person of Melchizedek stating that he is both king and priest, and that in “being eternally king
and priest, he reinterprets kingship and priesthood. That he radically redefines kingship is the
thrust of Psalm 110, where the emphasis is on political power.”11 Thomas views that even
Melchizedek's name “means means king of uprightness or righteousness, and Salem means
peace. He was king and priest, in fact the first priest we meet in the Bible, the 'progenitor of all
priesthood.'”12 The two offices are not mutually exclusive in Thomas' eyes, which takes a
different stance than reversing the role and mostly priest and partly king. Thomas even points to
the “royal Psalm which celebrates the primordial priesthood of Melchizedek challenges the
pretensions of all rulers, political and religious, which distance and separate them from
people.”13
While all three are compelling arguments, I must agree with the statement that
Melchizedek is brought to our attention to show the beginnings of the office of the high-priest.
While there are compelling arguments that he was the preincarnate Christ, I believe that more of
an emphasis on this would have been placed in scripture if this were true. He might have been a
“type of Christ”, but not actually Christ himself. The fact that he was an earthly being with the
office of king and priest is evidence to me against this being a preincarnate Christ, as the
appearance of Christ in the Old Testament is usually for a short period of time with a specific
purpose. If this were Christ, then more information would have been given about him, I believe.
I think also that the fact that he was a priest outside of the typical Levitical line is what is
referenced by the author of Hebrews, showing that Christ was also a high-priest outside of this
lineage.
BIBLOGRAPHY
Reiss, Moshe, "The Melchizedek Traditions." SJOT: Scandinavian Journal Of The Old Testament 26, no. 2, 2012.
Thomas, T.K., "Melchizedek, King and Priest." Ecumenical Review 52, no. 3, 2000.
Van de Water, Rick, "Michael or Yhwh? Toward Identifying Melchizedek in 11Q13." Journal For The Study Of The Pseudepigrapha 16, no. 1, 2006.
1 Rick Van de Water, "Michael or Yhwh? Toward Identifying Melchizedek in 11Q13." Journal For The Study Of The Pseudepigrapha 16, no. 1, (2006) 80.
2 Ibid.,80.
3 Ibid., 80.
4 Ibid., 83.
5 Ibid.,83.
6 Moshe Reiss, "The Melchizedek Traditions." SJOT: Scandinavian Journal Of The Old Testament 26, no. 2 (2012) 261.
7 Ibid., 261.
8 Ibid., 261-262.
9 Ibid., 262.
10 Ibid., 265.
11 T.K. Thomas, "Melchizedek, King and Priest." Ecumenical Review 52, no. 3 (2000) 408.
12 Ibid., 403-404.
13 Ibid., 408.
No comments:
Post a Comment