Questions About Melchizedek

When studying the New Testament Book of Hebrews, many questions arise in the minds of diligent Bible students. Some aspects of the material which God includes in this book are difficult for the modern disciple to decipher. That is not to suggest that Hebrews is impossible to understand. On the contrary, the point of the book, while not as easily interpreted to us as it was to its original recipients—i. e., certain Jewish believers in Christ in the first century—we can still easily see the point if we read the letter in a modern translation we can understand. The point of reading the Bible is to learn about Jesus, and the principles concerning Jesus in Hebrews are easily understood. The POINT, the PRINCIPLES, are easily understood—not every single thing the writer says.

One of the most mysterious aspects of Hebrews has to do with a man named Melchizedek. Some believe that he was literally a pre-incarnate appearance of Jesus Christ Himself. Is this so? I would say no, not at all.

It is certainly clear that God, in His sovereign decision-making concerning the revelation of Jesus Christ throughout the centuries, in preparation for His actual entrance into the world—the types and shadows of the Old Testament that pointed to Jesus and prepared the way for people to receive Him when He appeared—chose to have Christ appear at various times in the Old Testament before He came in the flesh. The example of Melchizedek, however, should not be viewed as one of them in my humble estimation. When we compare things the Bible says about both of them, we come away with a clear picture of the fact that they are not the same person.  

JESUS CHRIST IS A PRIEST ACCORDING TO THE ORDER OF MELCHIZEDEK

Considering the concept of Christ’s priesthood is paramount to understanding both His identity and His role in the world. And it also reveals the connection between the Old Testament priests—especially the high priest—who typify Christ, and Christ Himself. Christ was a priest of God according to the “order of Melchizedek” (Psalm 110:4; Hebrews 5:6, 10; 6:20; 7:11, 17).

When the Bible speaks of “order,” it is using a word that speaks of an arrangement. It means that Christ is similar to Melchizedek in many ways. If Christ was Melchizedek Himself, in other words, then He would not be according to the order of Melchizedek. “The Lord has promised and will not change His mind: You are a priest forever, in the order of Melchizedek” (Psalm 110:4).

Regarding Psalm 110:4, Christ revealed that the “priest in the order of Melchizedek” was an Old Testament passage that referred to Him (Matthew 22:43-45). Thus, the priesthood of Jesus, as well as His kingship, has much in common with that of Melchizedek when it comes to its arrangement and its nature.

MELCHIZEDEK WAS MADE LIKE THE SON OF GOD

As the inspired penmen wrote the words concerning Melchizedek, he made an interesting observation that, again, points to the fact that this mysterious gentleman was a type of Christ. The writer says Melchizedek was “like the Son of God” (Hebrews 7:3). Thus, he draws a comparison between the two men, and therefore also distinguishes between them. Melchizedek was not the Son of God, Christ was and is. By saying Melchizedek resembled Christ in certain ways, he makes a clear distinction between the two. Hebrews 7:15 says that Jesus is “like Melchizedek.” He cannot be LIKE Melchizedek and RESEMBLE Melchizedek, and BE Melchizedek.

The royal priesthood of Melchizedek was a part of God’s longsuffering plan to foreshadow the Christ, so that people would accept Him when He appeared. Everything in the Old Testament points to Jesus, including the ministry and priesthood of Melchizedek. Yes, the royal priesthood of this man pointed to Jesus. We must note again for the sake of emphasis, however, that highlighting the similarities between the two proves that they are not the same individual. Also notice that in the seventh chapter of Hebrews, God’s penman uses the word “another.” Here the magnificent Old Testament priest, and the even more magnificent real Son of God are compared (Hebrews 7:11, 15). Since he uses the word “another,” again, we are not talking about the same person. No, Melchizedek was one priest, Jesus was “another” LIKE him in some ways.

MELCHIZEDEK WAS A “TYPE” OF CHRIST

When we observe that Melchizedek was a type of Christ, we are, of course, making reference to the fact that his role as priest and king pointed to what Christ would do in the future for us. The Old Testament prepared the way for Jesus by giving many types, which were inspired previews of aspects of the work and wonder of Christ. Though mysterious in ways, Melchizedek is a wonderful example of a type of Christ. And he certainly could not have been a “type” of Christ and been Christ Himself at the same time.

WITHOUT FATHER AND MOTHER

We also must consider the question of why Melchizedek is said to be “without father, without mother, without genealogy, who had no beginning of days nor end of life, but was made like unto the Son of God, abides a priest continually” (Hebrews 7:3). Certainly this statement, as much as any other, has caused some to develop bizarre notions of the identity of Melchizedek as it pertains to Jesus Christ.

Hebrews 7:3 is not descriptive of a LITERAL situation concerning the life of Melchizedek. There is a point being made concerning what his kingly priesthood was like, and how it forshadowed the work of Christ. The contrast between the priesthood of Aaron, which was the operative system of sacrifices in the Old Testament, under the Law of Moses, and Melchizedek’s priesthood, which predated the Aaronic one, is the point being made. What we simply have to do is consider the statement contextually, looking at it through the lens of the point being made about both Melchizedek and Christ. We cannot isolate this statement concerning his having “neither father or mother,” etc., in other words, from its context. We must be true to its original meaning. It cannot mean now what it did not mean then.

Melchizedek was not literally without father or mother, as though he appeared from outer space. He is mysterious, but not THAT mysterious. So in context, what is the writer saying? This: Melchizedek was not a priest because of his family line. In order to be a priest under the Law of Moses, one had to be from the genealogical line of Aaron, specifically through the tribe of Levi. But Melchizedek was BEFORE Levi. So he was not a priest based on who his father or mother was. It had nothing to do with his bloodline.

How then did he become priest? God gave him his priesthood directly. And that is exactly the case with the Son of God as well. Jesus was not from the tribe of Levi, either. So he was a priest after the order of Melchizedek, not after the order of Aaron. Jesus was from the tribe of Judah, not from the tribe of Levi. And that is the point. Melchizedek was not priest because of who he was in a fleshly sense, but because God chose him to be the priest (Hebrews 7:14).

Melchizedek was a man, I am convinced, just like everyone else. He certainly had a father and a mother, or he would not have been born. But the point is, his position as priest did not come about BECAUSE OF his father and mother. This is how he was like Jesus and foreshadowed Jesus. Jesus was not a priest because of his descent from Levi or even Abraham. Both men were directly chosen and appointed by God to be priests. And that is the similarity between them.

MELCHIZEDEK HAD NO BEGINNING OF DAYS

When the writer says of Melchizedek that he had “neither beginning of days nor end of life,” we also must understand this is speaking symbolically. No end of life? Does anyone believe that Melchizedek is still alive somewhere on earth today? Surely not. We must consider a more reasonable explanation.

One point that has to be applicable is the fact that priests under the Levitical system were called to serve in the tabernacle for a specific number of years. Specifically, from the age of twenty-five until fifty (Numbers 8:24-25). Melchizedek, however, served under no such restrictions. When we look at the Genesis record, for example, there is no indication of when his priesthood began or when it ended. The suggestion seems to be that he served in that role until he died. So what the writer is likely saying is that since we have no record of it, it is as though he had no beginning or end, making him a type of Christ in that sense. Christ is eternal, LITERALLY having no beginning or end (Micah 5:2; John 8:58).

Seventeen times in the Hebrew epistle, Jesus is referred to as our “High Priest.” His priesthood did not end at fifty years of age (he did not live that long), but continues even now and will until the end of time. He lives to make intercession for us (Hebrews 7:25) and we always have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous (1 John 2:1). He is the go-between who makes us right in the eyes of God.

Salvation comes to us totally free of charge through faith in Jesus Christ because of His role as our High Priest. His sacrifice on the cross for our sins is what makes us right with God. And, like Melchizedek, He is also a king. THE King of Kings and Lord of Lords. Which means we live under His authority and rule and try to do what He wants us to do. So trust in Christ as your Savior and live for Him as your King.

         Dewayne Dunaway