Interesting guy:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melchizedek
From Hebrews 7:
"...He is without father or mother or genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life, but resembling the Son of God he continues a priest forever..."
I had never heard of him- which surprised me. There seems to be several different ideas about who he was/what he was. Even some differing ideas in the Jewish, Gnostic, and other traditions.
Bottom line is that he seems to have been some sort of King of "Salem" and "priest of the Most High". He is mentioned twice in the Old Testament and then mentioned again in Hebrews as being some sort of foundation for a priesthood that must have existed prior to the Aaronic preisthood and that later welcomed Jesus to its ranks:
Hebrews 6: "...where Jesus has gone as a forerunner on our behalf, having become a high priest forever after the order of Melchizedek."
Later, in Hebrews 7 (http://bibleresources.bible.com/passagesearchresults.php?passage1=hebrews+7&version1=47): "...He is first, by translation of his name, king of righteousness, and then he is also king of Salem, that is, king of peace."
So, it would seem that there was a Most-High Priest who was also a King (of possibly Jerusalem?) who received a tithe from Abraham and who resembled Jesus (he seemed to have appeared on the Earth without human parents, didn't die, and is still a priest today), and who had a "tradition" so important that Jesus followed in it.
Some translations seem to make the case that it was a political play to connect Jesus to a priestly line- because the tribe of Judah had no "priests" like Levi, etc. Similar to connecting Jesus to David's line (and, interestingly- David is connected to Melchizedek in perhaps a similar way in Psalms).
Any thoughts?
Welcome to The Red Cell!
If this is your first visit here, please take a moment to peruse the posts and comments. Try to see things from the vantage point of someone who does not know God.
The "Red Cell Thoughts" are not to be taken as a position of this blog- they are meant to stir thought. Please feel free to post other thoughts, questions, and possible answers. All posts are anonymous, but feel free to provide your name if you so desire. The Red Cell facilitators reserve the right to edit comments that are rude or offensive. Having said that, a little bit of offensiveness may be allowed- because if we offend no-one, then we might not be working hard enough! Remember, the Christian religion was founded on questioning the prevailing wisdom of the day and the Protestant Reformation continued that tradition. Don't be afraid to question all your assumptions.
Thursday, March 5, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
A buddy of mine hit me with this in response (I assume) to the central question from last month- "Can we find truth outside of the Bible (using science, reason, etc.), or was the Bible meant to be more than just a spiritual guide- answering ALL questions- to include Historical and Scientific":
ReplyDelete"...The bible is not the truth, Jesus is. In John 14:6, Jesus said, "I am the way, the truth, and the life." Therefore, you can only discover the Truth through Jesus, not through anything else..."
Which led me to ask what his definition of "Truth" is (spiritual only, or all-eccompassing). I also asked whether one could necessarily find Jesus without the Bible.
I guess one could make the argument that you can find Jesus through the Holy Spirit, but the concept of the Holy Spirit is a little fuzzy to me- in terms of how one would "use" the HS to help understand anything. That seems to advocate some kind of intuition (how does one know that the HS is influencing you?)- which would mean to me that one CAN find "Truth" outside of the Bible and even Jesus.