MYSTERIOUS MELCHIZEDEK
This Melchizedek was king of Salem and priest of God Most High. He met Abraham returning from the defeat of the kings and blessed him, Hebrews 7:1
In this chapter we learn much about the mysterious Melchizedek. Even his name is filled with mystery. “Melchizedek” is made up of two Hebrew words, melek, meaning “king” and “zedek” meaning “righteousness.” Our author takes these two words very seriously. He also takes note that Melchizedek is king of the ancient city-state of Salem, which itself has the meaning of “peace.” This city is generally agreed to be Jerusalem (Psa. 76:2). Melchizedek is also mentioned as the priest of God Most High, the same God that Abraham served. Since genealogies are important in the Book of Genesis and especially important later concerning the priesthood, it is remarkable that this man seems not to have one. Neither is his birth or death recorded.
Our author takes these mysteries and begins to expound upon them in the Jewish midrash style. The basis of his midrash is the Jewish interpretative principle of gezera shawa (equal category). According to this mode of interpretation if two separate passages contain the same word, this provides sufficient reason for explaining the one text in the light of the other.1 The two passages under consideration are Genesis 14:18-20 and Psalm 110:4. In the first passage the simple facts are mentioned about the king of Salem whose name is Melchizedek. This king went out to meet Abraham as he returned from the defeat of the Babylonian kings. It is recorded that Melchizedek met Abraham with bread and wine and that Abraham gave this king a tithe of his plunder. It is also recorded that Melchizedek blessed Abraham. In the second passage of the quoted Psalm 110:4, our author develops the idea of “priest forever” and applies this to eternal priesthood to Jesus.
In our modern and postmodern era we might object to the kind of Bible interpretation our author is doing. On the face of it, this type of interpretation does seem a little rash. Coffman actually calls it “the boldest argument in the entire Bible.” 2 Barclay remarks that the writer bases his argument as much on what the scripture did not say about Melchizedek as what it did say.3 Obviously the argument appears to us today to be largely an argument from silence.
However, Barclay goes on to remind us of how the Jewish people in ancient times interpreted scripture. They felt that all scripture had four basic meanings: First there was the Peshat or the actual and literal meaning; then there was the Remaz or suggested meaning. After that there was the Derush, or the meaning which was attained after a careful investigation, and then the Sod or the inner and sometimes allegorical meaning.4 When we consider this we realize that the form of interpretation was not so far removed from what we accept as good Bible analysis today. We also use a form of gezera shawa and interpret scripture by other scripture. In addition we look for deeper meanings in the word of God.
Before we go on we might inquire about how the Jewish people of the first century really viewed this Melchizedek and how others have viewed him. He is mentioned briefly by the first-century historian Josephus, who treats him as a true priest of God. He is especially mentioned in the Dead Sea Scrolls written shortly before Christ. He is looked upon as one who will visit God’s vengeance upon the ungodly and deliver the righteous from Belial, ushering in a day of peace (11QMelch 2:13-16).5 Apparently the Qumran community believed in two Messiahs, one priestly and the other kingly. Lane states regarding all this: “It is recognized by nearly all interpreters that Melchizedek occupied an exalted status in the apocalyptic expectations of first-century sectarian Judaism.” 6
In the first century and since that time there have been many opinions about this mysterious man. Some have seen him as an appearance of Shem, Noah’s son. Others have seen him as an angel. He was even viewed as an incarnation of the Holy Spirit or as a pre-incarnate appearance of Christ himself. Unfortunately, these ideas do not seem to fit the picture and would actually destroy the delicate typology involved here. It is best to see Melchizedek as a historical figure who had quite unusual qualifications and who became a type of the coming Messianic King and divine high priest.
Melchizedek introduces the concept of priest-king which was quite foreign to Israel. These two offices were normally separated. We remember that on one occasion King Uzziah imposed himself into the priestly realm; took a censer and entered the temple of God. He was immediately stricken with leprosy (2 Chron. 26:16-21). In later times the Maccabees, who were of the priestly line, ruled Israel. Their line began well but ended in disgrace some generations later. With human nature involved, it was much too easy for the priestly line to become corrupt while also serving as kings. Yet, Melchizedek speaks to us of a divine priest/king who would come and rule forever in righteousness.
Our author proceeds to say: “and Abraham gave him a tenth of everything. First, his name means ‘king of righteousness’; then also, ‘king of Salem’ means ‘king of peace’” (7:2). In Abraham’s time, and later in the period when the law was given, it was apparently customary for one to give a tithe or a tenth of his possessions or spoils to God (cf. Lev. 27:30). Abraham must have surely been impressed with the figure of this priest-king. It is truly amazing that Melchizedek who was in the midst of Canaanite paganism was nevertheless true to God Most High. This hints that not all people were swept away with the false ideas of the pagans and that there was still a thread of the original truth running through the society of that day.7
The idea of a priesthood that was not of the Levitical order must have been a strange and even shocking idea to Israel. In First Century Roman times when the Book of Hebrews was written the Levitical priesthood that sprang from Aaron was held in very high esteem.8 Robertson remarks that it was a daring thing for the author to place Melchizedek above Aaron, and yet that is precisely what he does.9
The author’s description of Melchizedek goes on. He is described as being one “Without father or mother, without genealogy, without beginning of days or end of life, resembling the Son of God, he remains a priest forever” (7:3). It is noteworthy again that no genealogy is offered for this king and that birth and death are not recorded. This was a far cry from the Levitical priesthood, which was based upon a scrupulous genealogy. This was a primary factor regarding the priesthood. If one could not prove his genealogy he could not serve as priest (Ezra 2:62-63; Neh.7:63-65). Personal qualities did not enter into these qualifications at all.
Yet we see that Jesus, who is priest forever after Melchizedek’s order, bases his priesthood not on genealogy or what he inherited but solely because of what he was and is. Thus the Levitical claim to priesthood was based on legality while Christ’s claim through Melchizedek’s order is based on personality alone.10
We should be careful to note here that the priesthood of Christ is not really based upon the priesthood of Melchizedek. It is the other way around. The priesthood of Melchizedek is based upon the eternal priesthood of Christ. This ancient priest was made like the Son of God. The word “having been made like” is aphomoiomenos in the Greek and is used only here in the New Testament.11
The author of Hebrews has now fully introduced the theme that he so wanted to discuss with these Hebrew Christians and yet he feared they were too immature to comprehend it at first. He will now continue to develop this theme in all its intricate and fascinating detail. In fact, the idea of priesthood after the order of Melchizedek will become the “most characteristic thought of Hebrews.” 12
THE GREATNESS OF MELCHIZEDEK
Just think how great he was: Even the patriarch Abraham gave him a tenth of the plunder! Hebrews 7:4
Thus, mysterious Melchizedek has become a very important person from the pages of ancient history. It is difficult to imagine the great Abraham bowing to receive a blessing from him and then actually offering up to him a tithe of his plunder.
In the Greek, the word for “plunder” or “spoils” (akrothinion) is a very interesting one. It has reference to “the topmost point” (akron) or “the top of the heap.” It was a tithe taken from the pick of Abraham’s spoil.13
“Now the law requires the descendants of Levi who become priests to collect a tenth from the people— that is, from their fellow Israelites— even though they also are descended from Abraham” (7:5). The comparison that the author wishes to make is not one between Abraham and Melchizedek but actually one between Aaron and Melchizedek since Aaron came from the loins of Abraham.14 We understand from scripture that it was the descendants of Aaron or the Levites who were charged with taking the tithes from the people. In turn, the priests received their portion of the offerings.
“This man, however, did not trace his descent from Levi, yet he collected a tenth from Abraham and blessed him who had the promises” (7:6). So we have something really unusual here. Melchizedek collected a tithe but he had no genealogy and was therefore not of the priestly line. He was in fact instituting a new priestly line that was not of Levi. It is of note that our author uses the perfect tense for Melchizedek receiving the tithes from Abraham (Gk. dedekatoken). This “draws attention, not only to the historic event, but also to its abiding significance.” 15 What is also interesting is that Abraham, from whom Levi descended, paid a tithe to Melchizedek and was actually blessed by him as well. All this has several astounding implications and the author will carefully develop them all.
The author of Hebrews also makes another important observation concerning this historic meeting: “And without doubt the lesser is blessed by the greater” (7:7). We see this principle at work in the life of Jesus as he blessed the little children (Mk. 10:16) and as he blessed his own disciples (Lk. 24:51). Obviously the greater one did the blessing in both events (cf. Deut. 21:5).
“In the one case, the tenth is collected by people who die; but in the other case, by him who is declared to be living”(7:8). The big problem with the Levites was that they could only minister between the ages of 30 and 50 (Num. 4:3). After that time they were considered too old to conduct the rather strenuous work of the temple (Num. 8:25). So the work of the Levites and of the priesthood was limited by the frailty of man. Eventually the priests and even the high priest died. The big advantage and dignity of the Melchizedek priesthood was that it was not limited by time or age. It was an eternal and perpetual priesthood while that of the Levites was temporal.16
“One might even say that Levi, who collects the tenth, paid the tenth through Abraham, because when Melchizedek met Abraham, Levi was still in the body of his ancestor” (7:9-10). To really understand the author’s reasoning from here on we need to get over some of our western individualistic-type thinking and get more into the family and community-type thinking of people in the ancient Near East. Paul deals with a similar problem in Romans 5:12, when he shows that the sin of Adam our forefather actually affected the whole human race. It may be that we are a lot more controlled by genealogy than we think.17 We see in a similar sense today that kings, presidents and politicians can make decisions that affect multitudes.
There seems to be such a thing as “federal headship,” where one person can represent numerous others. For instance when King Edward VII of England renounced his throne, the abdication did not just bind him, but it bound all of his posterity.18 Here we see that in a sort of genetic sense, all the tribe of Levi was in the loins of Father Abraham as he paid tithes and accepted a blessing from Melchizedek.19 As strange as it may seem, the whole Levitical priesthood thus acknowledged the eternal priesthood represented by this mysterious king.
THE PRIESTLY ORDER OF MELCHIZEDEK
If perfection could have been attained through the Levitical priesthood— and indeed the law given to the people established that priesthood— why was there still need for another priest to come, one in the order of Melchizedek, not in the order of Aaron? Hebrews 7:11
Although the Levitical law and priesthood were both functioning in David’s time, he through the Spirit, realized that there was a need for another priesthood— one that would reach perfection and would last forever. Thus he spoke the prophetic words of Psalm 110: 4: “The LORD has sworn and will not change his mind: ‘You are a priest forever, in the order of Melchizedek.’”
The old order of priesthood was passing away due to age and decay. That old order was concerned with ceremonial cleansing, with types and patterns, with outward requirements, and with the earthly things. There needed to be a priesthood that did not pass away and one that was concerned with inner realities; one that was spiritual and heavenly. David saw that there had to be what we would call today a “paradigm change.” 20
After all, the whole Levitical system of the law and priesthood was not really designed to bring people near to God but to keep them at a distance from God.21 It emphasized their sin and unworthiness to approach God. The most sacred areas of both the tabernacle and temple were always off-limits for the common people. Only the priests could enter the temple court and only the high priest could enter the Holy of Holies within the veil and that only one day out of each year. How could there be a real spiritual growth and fulfillment with such a system? 22
David saw through revelation that there had to be a new system based on the order of Melchizedek. It would be a system with an eternal priesthood established by God’s oath— a priesthood without beginning of days or end of years. The one who would come according to the type of Melchizedek would be both eternal priest and king. He would be king of righteousness and king of peace. In the Greek language there are two words used for “another.” There is “heteros” which refers to another of a different kind and “allos” which refers to another of the same kind. It is “heteros” which is used here.23 Jesus belonged to a different kind of priesthood. With these scriptures it is firmly established that Jesus would be the eternal High Priest and King and that he would not be attempting to follow in the natural line of Aaron.
“For when the priesthood is changed, the law must be changed also” (7:12). Here we are faced with a seemingly insurmountable problem. The scripture bears witness in several places that the word of God is eternal (cf. Isa. 40:8). The law being also the word of God falls into the category of being eternal (Psa. 119:144,152, & 160). How then can that which should stand forever suddenly be swept away? We actually see Jesus dealing with this very problem when he says in Matthew 5:17-18: “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.”
Jesus came to fulfill the law not to destroy it or cast it away. When Jesus died as the perfect sacrifice for our sins, all the ceremonial laws regarding sacrifices were suddenly fulfilled and ended. It was not that the law of sacrifice was rescinded but it was completed. There would never again be a need to offer to God the blood of bulls, sheep and goats. All these things were “in part” but now the “perfect” sacrifice had come. In like manner, the priesthood of Israel was fulfilled and completed. Even the great veil of separation in the temple was rent in two (Mk. 15:37-38). In this sense there was a change in the priesthood and the order of Aaron was retired.
The Greek language bears out this change with an additional word. The Greek word for “change” used in this case is metatithemi and has the idea of transposing or putting one thing in place of another.24 We cannot imagine what an assault this whole statement was upon Judaism’s most holy institution and its precincts.25.
“He of whom these things are said belonged to a different tribe, and no one from that tribe has ever served at the altar. For it is clear that our Lord descended from Judah, and in regard to that tribe Moses said nothing about priests” (7:13-14). Jesus’ descent from the tribe of Judah is incontrovertible in scripture. We see this stated clearly in Revelation 5:5 and we see it assumed in the birth narrative of Matthew 2:6.26 By law, Jesus could not become a priest but God had designed another way for this to happen.
JESUS, OUR PRIEST FOREVER
And what we have said is even more clear if another priest like Melchizedek appears, one who has become a priest not on the basis of a regulation as to his ancestry but on the basis of the power of an indestructible life. Hebrews 7:15-16
How tragic it was that Jesus at his trial appeared before the priests and even the chief priest of Israel who all were in the priestly line of Aaron (Mt. 27:1). It reminds us of the old Christmas song Sweet Little Jesus Boy published in 1934 by Robert MacGimsey. The
words go:
We didn’t know who you were.
Didn’t know you’d come to save us Lord
To take our sins away
Our eyes were blind, we could not see
We didn’t know who you were.
Israel’s priesthood with one voice refused to accept his ministry and condemned him. They decreed that he should be put to death. But unknown to them, Jesus would soon demonstrate the power of his endless life by being raised from the dead.27
“For it is declared: ‘You are a priest forever, in the order of Melchizedek’” (7:17). The priests who were descendants of Aaron had no idea that they had just been replaced by a new and eternal order. This was only realized on that resurrection morn by his few scattered but amazed disciples. Meyer remarks concerning these faithful: “Amid the almost universal lawlessness and depravity which swept over Palestine [sic], righteousness and peace seem to have fled for shelter to this little community, where alone due reverence was given to the Most High God, possessor of heaven and earth.” 28
A CHANGE IN THE LAW
The former regulation is set aside because it was weak and useless (for the law made nothing perfect), and a better hope is introduced, by which we draw near to God. Hebrews 7:18-19
We see in Romans that the weakness of the law was not due to the law itself but it was due to the weakness of human flesh (Rom. 7:14-16). In Galatians 3:24, the law is pictured as a stern schoolmaster or tutor who would lead us to Christ. The law was to be in force until the seed would come to whom the promise was made (Gal. 3:19). That seed was Christ. Once Christ has come and we have come to Christ we do not turn back to these elementary things. We now have a better hope in Jesus and through him we can actually draw near to God. The former things have served their purpose as only introducing us to Christ.
“And it was not without an oath! Others became priests without any oath, but he became a priest with an oath when God said to him: ‘The Lord has sworn and will not change his mind: ‘You are a priest forever’” (7:20-21). It is interesting that the whole Levitical system was made without a single oath from God. This seems to indicate that the whole system could be set aside.29 Barclay remarks that it is startling when we consider the Almighty God taking an oath and that it is an indicator that we have here a statement of extraordinary importance.30 We also have a priesthood that is eternal and unchangeable based upon the oath of the Almighty.
A BETTER COVENANT
Because of this oath, Jesus has become the guarantor of a better covenant. Hebrews 7:22
Here our author introduces for the first time the important subject of a “better” or “new covenant” (cf. Jer. 31:31-34). His practice all along has been to drop little hints of what he will be talking about in the future. The extremely important subject of the better covenant will be dealt with thoroughly in the next chapter and actually throughout the remainder of the epistle.
The word for “covenant” used here is the Greek word diatheke. It is the word that generally corresponds to the Hebrew berith and it means a disposition, testament or will. We see here that Jesus is the “guarantor” or “surety” of this will or testament. Here the Greek word egguos is used. In the ancient world, as well as in our modern world, this describes the one who gives security, stands good, cosigns or even posts bail for another person.31 So we see that Jesus guarantees this new and better covenant. One of the most beautiful and meaningful old hymns in this regard was written in 1742 by Charles Wesley. The first two verses of this grand old hymn speak of Jesus as our surety:
Arise, my soul, arise, shake off thy guilty fears;
The bleeding Sacrifice in my behalf appears:
Before the throne my Surety stands,
Before the throne my Surety stands,
My name is written on His hands.
He ever lives above, for me to intercede;
His all-redeeming love, His precious blood to plead:
His blood atoned for every race,
His blood atoned for every race,
And sprinkles now the throne of grace.32
The author reminds us again of the old priesthood: “Now there have been many of those priests, since death prevented them from continuing in office; but because Jesus lives forever, he has a permanent priesthood” (7:23-24). The Old Testament priesthood was a dying one. Each priest could serve only until he retired with age or death overtook him. Finally in AD 70, with the destruction of the temple, Phannias Ben Samuel was recorded as the last Jewish high priest, being the 81st or either the 83rd in the sacred order. He died in the temple’s destruction.33 During the almost two thousand years since that time, there has not been another high priest in Israel (cf. Hos. 3:4).
Unlike the priesthood of Aaron that died, Jesus lives as a priest forever. “Therefore he is able to save completely those who come to God through him, because he always lives to intercede for them” (7:25). In seeming opposition to all the passages warning us about falling away, this passage is one of the most assuring ones in the whole New Testament. Why should we not have assurance with Jesus God’s Son interceding for us? He ever lives to help us and to save us even to the uttermost.
On one important occasion in his earthly life (Luke 22:32) we see Jesus interceding for Peter. He prayed that his faith would not fail.34 Obviously Peter’s faith did not fail like that of Judas, and, although he had denied Christ three times, he was restored as a disciple and even as a leader of the church. How much more is Jesus able to plead our cause now that he sits enthroned in heaven.
OUR PERFECT HIGH PRIEST
Such a high priest truly meets our need— one who is holy, blameless, pure, set apart from sinners, exalted above the heavens. Hebrews 7:26
Jesus as our High Priest is perfectly able to meet all our needs. He is available at all times and in all our situations. We never have to wonder about his qualifications to help us since he is pure and set apart from us sinners.
“Unlike the other high priests, he does not need to offer sacrifices day after day, first for his own sins, and then for the sins of the people. He sacrificed for their sins once for all when he offered himself” (7:27). Barclay reminds us that the greatest of all sacrifices, the sacrifice for the Day of Atonement, always began with a sacrifice for sins committed by the high priest himself.35 He also reminds us that the author is here dropping another of his little markers concerning what he will talk about later. That will deal with Jesus offering himself as the perfect sacrifice for our sins.
Obviously Jesus being holy, blameless, pure, and set apart from sinners needed no sacrifice for his own sins. We never have to concern ourselves with the character of the one to whom we confess.
“For the law appoints as high priests men in all their weakness; but the oath, which came after the law, appointed the Son, who has been made perfect forever” (7:28). We might again remind ourselves of that which is better, the law that is weak due to human flesh and is being set aside, or the oath of God that endures for all time. The old order of priesthood was weak and in the end became utterly defiled and compromised by the world. Our priest is absolutely free from all such defilement and is ever available to meet our deepest and most urgent needs.