HEBREWS 7 COMMETARYEDITED BY GLE PEASE

Melchizedek the Priest1 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,

Over the centuries, there has been much discussion with regard to the nature of Melchizedek. Some have thought that he was a manifestation of the second person of the Trinity. Others have thought that this was a real Canaanitic priest who served to be a type or shadow of the messianic priesthood. This latter option seems more possible for a number of reasons. First, he is compared to the Son of God (this would be odd), secondly, he is named as the King of a specific city. However, either understanding is defensible and knowing for certain which is true is not absolutely necessary for us to receive the appropriate instruction and encouragement from the verses.

BARES, "For this Melchisedek; - compare the notes on Heb_5:6. The name Melchizedek, from which the apostle derives a portion of his argument here, is Hebrew,

Malkiy-Tsedeq, and is correctly explained as meaning king of righteousness -being compounded of two words - king and righteousness. Why this name was given to this man is unknown. Names, however, were frequently given on account of some quality or characteristic of the man: see the notes on Isa_8:18. This name may have been given on account of his eminent integrity. The apostle calls attention to it Heb_7:2 as a circumstance worthy of notice, that his name, and the name of the city where he reigned, were so appropriate to one who, as a priest, was the predecessor of the Messiah. The account of Melchizedek, which is very brief, occurs in Gen_14:18-20. The name occurs in the Bible only in Gen. 14, Psa_110:4, and in this Epistle. Nothing else is certainly known of him.

Grotius supposes that he is the same man who in the history of Sanchoniathon is

called Suduk. It has indeed been made a question by some whether such a person ever actually existed, and consequently whether this be a proper name. But the account in Genesis is as simple a historical record as any other in the Bible. In that account there is no difficulty whatever. It is said simply that when Abraham was returning from a successful military expedition, this man, who it seems was well known, and who was respected as a priest of God, came out to express his approbation of what he had done, and to refresh him with bread and wine. As a tribute of gratitude to him, and as a thank-offering to God, Abraham gave him a tenth part of the spoils which he had taken. Such

an occurrence was by no means improbable, nor would it have been attended with any special difficulty if it had not been for the use which the apostle makes of it in this Epistle. Yet on no subject has there been a greater variety of opinion than in regard to this man.

The bare recital of the opinions which have been entertained of him would fill a volume. But in a case which seems to be plain from the Scripture narrative, it is not necessary even to enumerate these opinions. They only serve to show how easy it is for people to mystify a clear statement of history, and how fond they are of finding what is mysterious and marvelous in the plainest narrative of facts. That he was Shem, as the Jews suppose, or that he was the Son of God himself, as many Christian expositors have maintained, there is not the slightest evidence. That the latter opinion is false is perfectly clear - for if he were the Son of God, with what propriety could the apostle say that he was made like the Son of God Heb_7:3; that is, like himself; or that Christ was constituted a priest after the order of Melchisedek; that is, that he was a type of himself? The most simple and probable opinion is that given by Josephus, that he was a pious Canaanitish prince; a personage eminently endowed by God, and who acted as the priest of his people.

That he combined in himself the offices of priest and king, furnished to the apostle a beautiful illustration of the offices sustained by the Redeemer, and was in this respect, perhaps, the only one whose history is recorded in the Old Testament, who would furnish such an illustration. That his genealogy was not recorded, while that of every other priest mentioned was so carefully traced and preserved, furnished another striking illustration. In this respect, like the Son of God, he stood alone. He was not in a line of priests; he was preceded by no one in the sacerdotal office, nor was he followed by any. That he was superior to Abraham. and consequently to all who descended from Abraham; that a tribute was rendered to him by the great Ancestor of all the fraternity of Jewish priests was just an illustration which suited the purpose of Paul. His name, therefore, the place where he reigned, his solitariness, his lone conspicuity in all the past, his dignity, and perhaps the air of mystery thrown over him in the brief history in Genesis, furnished a beautiful and striking illustration of the solitary grandeur, and the inapproachable eminence of the priesthood of the Son of God. There is no evidence that Melchizedek was designed to be a type of the Messiah, or that Abraham so understood it, Nothing of this kind is affirmed; and how shall we affirm it when the sacred oracles are silent?

(Doubtless great care and sobriety are requisite in the interpretation of types, and we admire the caution that, in every instance, demands the authority of Scripture, expressed or distinctly implied. From want of this caution, the greatest extravagancies have been committed, the most fanciful analogies established, where none were intended, and every minute circumstance in the Old Testament exalted into a type of something in the New. The very boards and nails of the tabernacle of Moses have been thus exalted.

Yet in our just aversion to one extreme, it is possible we may run into another. Of the typical character of Melchizedek, we had thought no doubt could be entertained. The canon of typical interpretation, indeed, demands, that in order to constitute the relation between type and antitype, there be, in addition to mere resemblance, precious design, and pre-ordained connection. And the commentary affirms, that there is no evidence, that Melchizedek was designed to be a type of the Messiah, or that Abraham so understood it. Let it be observed in reply, that in the Psa_110:1 Psalm the typical character of Melchizedek seems expressly acknowledged. It may be alleged, that the prophet simply states resemblance, without affirming that such resemblance was

designed or intended. But that a prophet should be commissioned to declare, that Christs priesthood should be after such an order, and yet that in the institution of that exalted order there should have been no designed reference to Christ, is improbable.

The prediction seems to involve the original design. And this order of priesthood, too, is far superior to that of Aaron, the typical character of which is admitted. Moreover, the last clause of verse third, in this chapter, according to our English translation as a designed connection. Melchizedek was made like unto the Son of God. The translation

is accurate. Aphomoimenos, according to Parkhurst, is made very like. So also Scott: The composition is probably intended to add energy; made very like. And Bloomfield adopts, being made by the divine decree a type of that great High Priest, who, &c,; see the notes in Greek Testament. Lastly, on any other principle than that of designed typical relation, it is difficult, if not impossible, to give any just account of the remarkable omissions, the apparently studied silence, in the history of Melchizedek, in regard to those things that are commonly related in notices of lives, however brief.

He is introduced to us with an air of impenetrable mystery. He appears on the stage as Priest of the most High God, and then disappears, leaving us in complete darkness concerning his birth, parentage, and death. In all these respects, says Mr. Scott, the silence of the Scripture is intentional and refers to the great antitype. Melchizedek, therefore, we may remark, seems not only to have been designed as a type, but special care has been taken, that the record of him should be in all things suited to that design. That the apostle lighted on a happy coincidence, deserving of a passing thought, is not probable, whether this remark be meant to apply to the name, or to other particulars in this remarkable story. Indeed, divest it of its designed typical character, and the grandeur of the passage vanishes. A simple resemblance has been discovered between Christ and a certain character in the old Testament. This is all the apostle means to affirm! And for this too, he introduces Melchizedek, with such wondrous caution in Heb_5:11; Of whom we have many things to say, and hard to be uttered, but ye are dull of hearing. What was hard to be uttered, or difficult to be comprehended about a mere illustration, or resemblance?

The following remarks of Owen are pertinent and beautiful. The true cause of all these omissions was the same with that of the institution of his (Melchizedeks) priesthood, and the introduction of his person into the story. And this was, that he might he the more express and signal representative of the Lord Christ in his priesthood. And we may herein consider the sovereign wisdom of the Holy Spirit in bringing forth truth unto light, according as the state and condition of the church doth require. And first he prophesieth only a naked story of a person that was a type of Christ. Something the people of the age wherein he lived, might learn by his ministrations, but not much. For what was principally instructive in him, for the use of the church, was not of force until all his circumstances were forgotten. Yea, the contrivance of any tradition concerning his parents, birth, and death, had been contrary to the mind of God, and what instruction he intended the church by him.

Afterward, when, it may be, all thoughts of any use or design in this story were lost, and the church was fully satisfied in a priesthood quite of another nature, the Holy Spirit in one word of prophecy instructs her, not only that the things spoken concerning Melchizedek were not so recorded for his own sake, or on his own account, but with respect to another priest, which was afterward to arise, by him represented. This gave a new consideration to the whole story; but moreover gave the church to know, that the priesthood, which it then had, was not always to continue, but that one of another nature

was to be introduced, as was signified long before the institution of that priesthood which they enjoyed, Psa_110:4. Yet the church was left greatly in the dark, and, at the coming of our Saviour, had utterly lost all knowledge of the mystery of the type, and the promise renewed in the Psalm. Wherefore, our apostle entering on the unfolding of this mystery, doth not only preface it with an assertion of its difficulty, but also by a long previous discourse, variously prepareth their minds to a most diligent attention.

The excellence of this quotation will, in the readers estimation, excuse the length of it. On the whole, he who reflects how all things in the ancient economy were ordered of God, and how great a part of that economy was meant to adumbrate the realities of the gospel, while he will be cautious in admitting typical analogies of a doubtful kind, will be slow to believe that the resemblance between Christs priesthood, and that of the most exalted order previously instituted, is casual, or undesigned - slow to believe, that the apostle would make so large use of such accidental analogy, and found on it an argument so great.)

King of Salem - Such is the record in Gen_14:18. The word Salem - shalm -means peace; and from this fact the apostle derives his illustration in Heb_7:2. He regards it as a fact worth remarking on, that the name of the place over which he ruled expressed so strikingly the nature of the kingdom over which the Messiah was placed. In regard to the place here denoted by the name Salem, the almost uniform opinion has been that it was that afterward known as Jerusalem. The reasons for this opinion are,

(1) That it is a part of the name Jerusalem itself - the name Jerus, altered from Jebus, having been afterward added, because it was the residence of the Jebusites.

(2) The name Salem is itself given to Jerusalem; Psa_76:2, In Salem also is his tabernacle, and his dwelling place in Zion.

(3) Jerusalem would be in the direction through which Abraham would naturally pass on his return from the slaughter of the kings. He had pursued them unto Dan Gen_14:14, and he was returning to Mamre, that is, Hebron; Gen_14:13, on his return, therefore, he would pass in the vicinity of Jerusalem.

Rosenmuller, however, supposes that by the name here, Jerusalem is not intended, but the whole region occupied by the Jebusites and Hittites, or the royal seat of this region, situated not far from the cities of the plain - the vale of Siddim where Sodom and Gomorrah were situated. But I see no reason for doubting that the common opinion that Jerusalem is intended, is correct. That place was favorably situated for a capital of a nation or tribe; was easily fortified; and would be likely to be early selected as a royal residence.

Priest of the most high God - This is the account which is given of him in Gen_14:18. The leading office of priest was to offer sacrifice. This duty was probably first performed by the father of the family (compare the notes on Job_1:5; see also Gen_8:20; Gen_22:2), and when he was dead it devolved on the oldest son. It would seem also that in the early ages, among all nations whose records have reached us, the office of priest and king were united in the same person. It was long before it was found that the interests of religion would be promoted by having the office of priest pertain to an order of men set apart for this special work. That Melchizedek, who was a king, should also be a priest, was not, therefore, remarkable. The only thing remarkable is, that be should have been a priest of the true God. In what way he became acquainted with Him, is wholly unknown. It may have been by tradition preserved from the times of Noah, as it is possible that the arrival of Abraham in that land may have been in some way the means of acquainting him with the existence and character of Jehovah. The fact shows at least

that the knowledge of the true God was not extinct in the world.

Who met Abraham - He came out to meet him, and brought with him bread and wine. Why he did this, is not mentioned. It was probably as an expression of gratitude to Abraham for having freed the country from oppressive and troublesome invaders, and in order to furnish refreshments to the party which Abraham headed who had become weary and exhausted with the pursuit. There is not the slightest evidence that the bread and wine which he brought forth was designed to typify the Sacrament of the Lords Supper, as has been sometimes supposed; compare Bush on Gen_14:18. What did he know of this ordinance? And why should we resort to such a supposition, when the whole case may be met by a simple reference to the ancient rites of hospitality, and by the fact that the deliverance of the country by Abraham from a grievous invasion made some expression of gratitude on the part of this pious king in the highest degree proper?

Returning from the slaughter of the kings - Amraphel, king of Shinar, Arioch, king of Ellasar, Chedorlaomer, king of Elam, and Tidal, king of nations, who had invaded the valley where Sodom and Gomorrah were, and had departed with a great amount of booty. Those kings Abraham had pursued beyond Dan, and to the neighborhood of Damascus, and had smitten them, and recovered the spoil.

And blessed him - For the important service which he had rendered in taking vengeance on these invaders; in freeing the land from the apprehension of being invaded again; and in recovering the valuable booty which they had taken away. From Heb_7:6-7, it appears that this act of blessing was regarded as that of one who was superior to Abraham. That is, he blessed him as a priest and a king. As such he was superior in rank to Abraham, who never claimed the title of king, and who is not spoken of as a priest.

CLARKE, "For this Melchisedec, king of Salem - See the whole of this history largely explained in the notes, See Gen_14:18 (note), etc., and the concluding observations at the end of that chapter.

The name Melchisedec, . is thus expounded in Bereshith Rabba, sec. 43, fol. 42,

.. matsdie.eth.Yoshebaiv, The Justifier of those who dwell in him; and this is sufficiently true of Christ, but false of Jerusalem, to which the rabbins apply it, who state that it was originally called Tsedek, and that it justified its inhabitants.

Salem is generally understood to be Jerusalem; but some think that it was that city of Shechem mentioned Jos_20:7. St. Jerome was of this opinion.

GILL, "Various have been the opinions of writers concerning Melchizedek; some have thought him to be more than a man; some, that he was an angel; others, that he was the Holy Ghost; and others, that he was a divine person superior to Christ, which needs no refutation; others have supposed that he was the Son of God himself: but he is expressly said to be like unto him, and Christ is said to be of his order; which manifestly distinguish the one from the other; besides, there is nothing said of Melchizedek which proves him to be more than a man: accordingly others take him to have been a mere man; but these are divided; some say that he was Shem, the son of

Noah, which is the constant opinion of the Jewish writers F26

: but it is not true of him, that he was without father, and without mother, an account of his descent being given in Scripture; nor is it probable that he should be a king of a single city in Ham's country, and Abraham be a stranger there: others say, that he was a Canaanitish king, of the posterity of Ham; others affirm him to be a perfect sinless man, and that all that is said of him in Genesis, and in this context, is literally true of him; but that he should be immediately created by God, as Adam, and be without sin as he, are

things entirely without any foundation: others take him to be a mere man, but an extraordinary one, eminently raised up by God to be a type of the Messiah; and think it most proper not to inquire curiously who he was, since the Scripture is silent concerning his genealogy and descent; and that as it should seem on purpose, that he might be a more full and fit type of Christ; and this sense appears best and safest. Aben Ezra says, his name signifies what he was, the king of a righteous place: Salem, of which he was king, was not Shalem, a city of Shechem, in the land of Canaan, (Genesis 33:18) afterwards called Salim, near to which John was baptizing, (John 3:23) where is shown the palace of Melchizedek in its ruins, which cannot be, since that city was laid to the ground, and sowed with salt by Abimelech, (Judges 9:45) but Jerusalem is the place; which is

the constant opinion of the Jews F1

, and is called Salem in (Psalms 86:2) . The interpretation of this word is given in the next verse; some of the Jewish writers referred to say, that it was usual for the kings of Jerusalem to be called Melchizedek and Adonizedek, as in (Joshua 10:3) just as the kings of Egypt were called Pharaoh.

priest of the most high God,as he is said to be, (Genesis 14:18) for he was both king and priest, in which he was an eminent type of Christ; and his being a king is no objection to his being a priest, since it was usual for kings to be priests; and though the Hebrew word "Cohen" sometimes signifies a prince, it cannot be so understood here, not only because the word is rendered "priest" by the Septuagint, and by the apostle, but because he is called the priest of God; and Christ is said to be of his order: and he is styled the priest of God, because he was called and invested by him with this office, and was employed in his service; who is said to be the most high God, from his dwelling on high, and from his superior power to all others, and to distinguish him from idol gods; this is a character of great honour given to Melchizedek;

and blessed him;Abraham, and the most high God also: the form of blessing both is recorded in (Genesis 14:19,20) . This was not a mere civil salutation, nor only a congratulation upon his success, nor only a return of thanks for victory, though these things are included; nor did he do this as a private person, but as the priest of the most high God, and blessed him in his name authoritatively, as the high priest among the Jews afterwards did, (Numbers 6:23-27) and in this he was a type of Christ, who blesses his people with all spiritual blessings, with redemption, justification, pardon, peace, and all grace, and with eternal glory. Here was a Gentile priest before there were Jews, and he was a priest of the true God. Gentiles were the people of God before the Jews.

HERY, "The foregoing chapter ended with a repetition of what had been cited once and again before out of Psa_110:4, Jesus, a high priest for ever, after the order of Melchisedec. Now this chapter is as a sermon upon that text; here the apostle sets before them some of the strong meat he had spoken of before, hoping they would by greater diligence be better prepared to digest it.

I. The great question that first offers itself is, Who was this Melchisedec? All the account we have of him in the Old Testament is in Gen_14:18, etc., and in Psa_110:4. Indeed we are much in the dark about him; God has thought fit to leave us so, that this Melchisedec might be a more lively type of him whose generation none can declare. If men will not be satisfied with what is revealed, they must rove about in the dark in endless conjectures, some fancying him to have been an angel, others the Holy Ghost; but,

1. The opinions concerning him that are best worthy our consideration are these three: -(1.) Therabbin, and most of the Jewish writers, think he was Shem the son of Noah who was king and priest to their ancestors, after the manner of the other patriarchs; but it is not probable that he should thus change his name. Besides, we have no account of his settling in the land of Canaan. (2.) Many Christian writers have thought him to be Jesus

Christ himself, appearing by a special dispensation and privilege to Abraham in the flesh, and who was known to Abraham by the name Melchisedec, which agrees very well to Christ, and to what is said, Joh_8:56, Abraham saw his day and rejoiced. Much may be said for this opinion, and what is said in Heb_7:3 does not seem to agree with any mere man; but then it seems strange to make Christ a type of himself. (3.) The most general opinion is that he was a Canaanite king, who reigned in Salem, and kept up religion and the worship of the true God; that he was raised to be a type of Christ, and was honoured by Abraham as such.

JAMISO, "Heb_7:1-28. Christs High Priesthood after the order of Melchisedec superior to Aarons.

this Melchisedec (Heb_6:20; Psa_110:4). The verb does not come till Heb_7:3, abideth.

king ... priest Christ unites these offices in their highest sense, and so restores the patriarchal union of these offices.

Salem Jerusalem, that is, seeing peace; others make Salem distinct, and to be that mentioned (Gen_33:18; Joh_3:23).

the most high God called also Possessor of heaven and earth (Gen_14:19, Gen_14:22). This title of God, the Most High, handed down by tradition from the primitive revelation, appears in the Phoenician god Elion, that is, Most High. It is used to imply that the God whom Melchisedec served is THE TRUE GOD, and not one of the gods of the nations around. So it is used in the only other cases in which it is found in the New Testament, namely in the address of the demoniac, and the divining damsel constrained to confess that her own gods were false, and God the only true God.

who met Abraham in company with the king of Sodom (Gen_14:17, Gen_14:18).

slaughter perhaps defeat, as Alford translates. So Gen_14:17 (compare Gen_14:15) may be translated. Arioch, king of Ellasar, lived and reigned after the disaster [Bengel]. However, if Chedorlaomer and Amraphel and Tidal were slain, though Arioch survived, slaughter of the kings would be correct.

blessed him As priest he first blessed Abraham on Gods part; next he blessed God on Abrahams part: a reciprocal blessing. Not a mere wish, but an authoritative and efficacious intercession as a priest. The Most High Gods prerogative as Possessor of heaven and earth, is made over to Abraham; and Abrahams glory, from his victory over the foe, is made over to God. A blessed exchange for Abraham (Gen_14:19, Gen_14:20).

CALVI, "1.For this Melchisedec, etc. He has hitherto been stimulating the Jews by exhortations, that they might attentively consider the comparison between Christ and Melchisedec. At the end of the last chapter, that he might return from his digression to his subject, he QUOTED again the passage from the Psalms; and now he enters fully into what he had before slightly referred to; for he enumerates particularly the things connected with Melchisedec, in which he resembled Christ. It is indeed no wonder that he dwells so minutely on this subject. It was doubtless no common thing that in a country abounding in the corruptions of so many superstitions, a man was found who preserved the pure worship of God; for on one side he was nigh to Sodom and Gomorrah, and on the other to the Canaanites, so that he was on every side encompassed by ungodly men. Besides, the whole world was so fallen into impiety, that it is very probable that God was nowhere faithfully

worshipped except in the family of Abraham; for his father and his grandfather, who ought to have retained true religion, had long before degenerated into idolatry. It was therefore a memorable fact, that there was still a king who not only retained true religion, but also performed himself the office of a priest. And it was doubtless necessary that in him who was to be a type of the Son of God all things excellent should be found: and that Christ was shadowed forth by this type is evident from the Psalm referred to; for David did not say without reason, art a priest forever after the order Melchisedec; no, but on the contrary, by these words a sublime mystery was recommended to the Church.

Let us now consider each of those particulars in which the Apostle makes Christ like Melchisedec. (110)

The first likeness is in the name; for it was not without a mystery that he was called the King of righteousness. For though this honor is ascribed to kings who rule with moderation and in equity, yet this belongs really to Christ alone, who not only exercises authority justly as others do, but also communicates to us the righteous of God, partly when he makes us to be counted righteous by a gratuitous reconciliation, and partly when he renews us by his Spirit, that we may lead a godly and holy life. He is then called the King of righteousness, because of what he effects in diffusing righteousness on all his people. (111) It hence follows, that out of his kingdom nothing but sin reigns among men. And therefore Zechariah, when he introduces him, as by the solemn decree of God, into the possession of his kingdom, thus extols him,

O daughter of Sion, Behold thy righteous King

cometh to thee, (Zec_2:10;)

intimating that the righteousness, which is otherwise wanting to us, is brought to us by the coming of Christ.

The second likeness which the Apostle states is as to the kingdom of peace. This peace indeed is the fruit of that righteousness which he has mentioned. It hence follows that wherever Christ kingdom extends, there peace ought to be, as we find in Isa_2:1, and in other places. But as peace among the Hebrews means also a prosperous and happy state, it may be so taken here: yet I prefer to understand it here of that inward peace which tranquilizes the conscience and renders it confident before God. And the excellency of this blessing cannot be sufficiently estimated, unless you consider on the other hand, how miserable a thing it is to be tormented by constant inquietude; which must necessarily be the case until we have our consciences pacified by being reconciled to God through Christ.

(110) The passage reads better, and the meaning appears more evident, when we consider was as understood in the first verse, as Calvin does. The first part refers to

what he did as to Abraham: and the second, to what he was as a type of Christ.

ow this Melchisedec, king of Salem, was a priest of the most high God; who met Abraham returning from the overthrow of the kings, and blessed him; to whom Abraham also divided the tenth of all: being first indeed, by interpretation, King of righteousness, and then also King of Salem, which is, King of Peace; without father, without mother, without decent, having no BEGIIG of days or end of life, but

By saying that he Abraham, we are to render that he prayed God to bless him, as we find it explained in Gen_14:19.

(111) It is not as a king, but as a priest that Christ is our righteousness. Therefore strictly speaking, as a king, he administers righteousness, or acts righteously. king of righteousness, may be rendered, as Stuart does, a righteous king. See Psa_45:7 Ed.

COFFMA, "CHRIST; THE ATITYPE OF MELCHIZEDEK;

JESUS' PRIESTHOOD IS SUPERIOR TO THAT OF THE LEVITES;

A DESCRIPTIO OF JESUS; THE PERFECT HIGH PRIEST

For this Melchizedek, king of Salem, priest of God Most High, who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings and blessed him, to whom also Abraham divided a tenth part of all (being first by interpretation, King of righteousness, and then also King of Salem, which is King of peace, without father, without mother, without genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life, but made like unto the Son of God) abideth a priest COTIUALLY. (Hebrews 7:1-3)

Melchizedek had already been mentioned a number of times, but here the author of Hebrews turns to a fuller exploitation of what must be termed the boldest argument in the entire Bible, based upon the historical ACCOUTof Melchizedek in Genesis 14 and what had doubtless seemed for ages like a minor statement in Psalms 110:4. The inspired author of this epistle reveals that the reference in Psalms 110:4 is not a minor thing at all. On the contrary, it was something God swore to! God himself, in that reference, made mention of a priest forever "after the ORDER of Melchizedek," and therein lay the key to unravel the mystery of that Messiah whose kingship descended through Judah, but whose priesthood was that of an altogether different order from the one enjoyed by the Levites. In the verses before us, Melchizedek is said to be like "unto the Son of God," and that Christ is after the likeness of Melchizedek (Hebrews 7:14), indicating clearly that Christ must be understood as the antitype of Melchizedek, making all the things of Melchizedek's life typical of certain things in the life of Jesus Christ. The likeness is noted in the following study.

MELCHIZEDEK AD JESUS

The following likenesses in type and antitype are plain: (1) The word "Melchizedek" means "King of righteousness," thus the very name becomes a title of the Lord Jesus Christ. (2) "King of Salem" means "King of peace," and thus the title of Melchizedek is another appropriate title of our Lord (Isaiah 9:6ff; Psalms 72:7). (3) Melchizedek was both king and priest, a double dignity not enjoyed by any illustrious Hebrew, not even Moses, and startlingly typical of Jesus Christ who is both king and high priest. (4) Melchizedek received tithes of Abraham, even as Christ receives gifts of them that love and follow him. (5) Melchizedek brought forth bread and wine; and, although not specifically mentioned here because it was not germane to the argument, the fact itself is a strong suggestion of the Lord's institution of the Lord's Supper. (6) He blessed Abraham; Christ blesses his followers. (7) Melchizedek's priesthood encompassed service to Gentiles and Jews alike, as witnessed by his reception of Abraham; and Christ likewise is the High Priest of all mankind, having no racial or other limitation. (8) The eighth likeness between Melchizedek and Christ is a little more difficult to understand because it is OT FOUDED on anything that Melchizedek did or said, and not even upon anything that is said about him in the Genesis narrative, this eighth similarity being made to depend upon the manner and form of the Genesis record, with special reference to what is not said. See below.

The statement by the author of Hebrews that Melchizedek had no father, no mother, no genealogy, no BEGIIG of life, and no end of days, simply means THAT HE HAD OE OF THOSE THIGS I THE SCRIPTURAL RECORD, and does not mean that he was actually born in a manner different from other men. Unlike the Levites who received their priestly offices through meticulously kept and guarded genealogies, Melchizedek, in his single glorious appearance in the sacred scriptures, flashes upon the holy record absolutely dissociated from everything either preceding or following that remarkable event. Ancestry? As far as the scriptures were concerned, he had none. Descendants? ot a word about any of them. Beginning of life? There was no record of his ever having been born, being an infant, or youth; he appeared in HISTORY once only, in royal, priestly dignity, with not even a hint of how any of this came to exist. End of days? As far as the scriptural record goes, he could be alive yet. There is no record of his death as there was of Moses, and of Aaron (UMBERS 20:22ff); and for all the scriptures say to the contrary, he still stands after all those centuries, in endless glory, a priest of the Most High God, receiving tithes of Abraham, and blessing him. The author of Hebrews, through inspiration, saw that it was by God's purposeful design that the story of Melchizedek had been so deployed upon the sacred page in isolated splendor, and that purpose was to make Melchizedek's priesthood SUGGEST the endless priesthood of Jesus. To be sure, Melchizedek's priesthood only gives an impression of being endless whereas that of Jesus is actually so.

Who was this mysterious Melchizedek? And which Salem had him for king? Lenski OTED some of the strange speculations on the identity of Melchizedek as follows:

Rabbi Ismael, about 135 B.C., thought him to be Shem, oah's son; this opinion has been accepted by Luther and others. Philo ... did not regard Melchizedek as a

historical person. Origen thought him to be an angel being. Hierakas, at the end of the third century, made him a temporary incarnation of the Holy Spirit, others a similar incarnation of the Logos.[1]Of course, these speculations are unconvincing, because there is not a word in the Genesis record to make Melchizedek any less historical than Abraham, Amraphel, Arioch, Chederlaomer, or Tidal. Salem is equally historical, there being at least two such ancient places, either of which could have been the dominion of Melchizedek. Josephus identified it with Jerusalem, saying "They afterward called Salem JERUSALEM."[2] Macknight identified it thus,

According to Jerome, who saith he received his information from some learned Jews, it was the town which was mentioned (Genesis 33:18) as a city of Shechem, and which is spoken of in John 3:23, as near to Aenon, where John baptized. This city, being in Abraham's way, as he returned from Damascus to Sodom after the slaughter of the kings, many are of Jerome's opinion that the northern city was Melchizedek's city, rather than Jerusalem, which was situated farther to the south.[3]The difficulty that makes people seek an unhistorical Melchizedek rises not in the Old Testament, where he plainly is historical, but in the ew Testament where the reference to "no father, no mother, no genealogy, no BEGIIG of life or ending of days" is confusing until one sees the divine purpose in so presenting him in the Bible. Lenski saw this as follows:

The sudden way in which the scriptures draw BACK and close the curtain on Melchizedek is the divine way of making him a type of Jesus, the King-Priest, who like Melchizedek, stands alone and unique in his priesthood and is absolutely distinct from the long Aaronic succession of priests.[4]Priest of God Most High, one of the titles of Melchizedek, is of the utmost significance to religious thought. This means absolutely that the Jews did not develop, evolve, discover, nor in any sense whatever originate monotheism; for this Melchizedek, who was not a Jew, is in the scriptures POSITIVELYidentified with the Most High God, the same Most High God who put the finger of heavenly light upon him as a type of the Messiah in Psalms 110:4. Polytheism was never able completely to crowd out the worship of the one true and only God; and some residue of that original and true worship was centered in Salem while Melchizedek was priest and king there. Westcott commented thus, "There were traces of a primitive (monotheistic) worship of El in Phoenicia side by side with that of Baal, the center of Phoenician polytheism."[5] The revelation of God regarding Melchizedek devastates the common notion that the Hebrews contributed monotheism to the world, in any sense that they originated the concept of it.

The slaughter of the kings can be softened a bit by making it read "the defeat of the kings"; but there is no need for this. The Bible calls things by their right names; hence, sinners are never referred to as the socially immature, nor the poor as the economically disadvantaged!

And blessed him are words that identify Melchizedek as superior in dignity to the

great patriarch of all the Hebrews, even Abraham; and later the author appeals to the truism that the less is blessed of the greater. The greater dignity of Melchizedek is further emphasized by the fact that Abraham recognized his authority and paid tithes to him from all the spoils from his victory.

There are only three short verses in Genesis about Melchizedek, and added to that, a single sentence concerning him in Psalms 110:4, written centuries after Melchizedek lived; and yet there is before us an immense amount of dissertation on this ancient type of Christ. The astonishing fact, seized upon by the writer of Hebrews, is that so long after Abraham and Melchizedek lived, GOD HIMSELF by means of his inspired writer in Psalms 110, should WITH A OATH make that ancient character a likeness of David's greater Son, the Messiah, indicating very forcefully that, from the beginning, God had purposed to provide what Westcott called "a higher ORDER of divine service than that which was established by the Mosaic Law."[6] The reason for bringing all this up at the time our author wrote is plain, as Lenski said,

The readers, former Jews who were now thinking of returning to Judaism, are here confronted with their great forefather Abraham and are shown how he accepted the royal priest Melchizedek long before Levi and Aaron were born and the Aaronic priesthood came into EXISTECE. The readers want to be true sons of Abraham, yea, are thinking of returning to Judaism for that very reason. Well, let them look at Abraham and at the one priest to whom Abraham bowed. Let them consider what God said through David regarding the royal priest and regarding the Messiah-Christ who is typified by Melchizedek.[7][1] R. C. H. Lenski, The Interpretation of the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Epistle of James (Minneapolis, Minnesota: Augsburg Publishing House, 1938), p. 207.

[2] Josephus, Life and Works of, TRASLATED by William Whiston (ew York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston), p. 44.

[3] James Macknight, Apostolic Epistles (ashville: Gospel Advocate Company, 1960), p. 537.

[4] R. C. H. Lenski, op. cit., p. 213.

[5] Brooke Foss Westcott, The Epistle to the Hebrews (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1965), p. 171.

[6] Ibid., p. 170.

[7] R. C. H. Lenski, op. cit., p. 208.

PIK, "Almost endless conjectures have been made as to the identity of Melchizedek. Questions have been raised as to what order of beings he belonged to. Some have insisted

that he was a Divine person, others that he was an angel, still others that he was Christ

Himself in theophanic manifestation as when He appeared to Joshua (Josh. 5:14), or in

Babylons furnace (Dan. 3:25), etc. Others, allowing that he was only a man, have

speculated as to his nationality, family connections, and so on. But as the Holy Spirit has

not seen fit to give us any information on these points, we deem it irreverence (Deut.

29:29) to indulge in any surmises thereon.

Melchizedek was "king of Salem": in the light of Psalm 76:2 there can be no doubt but

what this was the earlier or original name for Jerusalem: "In Salem also is His tabernacle,

and His dwelling-place in Zion". Only Jerusalem can there be intended. Further,

Melchizedek was "priest of the most high God", and this in the days of Abraham! Thus,

Jerusalem had a king many centuries before David, and God had a priest which He owned

long ere Aaron was called! It has been rightly pointed out that, "The argument of the

apostle, deducing and illustrating the superiority of Christs priesthood over the Aaronic,

from and by the relation of Melchizedek to the Levitical priesthood, is in some respects

analogous to the argument of the apostle with regard to the law, and its parenthetical and

inferior position, as compared with the Gospel.... the Jews were shocked when the apostle

Paul taught that it was not necessary for the Gentiles to observe the law; that for the new

covenant church the law of Moses was no longer the rule and form of life. And therefore

the apostle in his epistle to the Galatians, tells them that the law was given four hundred

years after the promise had been made unto Abraham, and that therefore there was no

injustice, and no inconsistency, in the bringing in of a new dispensation, which was in

fact only a return in a fuller and more perfect manner to that which was from the

beginning in the mind of God" (Adolph Saphir).

It is indeed striking to discover that Gods first priest was this king of Salemwhich

signifies "peace", Jerusalem meaning "the foundation of peace". Jerusalem was to be the

place where the incarnate Son of God was to begin the exercise of His sacerdotal office;

moreover, it was to be the seat of His local church (Acts 115) until the significance of

the type had been effected. In the history of that unique city we see the sovereign pleasure

of God again exercised and exemplified, for He appoints various intervals of blessing

unto places. Jerusalem was first privileged with the presence of this priest of the most

high God. Afterwards, for a long season, it was given over to the idolatrous Jebusites: see

Joshua 15:63, 2 Samuel 5:6, etc. Then, in process of time, it was again visited with

Divine favor and made the headquarters of the solemn worship of Jehovah. Now, as for

centuries past, it is "trodden down of the Gentiles" (Luke 21:24). But in the future it will

again be the center of Divine blessing on earth: Isaiah 2:1-4. In like manner God hath

dealt with many another place and city.

Who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings, and blessed him" (verse 1).

The historical reference is to Genesis 14:18,19. "Whether any intercourse had previously

taken place between these two venerable men, or whether they afterwards continued to

have occasional intercourse, we cannot tell; though the probability seems to be, that

Melchizedek was not a stranger to Abraham when he came forth to meet him, and that, in

an age when the worshippers of the true God were comparatively few, two such men as

Abraham and Melchizedek did not live in the same district and country without forming a

close intimacy" (Dr. J. Brown).

"And blessed him". This was a part of the priestly office as we learn from Deuteronomy

21:5: "And the priests the sons of Levi shall come near for the Lord thy God hath chosen

to minister unto Him, and to bless in the name of the Lord". The "blessing" Abraham

received, is recorded in Genesis 14:19: "Blessed be Abraham of the most high God,

Possessor of heaven and earth". Absolutely, only God can either bless or curse, for He

only has sovereign power over all good and evil. This power He exercises directly (Gen.

12:3): yet by a gracious concession and by His institution, God also allows men to invoke

blessings on others. In the Old Testament we find parents blessing their children (Gen.

9:26, 27:27, 48:20. etc.), and the priests blessing the people (Num. 6:24-26).

In both instances it was Christ that was typically in view. "In the blessing of Abraham by

Melchizedek, all believers are virtually blessed by Jesus Christ, Melchizedek was a

type of Christ, and represented Him in what He was and did, as our apostle declares. And

Abraham in all these things, bare the person of, or represented, all his posterity according

to the faith. Therefore doth our apostle in the foregoing chapter entitle all believers, unto

the promises made unto him, and the inheritance of them. There is, therefore, more than a

bare story in this matter. A blessing is in it conveyed unto all believers in the way of an

ordinance forever" (John Owen). It deserves to be noticed that the final act of Christ ere

leaving this earth was that "He led them out as far as to Bethany, and He lifted up His

hands, and blessed them" (Luke 24:50).

WAS MELCHIZEDEK A CHRISTOPHANY? That is a pre-incarnate appearance of Jesus. Those who say yes point to Abraham seeing the day of Christ in John 8:56. If they are not the same then you have two eternal priesthoods, and there can be only one. He had no parents and this only possible if from heaven already in existence. If this was Jesus He was a Gentile centuries before He was a Jew. If not Jesus then he was greater for he had no genealogy but Jesus did, and so he would be more amazing. Jesus would have said he was the greatest born of woman rather than John the Baptist if he was a mere man. He is said to be like the Son of God in verse 3, but also in Dan. 3:25 one who is like, and Ezek. 1:26 and so like can mean the very thing.

We are now into meat and it is a large steak and no longer pudding and easy to eat. The Jews were not the first people of God, for before Abraham there were ever priests of God, and here is greatest example. Gentiles were the people of God before the Jews. He is the first priest mentioned in the Bible in Gen. 14:17-24. Abraham is the most famous person in history but he here pays tithes to this Gentile priest and makes him even greater. Why all this about a great Gentile? It is because they are being enticed to go back to Judaism, and this is folly for God had a greater people among the Gentiles before the Jews, and so why go back to the Jews when there are deeper roots to return to. The father of Judaism submitted to this Gentile and so go ahead to the new Highpriest instead of slipping back to the shadow in the laws of Isreal.

If the issues is who was first, and that is what counts, then do not go back to Judaism, but to what was before in this Highpriest. If the issue is superiority and who has the longest tradition then Mel is the first. He is superior to Aaron in

3. Dignity-as he is high priest.4. Duration- as he is forever.5. Distribution-as Aaron was only for Jews, but he is for all Jews and Gentiles.

Jesus did not qualify for the Aaronic priesthood for he was not of that line, but he did for this one for he also has an eternal priesthood.

CHARLES SIMEON, "MELCHIZEDEC A TYPE OF CHRIST

Heb_7:1-3. For this Melchizedec, 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.

THE principal scope of the Epistle to the Hebrews is, to shew the superiority of Christ above the ordinances, and dispensers, of the Levitical law. In prosecuting this argument the inspired writer frequently mentions a priesthood different from that of Aaron, a priesthood instituted by God before any one of Abrahams chosen descendants was born, and consequently intended for the benefit of the Gentile world; and he shews that Christ was, ACCORDING to an express prediction, and a most solemn oath, to be a priest of this higher order, the order of Melchizedec [Note: Psa_110:4. with Heb_5:6; Heb_5:10; Heb_6:20; Heb_7:17; Heb_7:21.].

The words of the text should properly be connected with chap. 5:10. the whole intervening part being, as it were, a parenthesis. The Apostle, having laid great stress upon this prediction, now proceeds to illustrate it. He recites, in few words, the history to which the prediction itself refers, and declares, that it was altogether typical of Christ [Note: Gen_14:14-20.]. The agreement between Melchizedec and Christ may be observed in two particulars:

I. The dignity of their persons

Melchizedec, in reference to the import of his name, and the name of the city over which he presided, was called, king of righteousness, and king of peace: but in an infinitely higher degree do these titles belong to Christ

[Christ is a king, not only over one city or country, but over the whole world; his kingdom ruleth over all; he has the utmost ends of the earth for his possession; he is King of kings, and Lord of lords. In his own person he is holy, harmless, separate from sinners; he loveth righteousness, and hateth iniquity; he is indeed the Holy One, and the Just. His laws are a perfect transcript of his mind and will, all holy, and just, and good. In his government he exercises the most perfect equity, not oppressing or despising any, but ever ready to afford protection, and succour, to all that call upon him. The very ends for which he administers his government, are altogether worthy of his divine majesty; he rules his people, only that he may transform them all into his own image, and make them partakers of his own holiness. In every view, he approves himself worthy of that august title which the voice of inspiration assigns him, The Lord our Righteousness [Note: Jer_23:6.]. But Jesus is also called, The Prince of peace [Note: Isa_9:6.]; nor is this without reason, since he reconciles us to an offended God, and makes peace for us by the blood of his cross: yea, he brings peace into the wounded conscience; and calms the tempests which were wont to agitate the soul ]

That typical king is also called a priest of the Most High God; yet, though glorious in this respect, he was only a shadow of Jesus, our great High-priest

[Melchizedec, though a king, was not ashamed to execute the priestly office. Whether the bread and wine, which he provided for the refreshment of Abrahams troops, had any mystical signification, we pretend not to say: but certainly he acted as a priest, when he blessed Abraham; and was regarded as a priest by Abraham, who presented to him the tenth of all his spoils. As for Jesus, there was not any part of the priestly office which he did not perform. He was not indeed of that tribe to which the priesthood belonged, and therefore he was not instituted according to the law of a carnal commandment; but he was appointed of God with a solemn oath; and anointed to his office with a superabundant measure of the oil of gladness [Note: Psa_45:7.]. Having, in order that he might have somewhat to offer, taken upon him our nature, he presented himself an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweet-smelling savour. And having shed his own blood, he is gone with it within the vail, and there carries on the work of intercession for us; and will soon come forth again, not like the Jewish high-priest, to bless one nation only, but, like Melchizedec, to bless the father of the faithful, together with all his children dispersed throughout the world.]

Thus both in their names and offices is there a very striking agreement between Melchizedec and Christ. But the parallel between them may be yet further noticed in,

II. The duration of their priesthood

We are altogether indebted to the revelation of God for a just construction of what was related respecting Melchizedec, and of what was intentionally omitted in his history

[Melchizedec, like other men, was doubtless born of human parents, and in due season cut off by death from this present state of existence. But there is no mention made of his birth, or parentage, or death: nothing is said of any predecessor, whom he followed in his office, or of any successor to whom he resigned his office. These omissions, which might have been well ACCOUNTED for from the brevity of that part of the Mosaic history, we are assured were ordered of God, on purpose that, by appearing not to have beginning of days or end of life, he might, as far as a mortal man could do, shadow forth the eternity of Christs priesthood.]

What was figurately ascribed to him, is literally true with respect to Christ

[Christ, though born after the world had stood four thousand years, was appointed to this office from all eternity; and actually executed it, by his representatives at least, from the first moment that Adam or Abel offered their sacrifices on the altar. Nor has he ceased from his priestly work: he is now within the vail, offering up the incense of his own prevailing intercession, while his people CONTINUE praying without. Nor will he desist from his labour as long as there shall continue one single soul, for whom to intercede before God. As he had none to precede him in his office, so will he have none to follow him: He

abideth a priest CONTINUALLY, the same yesterday, to-day, and for ever [Note: Heb_7:23-25; Heb_7:28; Heb_13:8.].]

Advice

1. Regard the Lord Jesus according to his real dignity

[Jesus unites in himself the kingly and priestly character. None of the Levitical kings or priests ever attained to this honour. Uzziah, presuming to exercise the priestly office, was smitten with a leprosy, and made a monument of the Divine displeasure to the latest hour of his life [Note: 2Ch_26:16-21.]. But Jesus, as was foretold concerning him, was, like Melchizedec, a priest upon his throne [Note: Zec_6:13.]. Let us view this combination of character with lively gratitude. Let us contemplate him as every way qualified to be a Saviour to us And let us beg that he will exalt us also to a royal priesthood, that we may offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God through him [Note: 1Pe_2:5; 1Pe_2:9.].]

2. Look to him for the blessings which he is authorized to bestow

[As our exalted head he is a Prince and a Saviour, to give repentance and remission of sins. He has received gifts even for the most rebellious: and, having given himself for us, he is fully authorized to bestow upon us the purchase of his blood. Shall we not then make our APPLICATION to him? What bread and what wine would he not bestow on us for the refreshment of our weary souls! Shall we not then open our mouths wide that he may fill them? Surely, if we be straitened, it is not in him, but in ourselves: he would satisfy the hungry with good things; he would fill us with all the fulness of God. O that that God, who raised him up from the dead, would now send him to bless us, in turning every one of us from our iniquities [Note: Act_3:26.]!]

3. Consecrate to him, not the tenth only of your spoils, but all that you possess

[Though we should honour him with our substance, and with the first-fruits of all our increase, yet that is by no means sufficient: we should dedicate to him all that we possess in mind, or body, or estate. We are not indeed called to dispose of all our goods in CHARITY, but to ascribe to his bounty every thing we possess, and whether we eat or drink, or whatever we do, to do it all to his glory. Have we overtaken as Abraham did, and destroyed, our spiritual enemies? Let us acknowledge that his was the power, and the glory, and the victory. Let us see him in all things, and glorify him for all things; and present to him both our bodies and our souls a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God, which is our reasonable service [Note: Rom_12:1.].]

BIBLICAL ILLUSTRATOR, "Melchisedec, king of Salem

Melchisedec

I.MELCHISEDEC WAS KING OF SALEM.

1. Salem was certainly in Canaanthe land where Melchisedec and Abraham met.

(1) It is not a matter of course that Canaan was already wholly given up to idolatry and crime; and therefore Melchisedec may have been himself a Canaanite, and may also have found a body of worshippers of the true God among whom he could discharge his functions.

(2) Even if Canaan was more idolatrous than we have sufficient reason to believe that it now was, Melchisedec, who was, perhaps, of the Japhetian stock, may have been raised up by Heaven as a light in a dark place, and a harbinger and representative of the future ingathering of the Gentiles to Christ.

2. Two places of the name of Salem are mentioned in the Old Testament. The one is Salem in the land of Shechem (Gen_33:18)the same, perhaps, as Joh_3:23. The other is Jerusalem itself (Psa_76:1-2).

(1) The situation of the great metropolis of Palestine was one likely to be early fixed upon for a town in the colonisation of the land.

(2) That point lay near to the route which Abraham may be supposed to have taken on his homeward way from the slaughter of the kings.

(3) If Jerusalem was the place of which Melchisedec was king, he was thus the more strikingly representative of Christ (Psa_2:6).

3. It is certainly in respect chiefly of the priesthood that Melchisedec is compared to Christ. But, considering the object and design of the present specification of particulars, it must be understood that the royalty of the former has a typical, or at least a figurative, application to the latter. With Salem, both in the literal and figurative application of the name, Christ as King has especially to do. It was through Jerusalem that, in the days of His flesh, He rode in lowly, but royal stateliness (Zec_9:9; Mat_21:1-11). To Israel and her great metropolis was Messiah promised as a Sovereign Prince, ere ever the Magi came to welcome the regal visitor; and as He was, in His birth, saluted as Israels King Mat_2:1-6), so, over His cross on the heights of Salem, the unchangeable inscription bore that He was King of the Jews (Joh_19:19-22). And there is another Zion on which His throne is setanother Salem in which He reignsthe Zion, the Salem, of the Church. Amidst hostile arms and quaking dynasties, let the children of Zion be joyful in their King.

II. MELCHISEDEC WAS PRIEST OF THE MOST HIGH GOD.

1. The phrase of the most high God serves two ends.

(1) It contra-distinguishes Melchisedec and his priesthood from priests of the gods many and lords many of Paganism, and from the functions, often gross and cruel, which these performed.

(2) It suggests the solemnity and importance of the sacerdotal work which Melchisedec performed, and the reverence and awe with which not only ministers, but private believers, should maintain intercourse with that glorious One into whose presence they are called to enter, and whose business they are called to do.

2. The priesthood of the King of Salem, in all probability, comprehended the two

functions of sacrifice and intercession.

III. MELCHISEDEC MET ABRAHAM RETURNING FROM THE SLAUGHTER OF THE KINGS AND BLESSED HIM. To a spiritual warfare we have all been called; and while Christ is the Captain of the host, the better Abraham leading on His followers to battle and to victory, He, as the anointed Priest, the better Melchizedec, blesses His conquering, and even His struggling, troops. With His priestly hands extended, in generous benediction, over His first disciples, He left the world. In the same attitude, as it were, He stilt is standing, as Be looks down from His heavenly throne on the earthly charge which He loves so well. The good which on their behalf He seeks, it is His own prerogative and office to bestow. Nor can it be withheld. What is wanted for the fightwisdom, strength, courage, hopeHe d, lights, when His soldier looks to Him in faith and earnestness, to give. At length comes victory. Nor is that promise obsolete (Rev_3:21).

IV. TO MELCHISEDEC ABRAHAM GAVE A TENTH PART OF ALL THE SPOILS. The contribution of gold and treasures to the cause of the kingdom of Messiah is one of the facts recorded respecting Him in Hebrew prophecy Psa_72:10; Psa_72:15). Since the day when the Magi cast their gold, and frankincense, and myrrh at His blessed feet, thousands and tens of thousands have laid a like tribute on His altar. Christ deserves, and Christianity needs, it all. That, independently of any money of ours, He could work successfully is, of course, in some sense true. But, in unswerving wisdom and condescending mercy, He chooses to work by means; and among the appointed means is money. By ministers and missionaries, who are dependent on money for supportby Bibles and other practical and precious books, which must be printed and circulated at the cost of moneyby places of worship, which it requires money to erectand by other ordinances and institutions, which it is for money to establish and maintainChrist upholds His cause and extends His kingdom.

V. MELCHISEDEC WAS BY INTERPRETATION KING OF RIGHTEOUSNESS AND KING OF PEACE. This statement refers to the import of the names Melchisedec and Salem. Melchi means, king; Sedec, righteousness; and Salem, peace. It is probable that Melchisedec was a righteous and pacific king. At any rate, the name he bore, and that of the city where he dwelt, involved the ideas of righteousness and peace. And it is here distinctly intimated that, in this respect, he was fitted to represent the character and government of Christ. Christ in very deed is King of righteousness. His soul, how pure! His life, how undefiled! His laws, how just! His administration, how upright! The issues and outgoings of His sufferings and His glory, of His humiliation on the earth and His triumphs in the heavens, how suffused and fraught with righteousness! Nor is He less truly King of peace. His personal ministry was neither the earthquake nor the thunder, but the still, small voice. Peace He bequeathed to His disciples as a legacy of love (Joh_14:27). He made peace through the blood of His cross (Col_1:20). His gospel breathes of peace. They who believe it enter into peace. Theirs is peace with God; theirs, too, is peace with man; and a peace which passeth understanding keeps their ,hearts and minds by Christ Jesus Under the sceptre of Messiah, the wars which so long have wrought desolations in the earth shall pass away

VI. MELCHISEDEC WAS WITHOUT FATHER, WITHOUT MOTHER, WITHOUT DESCENT, &c. By the series of particulars it is manifestly meant to intimate that the parents, the ancestry, the birth, and the death, of this royal priest are all unrecorded in the sacred narrativethat, in this respect, there is a remarkable difference between him and the priests of the house of Leviand that, in so far as the record is concerned, he comes before us as the priest of unlimited existence, who had no predecessor and no

successor in the sacred line. He was thus, it is still further intended to suggest, a meet representative of that great high-priest who, as God, had no motheras man, had no human fatheras Divine, never began to be, and never diedas Mediator, carries on His priesthood still, interceding for believers in the heavens, even as, on earth, He made atonement for their sins, and wrought out redemption for their souls. (A. S.Patterson.)

The parallel between Christ and Melchisedec

I. THE TITLE OF MELCHISEDEC, AS KING. For this Melchisedec, king of Salem. It were idle to discuss here the various conjectures which have been started as to who this Melchisedec wasconsidered as he is by some to have been Enoch, by others to have been Shem, by others to have been an angel, by others to have been the Holy Spirit, by others to have been the Eternal Son of God Himself; it seems only needful to remark, that the nature of the apostles argument throughout the chapter positively requires that Melchisedec should have been a man, and a man, too, living, and performing the functions here attributed to him, in the time of the patriarch Abraham. Melchisedec becomes a remarkable person, were it only from the singular conjunction of the two offices of king and priesta conjunction which of itself would suggest his being a type of Christ. Thus he is a type of Christ even with regard to his kingship, and that both in his acts and in the titles by which he is distinguished. Even the first act recorded of him m Genesis we can hardly think was without some spiritual significance. You will observe, he is there represented as coming out to the father of the faithful, bringing him a present of bread and wine, in order that his followers might be refreshed after the toils of conquest, and be sent on their way with lightened and rejoicing hearts. What is this but a picture of the way in which Christ, the true Melchisedec, rewards and refreshes all the followers of faithful Abraham? Are they wearied with the toils of their spiritual warfare? He is wont to say to them, Come unto Me, all ye that are weary and heavy laden, and I will refresh you. Are they tired out with the worlds disappointing vanities, having spent their money for that which is not bread, and their labour for that which satisfieth not? His language is, He every one that thirsteth, come ye to the waters; yea, come ye, buy wine and milk, without money and without price. Nay, are they desirous of realising nearness of spiritual communionof being brought more closely into the presence of their God and Saviour? Are they desiring to see the King in His beauty, and to receive from Him tokens of reconciliation and peace and love? He comes forth like Melchisedec bringing bread and wine, offering to believing hearts the blessed sacrament of His passion, that in the memorials of His body broken, and the blood of redemption shed, believers, like the faithful followers of Abraham, may go down to their homes in peace! Still more typical of the Redeemers royalty are the titles here given to Melchisedec. You will observe it is said of himfirst being by interpretation, king of righteousness, and after that also king of Salem, which is, king of peace. These are the titles of the typical Melchisedec, and as applied to him may probably mean no more than that such names were given to him by the common consent of his subjectsas one who was distinguished for the righteousness which characterised his regal administration, for the integrity and uprightness of his judicial decisions, for the amicable relations which he maintained with all neighbouring states, and for the tranquillity which marked his government at home. But who sees not at once the application of these titles to Christ in the exercise of His spiritual royalty? He is a King of righteousness. If He cannot satisfy every demand of a violated law, if He cannot meet all the conditions of unsullied holiness, if He cannot cancel every claim which Heaven may have against our souls, nay, if He cannot present my soul as unblameableas pure from stain or blemish as His

ownthe ground of my confidence is gone. A mere king of compassions, a king of love and pity, will not suit me, He must be a King of righteousness. and after that also king of Salem, which is king of peace. This, again, is a beautiful type of Messiahs kingship. Therefore being justified by faith(there is the righteousness)we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ.

II. THE PRIESTHOOD. For this Melchisedec, king of Salem, priest of the most high God: Now, that to which I would specially direct your attention here is, that Melchisedec is the first instance we have in the sacred record of a person specially set apart for the office of the priesthood. You will observe that he is not one of a line succeeding to the sacerdotal office in a certain family order; he is not one who has received that sacred appointment by the investiture of others, according to any prescribed order of ecclesiastical polity, but he is one who, long before the Levitical priesthood had been established, stands alone in a strange country, challenging homage from the greatest saint of antiquity as an ordained priest of the most high God. Now, we see at once in this certain resembling features to Christ, the true Melchisedec. He is not descended of any line of human priesthood; there was no laying on of hands to designate Him to the sacred office; yet there rested on Him tokens of a Divine consecration. The opened heavens testified to the power of the Lords anointing; the Spirit of the Lord was upon Him, and when He had made His soul an offering for sin, when He had borne the sin of many, when He had poured out His spirit unto death, believing souls were drawn to His cross, and exercising faith in the great oblation hailed HimThou art a Priest for ever, after the order of Melchisedec. And then observe, that special office of the typical high priest here mentioned by the apostle, namely, that of benediction, who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings, and blessed him. Have we not here a close resemblance to Christ? Benediction, we know, seems never to have been off the lips of the holy Saviour. With streams of blessing did He open His first sermon on the mount; with hands of blessing He drew the little children to His embrace; with the uplifted voice of blessing He went up to the right hand of Power; blessed are the sleeping dead who die in His faith and fear; and when at last He shall separate the great congregation of risen dead, He shall first call to His redeemed ones, saying, Come, ye blessed children of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the beginning of the world. Yes, blessing was the first act of our High Priest, after He had returned to the Majesty on high: Unto you first God having raised up His Son Jesus, sent Him to bless you; and never will He lay down that His special prerogative of mercy, until He hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ. But observe, another act of the typical Melchisedec noticed by the apostle is his receiving a portion of the spoils. To whom also Abraham gave a tenth part of all. There can exist no question but that this act of the patriarch was a separation of a portion of his newly acquired wealth to the service of God. It was an offering to God through Melchizedec His appointed priest. Abraham had been prosperous; he had been honoured and eminently successful in the mission he had undertaken; how could he do otherwise than dedicate the firstfruits of his success to God? What shall I render unto the Lord for all His benefits? The passage plainly throws some light on the perpetual obligation of almsgiving, independently of all dispensations whatever; and seems to prescribe to us the minimum of our substance which we ought to set apart for Gods service. If you have been prosperous in the work of your hands, if you are returning like Abraham with the spoils of conquered difficulties, if your spiritual Melchisedec has met you with tokens of acceptance, give unto Him a tenth part of all. Let one strength, one help, one hope, one outstretched arm be recognised in all your successes:showing that on earth you will lay all your prosperity, even as in heaven you will lay all your crowns, at the feet of Him who

was ordained a Priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.

III. THE MYSTERY OF MELCHISEDECS ORIGIN. He is declared to be, in the third verse, without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life. Melchisedec is a person of whose death or birth no record had been preserved, both of which would have been if he had ever bad any accredited place in the Jewish polity. But this man has no record, has no genealogy: he starts up on the page of sacred history, exercising the mysterious functions of the priesthood, shrouding in a veil of impenetrable obscurity all the antecedents of his history, as well as all that relates To his end of days. All this was especially meant to perfect the typical character of this Melchisedec. It was, in fact, to show to us that Christ Himself was not to succeed to His office in the order of any human priesthoodthat He should not claim office in virtue of any transmitted rights, but that He should receive consecration direct from the hands or God: a Priest of the Most High God, after the order of Melchisedec. And then see how we are to apply to Christ the last remarkable words applied to Melchisedecto Christ, the true, the spiritual Melchisedec. He is said to be without father; is not this true of our Lords human nature? He is said to be without mother: is not this true of our Lords Divine nature? He is said to be without beginning of life, or end of days: must not this be true of Him whom prophecy describes as the Ancient of days, as the Father of eternity, as One who throws out the challenge to every finite intelligence, Who shaft declare His generation? nay, as One whom God Himself had solemnly designated and set apart. Thou art a Priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.

IV. THE INTRANSMISSIBLE CHARACTER OF MELCHISECECS PRIESTHOOD. This is declared in the third verse: He is made likenamely, that He abideth a Priest continually. Then turning to the twenty-fourth verse of this chapter you readBut this Man, because He continueth ever, hath an unchangeable priesthooda passage which, on looking at the margin, you will find thus rendered, a priesthood which passeth not from one to another. Now, to understand this, you must remember the stress of the apostles argument. It was a new theology to the Jews to suppose that Messiah was to be a Priest at all; they thought of Him, they expected Him, only as the Lord Christ, as the King of righteousness and peace. But suppose Christ were to be a Priest, then the Jew would say, He must be a Priest according to the order of Aaron. Then says the apostle, Christ can have no claim in this behalf; for He sprang from the tribe of Judah, of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood. What, then, is the conclusion? Why, that the real type of Christs priesthood is to be found, not in men having infirmity under the law, but in that remarkable personage expressly raised up of God in a particular age of the Church, in order that he might be a perfect, or, at least proximately perfect, type of Christ, as one who neither received his priesthood from any, nor yet transmitted his priesthood to any; and therefore, in so far as there was no delegation of the sacred functions, he might be said to abide a priest continually. Herein he becomes a glorious and eminent type of Christthe type of Him, who as He received His priesthood from none, so will He delegate it to none, not to human priesthoods, not to saints and angels, not to the ten thousand mediators of a corrupt and apostate church, but rather will continue, in all the might, in all the prevalency, in all the sovereign sufficiency of an unchangeable priesthood, ever living to make intercession for us. (D. Moore, M. A.)

Our Melchisedec

The Jews were very fond of beautiful mysteries, which awakened the sense of wonder and the desire for deeper knowledge; and, as the Psalms and Proverbs show, they love to have truth in pairs or in halves. Their minds moved, as a railway engine moves, on parallel lines and with corresponding wheels; their piety soared as the lark soars on equal wings. As in this subject of Melchisedec, they often gained their idea of the whole truth, just as in geography you gain your idea of the whole earth by uniting the two half-spheres that are separated on ,he map. The mystery of Melchisedec is thus explained by four pairs of truths.

I. HE WAS A MAN AND MORE THAN A MAN. Many things about him are hard to be uttered or explained (Heb_5:11). Here, I think, is the key that opens the difficulty:there are two Melchisedecs: the on, lived in Salem, and the other lives in this page. King Henry VIII., the queen-killer; was, as most people believe, a had man; but Froude makes him a good man. There are thus two Henrys: the one lived at Windsor, the other lives in Froudes history. What Froude did for Henry by hero-worship, Moses did for Melchisedec by omission; but with this difference, that Moses keeps to exact truth. As we have Froudes Henry and the real Henry, so we have, as we may say, the Melchisedec of Abraham and the Melchisedec of Moses. Melchisedec was made like unto the Son of God Heb_7:3). He was not like Him, but was made like Him. I have watched an apprentice wood-carver. Before him was a tree, like any other tree. Beside him stood a life-size statue of Christ. Glancing now and again at the statue, and guided by his teacher, he hewed out a piece here and there, and soon the tree became a statue. He made it more by making it less, for he thus put a grand idea into it. As that carver elevated the tree into an image of Christ, so Moses, guided by God, fashioned or rounded off the Melchisedec of his story into an image of Christ. It was not an after-thought, but a fore-thought to liken Christ to Melchisedec; for Christ is the original and Melchisedec the copy, expressly made beforehand for New Testament teaching. What a man of mystery that Melchisedec of Moses is! He seems to have dropped down from heaven. He seems to be his own ancestor and his own heir; one sprung from himself, a cause uncaused; one ever living among the dead and dying. He stands quite apart, has not his fellow in the Bible, and is like himself only. Fix your eye upon this portrait drawn by the Divine hand, grasp it as it lies there, and the subject is delightfully simple. This Melchisedec on whom you and I gaze, not that whom Abraham gazed upon; this literary Melchisedec, not that literal one; this Melchisedec is an image of Him who was without father as to His human nature, and without mother as to His Divine; as God having neither beginning of days nor end of life; who in His office was without descent and without succession, and so abideth a Priest continually. Melchisedec was a man and seems more: Jesus is a man, and is more.

II. CHRIST IS LIKE MELCHISEDEC, A PRIEST AND A KING. Pity belongs to Him as Priest, and power belongs to Him as King. His priestly pity and kingly power temper and sustain each other, and as two uniting streams roll along in one full flood of communicated joy. He saves with all the power of a king; He rules with all the gentleness of a priest. His kingly power enables Him to do His priestly work right royally, with royal graciousness and munificence. He saves with sovereignty, with a sovereigns generosity. The rebel Themistocles appealed for pardon to the Persian king Xerxes. The king pardoned him in his sovereignty; not as one who had to study petty economics, whose grace was a misers hoard; for he gave Themistocles the country of Magnesia for bread (about 12,000 a year); Myus for condiments, and Lampsacus for wine. That is how a sovereign pardons, and illustrates one part of what we mean by the sovereignty of God. Our great High Priest has a royal right and a royal power to save, as He makes one thing of Priesthood and Kinghood. The golden sceptre of grace is ever in His hand; and

whosoever will may touch it and live, shielded by the whole power of His kingdom. What can sin, death, and hell do against those who have Him as their ally?

III. MELCHISEDEC IS A TYPE OF CHRIST BECAUSE HE UNITES RIGHTEOUSNESS AND PEACE. His name means king of righteousness, and he was king of Salem, or peace. He was, no doubt, a righteous man and king, doing all he could to right the worlds wrongs. But much more than that is meant here. For he was a priest, and no priest was he unless he represented God to man and man to God, and so provided righteousness for the unrighteous. They for whom he acted should have had righteousness, but had it not; and it was the part of their priest to gain for them the abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness. To us, at least, priestly righteousness means all that. The righteousness our High Priest has to do with is held out as a free gift to the most unrighteous among us; and it is thine for the taking. Melchisedec was also king of Salem. A dense mass of meaning lies for us in this title also. Salem, like the salaam given to-day in the East, means peace. A King of Peace! Earths kings are war-makers; ours is a Peacemaker. Earths great cities have often been Aceldamas, streaming fields of blood; our mother city is peace. And what a union of contraries is here! Let the bare idea of Gods righteousness enter the heart of a man in sin, and lo! his peace is gone, and he is the prey of remorse. But Christ brings us a peace founded upon eternal righteousness.

IV. MELCHISEDEC IS A TYPE OF CHRIST. BECAUSE HE UNITES JEW AND GENTILE. Aaron, the priest, was only for the Jews; but Melchisedec, who was out of Aarons line and above it, was a Gentile, and he was a priest for Abraham the Jew, and for the Gentiles dwelling in Salem. He was a world-wide priest, opening his arms to all the races of humankind, and his city was meant to be the mother-city of all the earth, emblem of the heavenly Jerusalem into which people of all nations shall be gathered. Thus Christ is a Priest, not after the ruder of Aaron, who was for Jews only, but He is a Priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec; and any sinner under heaven may receive the blessings He brings. (James Wells, M. A.)

King of righteousness

Righteousness first, then peace

I. A HIEROGLYPHIC OF CHRISTS RECONCILING WORK.

First, King of Righteousness, afterwards King of Peace. There is no peace with God possible, except on the basis of righteousness. It is a true gospel, howsoever harsh it sounds, which proclaims Thou art not a God that hast pleasure in iniquity, neither shall the wicked dwell in Thy sight. This is the dictate of conscience; this is the dictate of what people call natural religion. This, the necessity of righteousness for friendship with God, is the message of the old covenant; and this, the absolute need of purity of life and heart for all true enjoyment of the Divine favour, is Christs message as truly. Nay, further, the first thing which the gospelwhich Christ, who is the gospeldoes when He comes into a mans heart is to emphasise two facts, the absolute need for righteousness in order to friendship with God, and the want of it in the heart to which He has come. And so the conflict is intensified, the sense of discord is kindled, the alienation between man and God is made conscious on the first entrance of Christ into the spirit. The oil comes after the arrow, the bandage after the wound.

II. A SUMMARY OF CHRISTS OPERATIONS IN THE INDIVIDUAL SOUL. There is no inward harmony, no peace of heart and quietness of nature except on condition of being

good and righteous men. The real root of all our agitations is our sinfulness; and wherever there creeps over a heart the love of evil, there comes, like some subtle sea-born mist stealing up over the country and blotting out all its features, a poisonous obscuration which shrouds all the spirit in its doleful folds. Disturbance comes not so much from outward causes as from an inward alienation towards that which is pure and good. Peace within comes from righteousness within, and no man is righteous unless he has Christs righteousness for the very spring and strength of his life.

III. THE PROGRAMME OF CHRISTS OPERATIONS IN THE WORLD. The herald angels sang on earth peace. Nineteen centuries have passed, and Christianity is still a disturbing element who, ever it comes, and the promise seems to linger, and the great words that declared Unto us a Child should be born, and His name shall be the Prince of Peace, seem as far away from fulfilment as ever they were. Yes, because He is first of all King of Righteousness, and must destroy the evil that is in the world before He can manifest Himself as King of Peace. If we are the followers of the Prince of Peace, who is, first of all, King of Righteousness, we are called to be His faithful servants and soldiers. For all the social evils that swarm round about us to-day, intemperance, impurity, commercial dishonesty, follies of fashionable and of social life and the like, for all teachings that dim and darken the face of His great counsel and purpose of mercy, we are to cherish an undying hatred and war against them an unceasing warfare.

IV. A PROPHECY OF THE END. The true Salem, the city of peace, is not here. One more conflict every soldier of the Cross, ere he treads its payment, has to wage with the lust enemy who is to be destroyed by Jesus Christ, but only at the end. For us and for the world the assurance stands firmthe King who Himself is Righteousness is the King whose city is peace. And that city will come. (A. Maclaren, D. D.)

First king of righteousness, and after that king of peace

I. ADMIRE THIS KING.

1. Melchisedec is such a king as God is. He is according to Divine model. At the fall God first set up a Judgment-sent, and right speedily a Mercy-seat. Righteousness must ever had the van, All along in the history of Gods dealings with men, He kept to this unvarying rule.

2. tie was such a king as Christ is. Christ preached no peace apart from purity. He never made little of vice or error; He was the deadly foe of all evil. He said, I came not to bring peace, but a sword.

3. Note, next that He is such a King as right-hearted minds desire. My heart rejoices in a sin-killing King, and then a peace-bestowing King, sweeping out the buyers and the sellers from the temple, and then manifesting Himself there in all His majesty to His waiting people. 4 Melchisedec is such a king as Jesus must be to every one of you who have not yet known Him, if you are ever to receive Him as your Saviour. Righteousness must hold the sceptre, or peace will not attend the court.

5. This is the kind of king that God would have every one of us to be.

II. ENJOY THIS KING.

1. Our Lord is first King of Righteousness.

(1) He who religiously obeys Mahomet may yet be doing grievous moral wrong;

but it is never so with the disciples of Jesus: obedience to Jesus is holiness.

(2) Notice, next, that if we trust this King of righteousness we are righteous in His merit.

2. And then, next He is after that King of peace. I want you to enjoy the King of Salem, the King of peace. Do you know that at this moment, if you are believer, you have peace with God through Jesus Christ our Lord? (C. H. Spurgeon.)

Melchisedec, king of righteousness

The word Melchisedec leads our minds at once to theft remarkable passage in the 23rd chapter of Jeremiah, where it is declared of Christ that this is His name, whereby He shall be called, Jehovah Tsidkenu, The Lord our Righteousness. For Zedek and Tsidkenu being the same in their root, the only difference between the passages is that in the prophet He is the Lord of Righteousness, while here He is its King. Whether we look therefore into the pictures of Genesis, or the shadows of prophecy, or the originals of the gospel, righteousness and royalty meet together to make the Lord Jesus Christ. Let us endeavour to catch the meaning of that word righteousness. Before God righteousness means justification. There is none righteous, no not one this is literally true. No child of man has ever paid all his debt to God. No child of m n has ever fulfilled all his relationships. Therefore no child of man is just. But that was