Cruising around Facebook this morning I saw a post that made me LOL - - - well, one of several, actually. A single, young woman had posted a pic of a chocolate dude. I don't mean a black man. I mean chocolate shaped into the shape of a man, ok? Her comment was that she had found the perfect man because he was "sweet and decadently rich"...
Well, the "man of the day" 'round here is not @POTUS or @VP (their official "new" Twitter handles). Instead, he is somewhat of a "mystery man".
The scriptural texts for today are Hebrews 5:10, Hebrews 7:1-10, Psalm 110:4 and Genesis 14:18-20. My strong suggestion is that you open some tabs on your browser to those texts (or your physical Bible, whichever you'd prefer).
The writer of Hebrews is said to have crafted a beautiful sermon in the Greek language, which helps me not one iota from the standpoint of my not knowing Greek. A lot of the beauty is lost in translation. The result is that what an English-speaker sees is that the writer keeps cycling back to the major themes hammered home in the book/sermon. In this specific case, in Hebrews 5:10, it is first asserted that Jesus Christ is a high priest "after the order of Melchizedek". Without further elaboration, the author cycles back to this in chapter 7.
The author was writing to Christian believers who were in danger of devolving back to Old Testament ritualistic, Levitical practices and beliefs, due to the intense persecution they were receiving (Hebrews 10:32-34). His purpose was to elaborate on this extremely crucial function of the Lord then (and in our present day), but also to show how Jesus and His Way are leagues apart (way different) from how things operated in the Old Testament. The recipients of Hebrews were in danger of turning back from following Jesus because they did not have a clear picture of who He was/is. Many if not all of them never met Jesus "in the flesh". In that respect they were in the same boat we are in today, which makes this teaching crucial not only to them but to us as well.
Ok, then. So, who was this Melchizedek?
The story begins in Genesis 14:1 and continues through 15:1, after Abraham was returning from a battle in which he killed several kings of the area. The King of Sodom and the King of Salem (Melchizedek) both met him in the Valley of Kings (14:17). One blessed Abraham, and the other "wanted a piece of" Abraham. One represents God's benevolent love (Melchizedek's bread and wine were echoed at The Last Supper (Matthew 26:17-30) and are a type of the body and blood of Christ, while the other represents Satan's desire to "have us". Abraham chose well. He refused the offers of the King of Sodom, but accepted the blessings of the King of Salem (Melchizedek), going even beyond that to give Melchizedek 1/10 of everything in his possession.
There are essentially 3 approaches to identifying this "mystery man".
1. The Traditional Jewish Approach
Because the patriarch Shem (one of Noah's 3 sons, the firstborn) was an old man at this point in Abraham's life, the traditional interpretation is that he was the king of Salem (Jerusalem) at that time. It is an interesting interpretation; you can read more about it here, if you are so inclined:
http://www.hebrew4christians.com/Scripture/Parashah/Summaries/Lekh_Lekha/Melchizedek/melchizedek.html
We must read with discernment what we find on the Internet. The scriptures never say, for instance, that the King of Sodom brought Abraham to the King of Salem.
2. The Typological Approach (Figurative Interpretation)
Scaring you with the big words, ain't I? :)
What is a "type" in the Bible, first of all? It is important to understand this, as types fill the Bible.
In biblical study, a type refers to an Old Testament person, practice, or ceremony that has a counterpart, an antitype, in the New Testament. In that sense types are predictive. The type pictures, or prefigures, the antitype. The type, though it is historical, real, and of God, is nonetheless imperfect and temporary. The antitype, on the other hand, is perfect and eternal. The study of types and antitypes is called, as one might expect, typology.
In this way of thinking, then, Melchizedek was a human man about whom little is known, hence the mysterious references to him having no mother or father, no beginning or end, etc. (Hebrews 7:3). Such a lack of information on the "man", Melchizedek, in the remainder of Scripture would, therefore, be purposeful.1
A "sub-set" of the typological approach is an alternative interpretation that, while Melchizedek was a real being who "reigned" over Salem (forerunner of Jerusalem), he was a supernatural (angelic) being. This would explain the non-human attributes given in Hebrews 7. More elaboration will be given to that explanation as we look at the author of Hebrews' exposition contrasting the Levitical priesthood with the Melchizedekan.
3. The Theophany Approach (Literal Interpretation)
As a general rule, I believe it is always best to interpret Scripture literally, unless it is patently obvious that a more figurative interpretation is required. Many Bible scholars believe Melchizedek was a Christophany. (The two terms "theophany" and "Christophany" are essentially interchangeable, as anytime God took on human form to interact with men/women in the O.T., you have a Christophany.)2 I used "Christophany" here, though, because of the heavy linkages made in Hebrews between Jesus and Melchizedek.
Those who argue for this literal interpretation3, (that God took on human form to appear to Moses, to bless him and to receive his tithes), point to the descriptors in Hebrews 7 to defend their position.
1For this Melchizedek, king of Salem, priest of the Most High God, met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings and blessed him, 2and to him Abraham apportioned a tenth part of everything. He is first, by translation of his name, king of righteousness, and then he is also king of Salem, that is, king of peace. 3He is without father or mother or genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life, but resembling the Son of God he continues a priest forever.
If the writer of Hebrews is being literal here, then what human in Scripture ---
- is called King of Peace
AND
- is called King of Righteousness
AND
- is called a priest of the Most High God (the first time priesthood has been mentioned in the Bible)
AND
- blessed Abraham (John 8:58)
AND
- has no mother or father or genealogy
AND
- has no beginning nor end of life
AND
- resembles the Son of God
AND
- continues as a priest forever
A mystery? Depends on your point of view. There are no other explicitly recorded priests "after the order of Melchizedek" except, well, Melchizedek and Jesus Christ.
The Old Testament is full of instances where God "came down" to appear to an O.T. character. Here are a few references:2(again)
From Genesis:
11:5, 12:7-9, 16:7-14, 18:1-33, 22:11-18, 32:22-30
From Exodus:
3:2-4:17, 24:9-11 and 16-18, 33:9, 34:5
Numbers 11:25 and 12:5
Deuteronomy 31:14-15
Judges 5:23
2 Kings 19:35
And, finally in the N.T. - - - Matthew 1:23, when God revealed Himself to us by putting on flesh in the form of the infant God-King, Jesus.
We serve a mysterious God, yet One who desires for us to know Him. Hallelujah!
The whole point of the Hebrews passage is to illustrate that Jesus Christ both fulfilled, far exceeded and replaced the Levitical priesthood and system to which the struggling, first-century Hebrew Christians longed to return. This theme of the high priesthood of Jesus Christ is further developed later in the book of Hebrews, and I look forward to exploring it with you in further posts.
Sources:
1 http://www.gty.org/resources/bible-qna/BQ032813/who-was-melchizedek
2 https://www.gotquestions.org/theophany-Christophany.html
3 https://bible.org/seriespage/lesson-20-why-you-need-know-about-melchizedek-hebrews-71-10
No comments:
Post a Comment