Adventist International Institute of Advanced Studies Theological College “After the Order of Melchizedek” A Term Daily news Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement for the Program: THST 619 Doctrine of the Sanctuary by simply Ralph M Bock March 2009 Desk of Contents CHAPTER 11 INTRODUCTION1 AFFIRMATION OF THE PROBLEM4 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY4 PURPOSE OF THE STUDY4 DELIMITATION5 METHODOLOGY5 CHAPTER 27 TYPOLOGY OF JESUS AND MELCHIZEDEK7 WHAT IS TYPOLOGY? six WHO IS MELCHIZEDEK? 8 FOLLOWING THE ORDER OF MELCHIZEDEK10 PART 316 OVERVIEW, FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION16 BIBLIOGRAPHY19 CHAPTER one particular
INTRODUCTION WHAT IS THE MEANING WITH THE PHRASE “AFTER THE BUY OF MELCHIZEDEK? ” PSALM 110 ECHOES ABOUT A ONE WHO IS A KING AND A PRIEST, IN THE HISTORY OF ISRAEL THERE WAS NEVER THIS SORT OF A FULL. IT COULD BE THAT THE PSALM SPEAKS ABOUT A FUTURE KING-PRIEST. IT CAN BE OBVIOUS WHICH IT DEALS NOT WITH A HISTORICAL KING, BUT WITH THE MESSIAH.
[1] The prediction of Jesus’ priesthood according to the order of Melchizedek indicated which the Aaronic priesthood was transitory (Heb 7 verses 11–14), and imperfect—that is, solution from sin—was not possible through the Aaronic priesthood.
This resulted in God meant to change the priestly law, allowing for one who has not been a descendant of Aaron to become a Excessive Priest. When the new Large Priest after the order of Melchizedek came, the typical priesthood would end (verses 15–19). Christ became priest, certainly not on the basis of ancestry and genealogy ties, nevertheless by a work declaration. His priesthood is usually permanent because His a lot more indestructible. [2] This is named in biblical theology typology. Whether or not typology can rightly be accepted in the presentation of particular messianic prophecies is by far the most controversial issue.
One area of OT typology was that of typical those who served as prototypes both these styles other people within the OT and of Christ, in addition , the Melchizedek of Genesis 18: 18-20 dished up as a person type of the Messiah inside the OT, since evinced in Psalm one hundred ten: 4, and that the author in the Book of Hebrews used the Melchizedekian typology currently employed in the OT several to further his arguments for the supremacy of the priesthood of Jesus to that with the Levites. [3] Matthew Holly and et al. reference to Hebrew six. that Melchizedek met Abraham returning through the rescue of Lot, Melchizedek’s name, “King of Righteousness, ” probably suitable to his personality, marked him as a kind of the Messiah and his empire. The name of his city signified “Peace, ” and as California king of Peace he typified Christ, the Prince of Peace, the fantastic Reconciler of God and man. Nothing is recorded as to the beginning or perhaps end of his existence, thus this individual typically was similar to the Son of God, whose presence is via everlasting to everlasting, who no one that was before Him, and can have no a single come after Him, in His priesthood.
All of Scripture honors the great King of Righteousness and Peace, our glorious Substantial Priest and Savior, plus the more we examine it, the more we need to be confident, that the testimony of Christ is the spirit of prediction. [4] You will find strong parallels between Melchizedek and Jesus: both are the Sons of God, clergyman of the Purchase of Melchizedek, King of Righteous, California king of Peacefulness, appointed by God, eternal priesthood, and preexistent. Affirmation of the Difficulty The problem this paper espouses is put in the queries: What was thus special regarding the buy of Melchizedek?
Why would God juxtapose the order of Melchizedek to that of Jesus if there where no credit to it? Significance in the study The study is significant because it will certainly explore the intertextual examine of Melchizedek in relation to Christ. The study is essential because it is going to contribute to the familiarity with bringing to target the importance of Jesus’ priesthood as excellent and more increasing and in a position to meet the needs of The lord’s people throughout the closing times of earth’s record. Purpose of the research
The main drive of this newspaper is to give a clearer look at of the outstanding and excellent perception of Jesus’ priesthood as efficacious enough intended for the people of God. In reality, Jesus Christ is a only accurate priestly mediator between God and the people. The priesthoods of Aaron and Melchizedek serve simply as function models of Christ’s effective ministry. “For there may be one God, and there is one particular mediator among God and men, the person Christ Jesus, who provided himself as a ransom for all those, the testimony to which was borne on the proper time” (1 Harry. 2: 5, 6). [5] Delimitation
The paper will be delimited for the few pericopes about Melchizedek in Genesis 14, Psalm 110 plus the letter to the Hebrews section 7. Technique This is a qualitative study that identifies Melchizedek and Jesus’ priesthood from Legislation and Christian sources. Part 1 can be described as description in the introduction which includes the significance of study, purpose and the delimitation of the research. Chapter 2 contains the literary works review that extrapolates sources from Legislation, Christian, and non-Christian books to expound on Melchizedek and Jesus’ priesthood because relevant to the master plan of salvation.
Chapter 3 is the summary with the focus on the overview and results of the study. Chapter a couple of TYPOLOGY OF JESUS AND MELCHIZEDEK PRECISELY WHAT IS TYPOLOGY? Exactly what is a type? Theologically speaking, a type might be defined as “a figure or perhaps ensample of something foreseeable future and more or less prophetic, called the ‘Antitype'”. [6] Muenscher says a type is “the preordained representative connection which particular persons, situations, and organizations of the Old Testament carry to corresponding persons, events, and institutions in the New”. 7] Wick Broomall has a succinct statement that is certainly helpful: “A type can be described as shadow solid on the pages of the Old Testament background by a truth whose complete embodiment or antitype is found in the New Testament revelation”. [8] We would, in summary, suggest the next definition, which in turn we paraphrase from Terry: A type is a real, exalted taking place in history which has been divinely ordained by the omniscient God to become a prophetic photo of the good things which he purposed to bring to fruition in Christ Jesus.
Who may be Melchizedek? The identification of Melchizedek has been highly debated in the history of the church. Jewish custom has recognized Melchizedek with Shem, the son of Noah who also, after the chronology in Genesis, survived the flood and lived each time when Abraham was in and was his modern-day for a hundred years. Christian traditions has proposed different interpretations to identify whom Melchizedek was. Origen said that Melchizedek was an angel. Others have got proposed that he was the Holy Spirit in human being form.
Various Christians, historical and contemporary, have said that this is a time-honored example of a Christophany in the Old Testament, that is, Melchizedek was Jesus Christ himself, whom appeared to Abraham in man form. The concept of Christophany should be rejected since it contradicts the statement in the book of Hebrews that Christ was selected a Priest after the buy of Melchizedek. If Melchizedek was Christ then how do Christ him self become a Clergyman in the similarity of Melchizedek? [9] Ellen White wrote in the Review and Herald that it was Christ that chatted through Melchizedek, the priest of the Most Excessive God.
Melchizedek was not Christ, but he was the tone of God in the world, the representative of the Father. And all throughout the generations in the past, Christ has spoken, Christ has led His persons, and has been the light of the world. [10] One more view is the fact Melchizedek was obviously a type of Christ. The typological interpretation suggests that the priesthood of Melchizedek was a sort of Christ’s priesthood. As Melchizedek was a priest of the Most Large God, and so was Christ. As Melchizedek was a full, so was Jesus. Both equally Melchizedek and Jesus had been royal priests.
In the people of Melchizedek and Jesus the offices of priest and king were merged. For this daily news we are going to give attention to the view that Melchizedek was a type of Jesus. After The Buy of Melchizedek The Lord features sworn and definitely will not transform his mind: You really are a priest forever after the buy of Melchizedek (Ps one hundred ten, 4). Contrary to the ordinary priests, for to whom it was conceivable to be of priestly descent and yet certainly not actually work as priests (cf. Deut 18, 6-8, Lev 21, 17-23), the priesthood of Christ priest was sworn on to Him simply by God Him self to be after the order of Melchizedek.
Having been not of any priestly descent inasmuch as he was not of the tribe of Levi, nor was he a priest in the sense of someone who had been actually employed as a sanctuary attendant and was performing sanctuary duties on a everyday basis. Nevertheless , his priesthood was more permanent and enduring than that of any other priest, since whether or not he was functioning inside the sanctuary and ‘doing the job’ of priest, he was by description a mediator between persons and deity for the rest of his life. [11] Christ was obviously a priest of God after the “order of Melchizedek” (Psalm 110: some, Hebrews your five: 6, 15, 6: 20, 7: eleven, 17).
The term “order” (taxis) signifies an “arrangement. ” In this interconnection, it means “of similar layout, ” i actually. e., the nature of, or “just like Melchizedek”. The meaning is this: in some impression the kingly-priesthood of Christ would be related in nature to that of Melchizedek. Take note the mention of the Psalm 128: 4 previously mentioned, and observe that Christ made the application of this Psalm to Himself in Matthew twenty-two: 43-45[12] It had been not that Melchizedek was “without father, without mother” literally, or that he had no ancestry and genealogy background.
No, the truth becoming conveyed was this. Although the Aaronic priesthood lead from like a part of a family line, i. e., the descendants of Aaron, Moses’ brother, the priesthood of Melchizedek was bestowed straight by Our god. And it was precisely in this manner that the Master Jesus was appointed as our High Priest, this individual did not get it using a physical lineage (cf. Hebrews 7: 14). [13] In the Letter to the Hebrews, the writer uses the figure of Melchizedek in his reflection within the salvation-historical significance of Jesus’ life.
However are probably first elements to his usage of Melchizedek, much of what he affirms regarding Melchizedek is parallel or similar to precisely what is found in Jesus. The author uses the view that his visitors had regarding Melchizedek when it comes to proving the superiority of Jesus’ High Priesthood to that of Aaron fantastic descendents. His goal is always to demonstrate that Christ’s fatality brings the Levitical sacrificial system to a end. The figure of Melchizedek recognizes the unification of california king and high priest as one individual. The two of these offices had been separated inside the Mosaic agreement and also later on in the Davidic covenant.
Moses led those whereas Aaron his sibling founded a high-priestly purchase, later, the moment God swore to David that he would establish his dynasty permanently, the large priesthood hailed from the category of Zadok, who was a priest (from the queue of Aaron). Melchizedek, inside the author’s perspective, prefigures the unification of two office buildings in one person, which should arrive to pass in the “last days. ” As a priest permanently according to the order of Melchizedek is to be the two king and priest. As I may so say, Levi also, who receiveth tithes, payed tithes in Abraham. 0 Intended for he was yet in the loins of his father, the moment Melchizedek fulfilled him. Abraham, the father with the Levites as well as the nation of Israel, paid tithes to Melchizedek also because of that, through Abraham, Levi also paid tithes to Melchizedek, so to speak. In doing so , not only was Melchizedek more than Abraham, yet greater than Levi and the priesthood that weary his name. In the event that therefore excellence were by the Levitical priesthood, for under it the people received the law, what further require was right now there that one more priest should rise after the order of Melchizedek, but not be referred to as after the order of Aaron?
The copy writer, having established the superiority of the priestly ministry of Melchizedek over the Levitical priesthood, right now shows the superiority of the priestly ministry of Christ Jesus over equally. Perfection, as we have seen in this kind of paper, refers to salvation. Flawlessness is the Fresh Testament sacrifice, it is salvation through the sacrifice of Christ, and the completeness of His entire work for the believer. In addition if the Levitical priesthood and the Variety Law could bring a person in to salvation, getting back together and entry to God, then simply there was you do not need another clergyman to come after the buy of Melchizedek.
The fact that there was person who came following your order of Melchizedek proven the failing of the Levitical priesthood as well as the Mosaic Law to provide a finish and complete salvation that only Christ, each of our great High Priest, supplies. It means that Christ had not been a High Priest, as in Aaronic and the Levitical order (according to the legislation of Moses). The Substantial Priesthood of Jesus Christ features a higher buy! Christ was and is a High Priest while Melchizedek, rather than as Aaron or Levi. Note the subsequent: 1 . Melchizedek’s position as High Priest was not influenced by ancestry, either was Christ’s. (7: 14). 2 . Melchizedek was not in a succession of numerous priests, nor is Christ. (7: 3). 3. Melchizedek’s priesthood was higher than and separate from your Levitical order, so is definitely Christ’s. (7: 4-7).? four. Melchizedek was priest and king, thus is Christ! (See Zech. 6: 9-15). 5. Melchizedek received tribute from Abraham, the father from the Jewish region, this reveals the superiority of Melchizedek’s priesthood above the Levitical (which came out of the loins of Abraham). Observe Gen. 16: 18-20 with Heb. six: 4[14]. Chapter three or more SUMMARY, SUMMARY, AND SUGGESTION
THIS CHAPTER DISCUSSES THE SUMMARY IN THE FINDINGS, A CONCLUSION, AND SUGGESTION FOR FUTURE RESEARCH. Brief summary The changing of the old priesthood together with the eternal priesthood of Christ also meant a replacement from the Old Covenant with the New Covenant, that was required. This was build, executed and revealed by simply God, with regards to convincing the Jews , their old Levitical priesthood was at this point history. And it means that we have a High Priest and access to God! “For such a higher priest became us, that is holy, safe, undefiled, distinct from sinners, and made greater than the heavens.
Who required not daily, as individuals high priests, to offer up sacrifice, initial for his own sins, and then for the people, just for this he would once, if he offered up himself. inches (Heb. 7: 26-27).? “Wherefore, he is capable also to save lots of them to the uttermost that can come unto Our god by him, seeing this individual ever resided to make intercession for them, inch (Heb. 7: 25). Realization A very careful reading of Hebrews several provides a zoom lens for learning the rest of the notification. Christ’s priesthood, its effectiveness and the response, is the main theme of the letter, and this is expounded carefully in chap. several, via the motor vehicle of Melchizedek.
In the form of true Hebrew poetics, repetitions of references to Melchizedek business lead the reader on the hermeneutical trip. However , also in good Hebrew form, what is left unsaid explicitly also shades the studying and understanding and makes the options for presentation even richer. [15] Tips After a cautious analysis from the juxtaposition location of the Melchizedek’s priesthood and Priesthood of Christ, this kind of paper offers the following suggestion for further analysis: In examining the priesthood of Christ, does elegance have any antecedents?
What has Christ to offer on with the flawlessness of His Priesthood in heaven? Really does Christ Priesthood offer virtually any hope of salvation towards the sinner? Bibliography BIRD, CHAD L. 2000. “TYPOLOGICAL PRESENTATION WITHIN THE AGED TESTAMENT: MELCHIZEDEKIAN TYPOLOGY. inch CONCORDIA RECORD 26. Booij, Thijs. “Psalm 110: “rule in the midst of your foes! inch Vetus testamentum 41, number 4 Oct 1991. Broomall, Wick. 1960. Baker Dictionary of Theology. Everett N. Harrison, Geoffrey W. Bromiley, and Carl F. They would. Henry, eds. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker. Bullinger, Elizabeth. W. 1968. Figures of Speech Employed in the Holy book. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker. Coleran, David E. The sacrifice of Melchisedech. ” Theological Research 1, no . 1 Feb . 1940. Danker, et approach., Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, Chi town: University of Chicago, 2000. Dunnill David, Covenant and sacrifice inside the Letter for the Hebrews. SNTS 75, Cambridge, CUP, 1992. Edwardson, C “Bible specifics concerning the Sanctuary and the Judgement”, Maplewood Press. Fitzmyer, Frederick A. “Now this Melchizedek” (Heb six: 1). inches Catholic Biblical Quarterly twenty-five, no . 3, July 1963. Gane, Roy “Altar Call” Daidem, 99. Kobelski, G J. “The Melchizedek custom. ” Diary of Biblical Literature 96, no . some December 1977. Lefler, Nathan. The Melchizedek traditions inside the Letter to the Hebrews: examining the eyes of an inspired Jewish-Christian writer. ” Expert Ecclesia 16, no . one particular, 2007. Mariottini Claude, A Priest following your order of Melchizedek, Teacher of Aged Testament, Northern Baptist On;ine seminary. Mason, Richard Farrel. “Hebrews 7: several and the romance between Melchizedek and Christ. ” Biblical Research 40 2005. Neyrey, Jerome L. “Without commencing of days or end of life” Hebrews several: 3: topos for a true deity. inch Catholic Biblical Quarterly 53, no . 3 July 1991. Paul, M J. “The order of Melchizedek Ps 110: 5 and Heb 7: 3. ” Waltham forest Theological Journal 49, no . Spr 1987. Petuchowski, Jakob Josef. “The controversial figure of Melchizedek. ” Hebrew Union College Annual 28, 1957. Assessment and Harold, Feb. 18, 1890. Rooke, D. T., Kingship as Priesthood: The Relationship between the Large Priesthood and the Monarchy, Ruler and Messiah in Israel and the Historic Near East. JSOTSS 270, Sheffield 1998. Songer, Harold S. “A superior priesthood: Hebrews four: 14-7: twenty-seven. ” Review , Mostrador 82, number 3 Total 1985. Terry, M. S. 1890. Biblical Hermeneutics. New york city, NY: Eaton , Mains. Thompson, David W. “Conceptual background and reason for the Midrash in Hebrews 7. ” Novum testamentum 19, no . July 1977. Walter L. Roehrs, “The Typological Use of the Old Legs in the New Testament, ” Concordia Log 10, 1984: 204-216, William J. Hassold, “Rectilinear or Typological Interpretation of Messianic Prophecy? inches Concordia Theological Monthly 37, 1967. Warren E. Berkley, http://www. scriptures. ca/ef/expository-Hebrews-7. htm Were, John F. “The blotting out of sins” , , , , , , , , [1] Paul, M M. “The buy of Melchizedek (Ps 110: 4 and Heb several: 3). “Westminster Theological Log 49, no . 1 (Spring 1987): 195-211. [2]Raoul. Dederen, vol. doze, Handbook of Seventh-Day Adventist Theology, (electronic ed. Trademarks Library System, Commentary Research Series Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald Publishing Connection, 2001, c2000), 390. [3]Fowl, Chad M. 2000. “Typological Interpretation Inside the Old Legs: Melchizedekian Typology” Concordia Journal 26, number 1: 36-52. [4]Matthew Holly and Thomas Scott, Matt Henry’s To the point Commentary, (Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Analysis Systems, 1997), Heb 7: 1 . [5]Dederen, Raoul, volume. 12, Handbook of Seventh-Day Adventist Theology, (electronic ed., Logos Catalogue System, Comments Reference Series Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald Creating Association, 2001, c2000), 390. [6] Bullinger, E.
Watts. 1968. Statistics of Presentation Used in the Bible. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker. [7] Terry, M. S. 90. Biblical Hermeneutics. New York, NYC: Eaton , Mains. [8] Broomall, Wick. 1960. Baker Dictionary of Theology. Everett F. Harrison, Geoffrey W. Bromiley, and Carl Farreneheit. H. Henry, eds. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker. [9] Mariottini Claude, A Clergyman after the order of Melchizedek, Professor of Old Legs, Northern Baptist Seminary. [10] Review and Harold, February. 18, 1890. [11] Deb. W. ROOKE, Kingship because Priesthood: The Relationship between the High Priesthood as well as the Monarchy, Full and Messiah in Israel and the Historic Near East.
JSOTSS 270, Sheffield 1998. [12] Danker, et ing., Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament,[pic] Chicago, il: University of Chicago, 2150, 989. [13] D. T. ROOKE, Kingship as Priesthood: The Relationship between the High Priesthood and the Monarchy, King and Messiah in Israel and the Ancient Around East. JSOTSS 270, Sheffield 1998. [14] Warren Electronic. Berkley http://www. bible. ca/ef/expository-hebrews-7. htm [15] John Dunnill, Covenant and sacrifice in the Letter for the Hebrews. SNTS 75, Cambridge, CUP, 1992
