Jesus: A High Priest After the Order of Melchizedek
Several days ago, a friend asked me to explain the statement in the book of Hebrews that Jesus is “a priest after the order of Melchizedek.” This designation of Jesus as a priest after the order of Melchizedek has baffled many Christians and has produced several interesting interpretations. The purpose of this post is to study the meaning of the statement in Hebrews that Jesus is a priest after the order of Melchizedek.
Five times in the New Testament, Jesus is called, directly or indirectly, “a priest after the order of Melchizedek” (Hebrews 5:6, 10; 6:20; 7:11, 17). The text in Hebrews 5:5-10 presents two examples of the designation of Jesus as a high priest:
So also Christ did not exalt himself to be made a high priest, but was appointed by him who said to him, "You are my Son, today I have begotten you"; as he says also in another place, "You are a priest forever, after the order of Melchizedek." In the days of his flesh, Jesus offered up prayers and supplications, with loud cries and tears, to him who was able to save him from death, and he was heard because of his reverence. Although he was a son, he learned obedience through what he suffered. And being made perfect, he became the source of eternal salvation to all who obey him, being designated by God a high priest after the order of Melchizedek (Hebrews 5:5-10 ESV).
The proper understanding of Jesus as Melchizedek must begin with Genesis 14:18, where Melchizedek is introduced for the first time: “And Melchizedek king of Salem brought out bread and wine; he was priest of God Most High.”
Melchizedek met Abraham when the patriarch returned from the pursuit of Chedorlaomer and the other Mesopotamian kings who had taken Lot as a prisoner of war. In the text, Melchizedek is introduced as the priest of God Most High and as the king of Salem. Salem is an ancient name for Jerusalem: “His abode has been established in Salem, his dwelling place in Zion” (Psalm 76:2).
The identification of Melchizedek has been highly debated in the history of the church. Jewish tradition has identified Melchizedek with Shem, the son of Noah who, after the chronology in Genesis, survived the flood and lived at a time when Abraham was alive and was his contemporary for a hundred years.
Christian tradition has proposed different interpretations to identify who Melchizedek was. Origen said that Melchizedek was an angel. Others have proposed that he was the Holy Spirit in human form.
Many Christians, ancient and contemporary, have said that this is a classical example of a Christophany in the Old Testament, that is, Melchizedek was Jesus Christ himself, who appeared to Abraham in human form.
The concept of Christophany should be rejected because it contradicts the statement in the book of Hebrews that Jesus was designated a priest after the order of Melchizedek. If Melchizedek was Christ then how could Christ become a priest in the likeness of Melchizedek?
Another view is that Melchizedek was a type of Christ. The typological interpretation suggests that the priesthood of Melchizedek was a type of Christ’s priesthood. As Melchizedek was a priest of the Most High God, so was Jesus. As Melchizedek was a king, so was Jesus. Both Melchizedek and Jesus were royal priests. In the persons of Melchizedek and Jesus the offices of priest and king were combined.
The text in Genesis indicates that Melchizedek was a Canaanite king who reigned in Jerusalem before the city was conquered by David and became the capital of the united monarchy (2 Samuel 5:6-10).
As king of Jerusalem, Melchizedek combined the offices of priest and king into his official duties. The combination of priesthood and kingship into the office of the king was not uncommon in the Ancient Near East. For instance, Ethbaal king of the Sidonians and the father of Jezebel, was also the priest of Astarte (1 Kings 16:31).
So, when David conquered Jerusalem and made the city the capital of his empire, he called the stronghold of Zion “The City of David” (2 Kings 5:9). David incorporated the original inhabitants of Jerusalem into the population of Israel and became their king.
Since the king of Jerusalem was also a priest, David became a priest, not because he was a Levite, but because he continued the tradition established by Melchizedek. This is what Psalm 110:4 is trying to communicate. The words of verse 4 are addressed to the king: “The Lord has sworn and will not change his mind, ‘You are a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek.’”
Melchizedek now becomes a type of the Davidic king. The descendants of David will be king and they will be priests; this is clearly expressed in 2 Samuel 8:18: “and David's sons were priests.”
The priesthood of Melchizedek is used by the author of the book of Hebrews to prove the claim that Jesus Christ was a high priest. In Israel, the high priest had to be a Levite and a descendant of Aaron. Since Jesus was from the tribe of Judah and a descendant of David, it was impossible for the writer of Hebrews to say that Jesus was a high priest.
But, this is precisely what the author of Hebrews is emphasizing in his writing. As a high priest, Jesus presented a sacrifice for sins. Jesus Christ was the “great high priest who has passed through the heavens” (Hebrews 4:14). Jesus Christ was the high priest who opened the way for people to approach the throne of grace (the Mercy Seat) with confidence so that they “may receive mercy and find grace to help in time of need” (Hebrews 4:15-16).
The writer of the book of Hebrews then is saying that Jesus became a high priest, not because he was a descendant of Aaron. Jesus because a high priest after the order of Melchizedek because he was a descendant of David and a legitimate successor of the legacy left by David when he became king of Jerusalem.
By saying that Jesus became a priest after the order of Melchizedek, the author of Hebrews is emphasizing that Jesus “become a priest, not according to a legal requirement concerning bodily descent” (Hebrews 7:16-17), but because of the promise made to David that he and his descendants would become priests forever after the order of Melchizedek (Psalm 110:4).
The erroneous view that Genesis 14:18 is a Christophany or that Melchizedek was an angel or even the Holy Spirit makes it difficult for the reader to understand the meaning of the statement that Jesus Christ is a high priest “after the order of Melchizedek.”
Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary
Tags: Hebrews 7, Jesus, Melchizedek, High Priest
Labels: Hebrews 7, High Priest, Jesus, Melchizedek




14 Comments:
Professor,
You should include the fact that LDS (Mormons) are the only christian church in the present days that claim to have received the Melchizedek priesthood from messengers from above. Something to think about.
Forte abraço.
Julio,
This view, taught by the Mormon church, is difficult to accept. If David and his family became priests because they continued the tradition established by the king-priest of Canaanite Jerusalem, how can the Mormons claim they received the priesthood from Melchizedek if they are not from the family of David?
Thank you for visiting my blog and for your comment.
Since you are reading Hebrews as saying that the connection between Melchizedek and Jesus is mediated through David, could this designation have any messianic undertones? And do you know if there are messianic readings of Melchizedek in Jewish sources (such as the DSS, Tgs, etc)?
Thanks,
Matt<><
Matthew,
Melchizedek appears in Philo, Josephus, and other Jewish writings. He also appears at Qumran. A fragment designated 11QMelch makes allusions to Melchizedek. If you are interested in pursuing this topic, I recommend that you consult the article “Melchizedek (Person)” by Michael C. Astour in The Anchor Bible Dictionary 4:684-686 and the article “Melchizedek (11QMelch)” by George J. Brooke in The Anchor Bible Dictionary 4:687-688.
Again, thank you for your comment.
Claude Mariottini
Dear Dr. Mariottini,
Thank you so much for delineating the substance of the statement that Christ is a high priest “after the order of Melchizedek.”
It had never occurred to me that, because the high priest had to be a Levite descended from Aaron, Jesus -- a descendant of David from the tribe of Judah -- could not be legitimately presented as a high priest by any other means. In retrospect, where verse 3 says, “Without father or mother, without genealogy, without beginning of days or end of life, like the Son of God he remains a priest forever,” it seems abundantly obvious that the intent of the writer is to provide a valid basis for claiming the high-priesthood of Christ.
Sincerely,
Andy Sturt
My Blog
Wow. This is something I'd never thought of before. Thanks for the article.
And to show that I really paid attention: your reference in the penultimate paragraph should be to Ps. 110:4.
Peace.
Andy,
Thank you for your comment. I apologize for the delay in responding to what you wrote. I agree with you that the writer of Hebrews was trying to explain how Jesus could be a priest without being a Levite. You are not alone: many people do not ask the question about Jesus’ priesthood. When they do, they must find a justification for the fact that Jesus performed the work of a priest. The writer of Hebrews provides a good justification for Jesus’ work.
Thank you for visiting my blog.
Claude Mariottini
Milton,
Thank you for your comment and your correction. You are right: the reference is to Psalm 110:4. I will make the change.
By the way, are you available to work as my editor?
Claude Mariottini
Claude Mariottini,
I'm a student at a Bible College in Kansas City and I'm working on a paper about Jesus being our sympathizing high priest. I came across your blog and I just want to say...it was sooooo helpful, so clarifying!! It brought so much more clarity into understanding what it means in saying that Jesus is a high priest in the order of Melchizedek and how it's even possible. Going through the line of David made it so much more understandable. Oh and it makes me love and trust Jesus more...he has fulfilled EVERY prophetic promise and he's coming back to reign as king of Israel. I LOVE how it not only establishes him as high priest forever, but also as king!!! Thank you for sharing-it was so clear. You must be a great prof. May the Lord continue to give you a spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him (Eph. 1:17) and the ability to teach with clarity!! Bless you!
Sorry...I forgot to sign my name in the last post...I'm Stephanie, by the way!! :)
Stephanie,
Thank you for visiting my blog. I am glad that my post on Jesus and Melchizedek was helpful to you in the preparation of your paper. The Old Testament has much to teach Christians about the truths taught in the New Testament. I hope you do well in your paper.
Visit my blog again and when you do, leave a comment.
Claude Mariottini
I just wanted to supplement Julio's comment above. He talked about the Mormons having the Priesthood of Melchizedek. You answered: how can the Mormons claim they received the priesthood from Melchizedek if they are not from the family of David?
I believe you answered this in your post where you talk about the Royal Priesthood. Didn't Peter say that the whole Church was to be considered part of this Royal Priesthood, which was, in fact, the Melchizedek Priesthood. This would seem to mean that church members from all families and lineages could now participate in the Melchizedek Priesthood. Mormons believe that instead of passing it from father to son, Jesus passed on the Melchizedek Priesthood to his Apostles, who passed it into the Church. Joseph Smith claimed to receive this priesthood through a visitation from Peter, James, and John.
I would be interested in your opinion on this.
Professor,
Are you aware of a trend nowadays of some church leaders being referred to as high priest by some of those in their heirarchy?
Is this in any way compatible with our classic Christian understanding that there is only one high priest in the church... Jesus Christ? I don't think so but I'd like to hear your view.
Femi
Femi,
There is no reason for anyone to call himself “a high priest.” Those who do so, do so without any biblical authority. The function of the high priest in the Old Testament was very specific and no one today fulfills that function.
The New Testament teaches that Jesus is our High Priest and only Jesus can make atonement for our sins.
Claude Mariottini
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home