Your ShelfYour Projects

Question—Melchizedek

17%

Seventh-day Adventist Missionary Society · Oakland, Cal. · Sep 14, 1882

FromSigns of the Times, Vol. 8, No. 35.

Read the full edition

Question—Melchizedek.

By Editor

1. Is there any evidence that the order of priesthood of which Melchizedek was priest existed before his time?
ANSWER.—There is no evidence to that effect, but there are reasons for the contrary. Christ was called the son of David—not the son of Jehoshaphat, nor of Hezekiah, nor of Josiah—because David was the first of that line of kings. The priests under the Levitical law were priests of the order of Aaron—not after the order of Eleazar, or Zadok—because Aaron was the first of that line of priests. This method of counting lines or orders was never departed from to our knowledge. This would certainly determine that Melchizedek had no predecessor in office.
2. Some have asserted that Melchizedek was Shem, and some say that he was Christ himself. Is either true, and if so, which?
ANSWER.—Neither is true. We have the genealogy of Shem, which forbids his being identical with Melchizedek, according to Paul's argument in Hebrews 7. To say that he was Christ himself is to say that Christ is a priest after the order of Christ, or that he was a type of himself. This involves an absurdity as great as to say that David was a king in the line of David, or that Aaron was a priest after the order of Aaron.
These conjectures as to who was Melchizedek (for they are but conjectures) are unprofitable, because they are inquiries into that which is not revealed. There is a great truth set forth by Paul in his letter to the Hebrews, which would be utterly lost were it possible to identify Melchizedek. Though Aaron, in his priesthood, “served unto the example and shadow of heavenly things,” Heb. 8:5, Aaron was not a complete type of Christ. Paul points out as many as ten particulars wherein they differed. A few are these: Aaron had not a kingly priesthood; he died and left his office to a successor; the priests of his order must be able to show their genealogy; he had to offer sacrifice for his own sins; they were from different tribes. But we have just facts enough stated in regard to Melchizedek to supply the points lacking in Aaron to furnish a complete type of the priesthood of Christ. The expression that Melchizedek was without father, etc., was common among the Jews, of those whose descent or pedigree was not given. For more extended proofs, see “Refutation of the Age to Come,” for sale at the SIGNS office.