₦airaland Forum

vooks:
You are yet to explain to me at what point Melchizedek the Holy Spirit stepped down and Melchizedek the Son took on the office. Who was the Melchizedek order priest BEFORE Christ shed his blood say when he was born? It was eternal,wasn't it?

I didn't say the Holy Spirits name is Melchizedek. The Holy spirit answers to being called Jesus.

I said when the Holy Spirit put on flesh the name of that flesh was Melchizedek. Jesus became our high priest when he died on the cross and resurrected. Then he took his blood to Heaven (Hebrews 9). The death and resurrection transferred the main priestly role to Jesus. That's what the bible says. The priest before Jesus was Melchizedek. That is why Jesus is according to his order same way Eleazer is according to the order of Aaron. The first person in the line begins the order.

John 20:16-17 KJV

Jesus saith unto her, Mary. She turned herself, and saith unto him, Rabboni; which is to say, Master. Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.

She turned and SAID. . .then Jesus immediately said "don't touch me". This shows she couldn't have or did she disobey him?

As per the Torah, reading Exodus 28:42 or so and Leviticus 16 mentions the requirements. It can be simplified by doing a research on the day of atonement.

vooks:
Show me where it is written she didn't. You may also want to direct me to the relevant shadow of this in the Torah.
Thanks bro

christemmbassey:
i agree with this.... Plus

I disagree with almost everything therein because it is extrabiblical. The bible never said "we don't have a record of Melchizedeks birth". Thr bible said "neither HAVING Beginning of days". This simply means he didn't HAVE a beginning. Please let us stick to the scriptures.

In the OT all the priests must be traced to Aaron without which you couldn't be a priest. No matter how sinful someone was, as long as they were sons of priests they were destined to become priests because the Aaronic priesthood was succeeded by the death or old age of the predecessor. That is why those priests were said to be according to the order of Aaron.

Paul argues in Hebrews (because he knows the Jews deny any other priesthood bar Aarons) that Jesus is not only a priest but a far better priest than any levitical priest there ever was. Knowing they would want to trace Jesus' lineage to see if he hailed from Aaron, Paul argues that Jesus could not be according to the Aaronic priesthood for 3 reasons:

1. Jesus is God and should therefore pre-exist Aaron.
2. Aaronic priesthood was born by a temporary law.
3. Aaronic priesthood changed by death by Jesus was indestructible.

Now, the puzzle is, if the Hebrews writer had said Jesus was according to his own order there would be no argument for Melchizedek. Or even if it was the Hebrews writer that suggested that Jesus was according to the Melchizedekean order he too may have been wrong. But we have to take greater care because it is GOD ALMIGHTY that said Jesus is a priest according to the order of Melchizedek. So why would he relate his eternal son to an ordinary man? That could never be.

The aaronic priests lived and died like Aaron and the scriptures told us when. But the scriptures never told us Melchi died and even more, the scriptures says Jesus is according to Melchizedek's order. It was NOT just a comparison for if it was there was NO NEED to still say Jesus hailed after Melchizedek's order. It is an insult to his deity that it would be compared to a mere man's.

The scriptures told us why Jesus was according to Melchizedek's order: Melchizedek was the first in this line of priests. The type of priests that unlike the Aaronic ones, DID NOT DIE or better still have an ENDLESS and INDESTRUCTIBLE LIFE. Same way Jesus defeated death and proved his indestructibility. Without doubt read the book of Hebrews and see all these things. The bible said (comparing the levitical priesthood and the Melchizedek one) that on earth men that die receive tithes (referring to fallible mortals) while there [men that do not die] (emphasis mine) showing that Melchizedek was in that DEATHLESS camp like Jesus. You cannot miss it.

vooks:
Who told you she didn't touch/cling to him?

She didn't. The High priest (when he was about to offer the blood of bulls or a lamb) in the most holy place for the sins of the nation always wore white apparel and was NEVER touched. The reason being that if he was touched by anyone or thing, he would be rendered unclean and the sacrifice would be disallowed.

So Jesus was on his way to playing the role of high priest. His body and blood were the sacrifice which he presented in the most Holy place in Heaven. That is why he told Mary not to touch him and why he had to ascend on that day. Of course, the spiritual world isn't timed like the physical so whatever he did in heaven he was able to accomplish it and still return in the evening of that same day (remember he met Mary very early in the morning). This time around he had done his role and was given all authority in heaven and earth (something he didn't have while on earth before his death). That is why he told his disciples to hail him and also why he could let them touch him.

vooks:
This is no different form telling me that Mary was not Jesus' mother because he called him woman. Semantics really.
Care to explain how Jesus assumed e priesthood? Did Holy Spirit step down? Is Melchizedek priesthood some form of rotating office between members of the Godhead?

Jesus calling his mum "woman" actually shows her to be his mum. A research on that term reveals that it used to portray endearment.

As per Jesus' priesthood, you have to realise that Jesus didn't pre-exist himself (contrary to the general consensus). Jesus existed as the inseparable word of the father not as a man. And the bible says no one has ever seen God the father in his glory, so whenever God made an appearance in the OT he did so by the messenger of his presence (the Holy spirit) who took the form of a man who at times (like in the case of Melchizedek) appeared as a king-priest.

Now when the time was right God sent his word to come on earth and become flesh. That flesh was called Jesus. We know the story. That Jesus (the word made flesh) now died and resurrected and completed the will of the father concerning our salvation and when he ascended the first time. Hebrews says that is when he offered his blood in heaven, and was conferred with the role of High priest. This was the time the prophecy of Psalms about the savior becoming a priest according to the order of Melchizedek was fulfilled. Then he came back down on earth, met with his disciples, taught them some of these things, gave them gifts, and then ascended the second time (10 days away from pentecost)

christemmbassey:
Melkizedek is NOT a high priest. He has no priests under him, Jesus is and we, christians are priests under Jesus priesthood.

Yes in a sense because there was no one under him at the time.

christemmbassey:
'in the ORDER of .....'' is the problem here, pls lets study this expression carefully. God bless.

I know the meaning. Almost enough to write a book (joking). The point is this; if Eleazer was a priest according to the order of Aaron what else could it mean but that his priesthood began from Aaron? Same way with Jesus and Melchizedek. Melchizedek was the first form that God by the Holy Spirit, used to put on flesh and come on earth. When he came he performed a king-priestly role to Abraham. Years later God's word (different from his Spirit) put on flesh and was called Jesus. Jesus performed the sacrificial role. When he was done the bible says the father bestowed on him the High priestly role the same way that Melchizedek was. That's why Jesus was referred to as a priest According to Melchizedek's order. This means Melchizedek was the first in the line of this type of priests. What type?

1. They have no mother or father.
2. They have no beginning.
3. They have no ending.
4. They are king-priests
5. They are the authors of Righteousness and Peace. Etc.

Why is Jesus so similar to Melchizedek? Because Jesus is the word of God made flesh while Melchizedek (to me) was the Holy Spirit that put on flesh. They are both God and Jesus said so when he called the Holy Spirit "Allos Parakletos" which means one of EXACTLY the SAME KIND. In other words, the Holy Spirit is EXACTLY like Jesus in everything and administration. The only difference is that in performing their roles Jesus was first a physical man( we could touch, see, feel him) while now, the holy spirit is an invisible person whom the world cannot see.

If you research well you would see that this Holy Spirit made a couple of appearances in the OT as a man. So it is not hard to see why I believe what I believe.

Zikkyy:
I want to believe our discussion was about events (& priests) in Abraham's time, not about priests in Abraham's loins at the time he was being blessed by Melchizedek.

I believe the point I was trying to make to you is the "of the Most High God" didn't mean anything else but that seeing that other men had the same thing..including Jesus who you (I am sure) believe is God.

Zikkyy:
You are saying the Melchizedek was actually the Holy Spirit, and we read the Hebrews writer saying Melchizedek remains a priest forever. Are you saying the Holy Spirit remains a priest forever? and i thought Christ was the only priest presently in office.

Christ is NOT the ONLY priest. Christ is the SERVING HIGH priest for the WORLD while the Holy Spirit is a HIGH priest to ONLY Christians. They are high priests because the church now represents a nation of Kings and priests just like Jesus and Melchizedek are. In other words we are priests and they are high priests.

vooks:
There is no record of his birth nor death. That's the closest you come to defining eternity. But absence of these records is no evidence of immortality, otherwise everybody in OT without these would equally qualify.

You need to look at Melchizedek in Hebrews as largely an argument from silence/absence of records

The flaw in this reasoning is that the bible didn't say "we have no records of his birth or death". That is what you have to make it say to take your position. The bible simply said "WITHOUT Father WITHOUT Mother. Neither HAVING beginning of days nor end of life". This is clear enough. Before we even add that the scriptures say their similarities as priests is in relation to their ENDLESS LIFE.

To make it clearer he concludes that God almighty declared that his son, Jesus would forever be a priest according to Melchizedek's order. If this doesn't say DEITY. Nothing else does.

vooks:
Good question. Jesus appeared to the disciples throughout the forty days intermittently. He told her to tell them because that's the only reason he appeared to her; to make her and others witnesses of his resurrection. Note he did it later in the day

He didn't appear to her. Mary Magdalene went to his grave to embalm his body on the 3rd and was surprised by him. Then he said "don't touch me. Go and tell my brothers that I ascend to my father". The bible says she went to tell them. Later on the same day he came back and then appeared to them. This time he let them touch him. Why didn't he let her (Mary) touch him earlier on in the day?

vooks:
He said he would ascend to the father. Where is it written he ascended that moment?

He didn't say I WOULD ASCEND. He said "I ASCEND".

Happy birthday to God's Field Marshal. I could get teary-eyed talking about you and how you made me love God and his word. I remember stumbling into a CEC by chance and seeing the members stand up as you walked in to deliver the word. I remember the puzzled look of disgust that masked my face. That look soon phased out the more I listened. You have a unique way of sharing the word. Sometimes the anointing would be so strong that the hairs at the back of my head would be at attention. Other times my heart would burn with fire and an unquenching desire to change my world. The calling on you is not in doubt to anyone that is of the spirit. I remember listening to that message: the one very simple yet powerful, the one worth-hearing, and saying to myself "I know I would never be the same again". And true to it, I changed and am still changing into that very image that Christ wants me to be.

If I was to write about all the things I have gained from being mentored by you, I suppose all the books in the world would not be enough. So let me use this little corner of this thread, to join millions around the world to celebrate you.

Happy birthday sir!

vooks:
He said he would ascend to the father. Where is it written he ascended that moment?

Didn't you see "Go and tell them?". Why did he tell her to tell them? Why didn't he do it himself?

vooks:
John 20:17 (KJV)
Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.

Jesus says He is going to the father. What's the quarrel?

AND SAY UNTO THEM I ASCEND UNTO MY FATHER AND YOUR FATHER. . .

He Ascended that moment. That is clear enough. Was it 10 days away from Pentecost on this day?

Zikkyy:
@bolded, you do agree that Melchizedek is a priest, and he is a priest forever. and you are of the opinion Melchizedek is not Jesus. so if Melchizedek is priest forever, where is his office currently?

He is still a priest forever.

Zikkyy:
You forgot to add this bit in red font...
....without beginning of days or end of life, resembling the Son of God.....
It is Melchizedek that resembles Christ.

How does he resemble the son of God?

Zikkyy:
What i read you say here is that Christ claim to 'endless life' flows from his priesthood similar to/(after the) order (priestly type) of Melchizedek.

15 "And it is yet far more evident: for that after the similitude of Melchisedec there ariseth another priest,16 Who is made, not after the law of a carnal commandment, but after the power of an endless life".

The Levi priest become priest according to the Mosaic law. i.e. one based on succession from father to son (carnal commandment). Christ claim to a priesthood that is eternal flows from his immortality.

I said (based on that verse) that Melchizedek (like Christ) had a forever priesthood. Not only that but was made after the power of an endless life. You cannot separate which to arrogate to Melchi and Jesus especially when the scriptures gave you no such authority. The verse was clear.

Zikkyy:
I am not aware of any other priest (of the most high God). Maybe you can help.

Was Aaron a priest of the most low Devil?

vooks:
I believe we both don't worship no translation nor paraphrase. We are brothers

The point is anybody arguing that since Jesus was conceived of the Holy Spirit, the Holy Spirit is his father and this is evidenced by Jesus being the prince of peace while Holy Spirit/Melchizedek is King of Peace is not making any sense

The Holy Spirit is sometimes referred to as the Carrier of the Father's presence. He is the one who takes the presence of the father from place to place. He was the one who created the man Jesus. We should just stick to the script.

vooks:
Sir, you have to stretch imagery to absurdity to sustain an even worse absurdity called double ascension theory. Somebody told me that Oyakhilome is against graphics depicting Holy Spirit as a dove.



Equally there some things in Romans without which we would NEVER have understood things like the future of Israel, relationship between the covenants and so forth. Point is Hebrews carrying unique teachings is nothing to dwell on here.

Christ NEVER ascended with his blood to heaven at no time to offer nothing. The sacrifice and blood was offered and finished at calvary. You can do me a favor and state your biggest conviction on this and I will rebut it right here

So let me take you step by step. The scriptures will tell which idea is absurd.

1. John 20:17. Where was Jesus going to here? Let us start from there.

2. The teachings Hebrews carried was to help clarify on some of the things we did not understand post-resurrection. That's what I meant.

3. Hebrews 9:11-12. We can also start from here.

Zikkyy:
The Hebrews writer focus was on the priesthood (as defined by the character/nature of the priest). Jesus did not come 'after' Melchizedek, his priesthood resembles that of Melchizedek.



in arguing your case for theophany, you deliberately ignore the fact that Melchizedek was also a priest. Can you please tell us if the Holy Ghost is also a priest of the most high God. or maybe you are saying Melchizedek was never a priest?



That's the point. Jesus did not come after the order of anybody ( i don't even understand what you mean by 'order'). The reference to Melchizedek is to show resemblance (based on perception).

Eli, Eleazer etc were priests after the order of Aaron. Their priesthood was born from Aaron's priesthood that's what it means. How else will Jesus' priesthood resemble Melchizedek's?

lol, I didn't deliberately avoid anything of the sort. The Holy Spirit took upon varying roles in each of his visits. In this case, he was a priest, the same one offering bread and wine to Abraham which is significant because that was the communion. That Jesus is presently our high priest has nothing to remove from the Holy Spirits role. It is easy for one to confuse the Holy Spirit's personality for Jesus' because he is Allos Parakletos- one of the same kind with the son. Thus the Man, Melchizedek was a priest.

Jesus came after the order od Melchizedek. The father belabored that enough in the scriptures. It was nobody's perception but the almighty Father's.

Hebrews 5:10-11 AMP

Being designated and recognized and saluted by God as High Priest after the order (with the rank) of Melchizedek. [Ps. 110:4.] Concerning this we have much to say which is hard to explain, since you have become dull in your [spiritual] hearing and sluggish [even slothful in achieving spiritual insight].

Why would he withold information about Jesus that he is trying to present to them? He was just saying indirectly that " I don't even want to start talking about Melchi now to confuse you further. Let me talk about only Jesus". If you noticed this was chapter 5. By Chapter 7 he was forced to say a little about Melchi, things we would not have known had he not mentioned it.

Zikkyy:
@bolded, there was many things to say about Jesus. Melchizedek was not in the equation.

vooks:
Abraham met a king and a priest. It is that simple. Melchizedek was a priest. Are not even kings subject to priests? Had he been a mere king, Abraham would not have done nothing. But then again, I have heard that Kings took tributes from war spoils.



MSG is mistranslated? I like. Please advise Gombs. He has an irritating tendency to flash MSG to prop up arguments about words, arguments which can't stand Hebrews or Greek, kind of unknown tongue vs tongues
Now, pick any translation you want here and tell me whether CHILD OF THE HOLY GHOST is a title of any sort or part of a sentence
https://www.biblegateway.com/verse/en/Matthew%201:18

What I meant is the MSG mistranslated that verse. It is not an aberration. Some translators did so according to their own understanding, some of which were erroneous.

The AMP for example, said "through the power of the Holy spirit". How else will anyone say a woman got pregnant except by the power of some other person?

Zikkyy:
"you are a priest forever.........."......This is the 'koko' of the message from God. Christ is a priest forever because he lives forever (due to his divine nature). But the Jews will not understand how one can be a priest forever (based on their understanding of the Levi priesthood). To clarify the nature/type of Christ priesthood, the reference to Melchizedek type priesthood was required....."after the order of Melchizedek" i.e. similar to Melchizedek type of priesthood. This is because the Jews see Melchizedek as still occupying his office (due to lack of info).

After his order means exactly AFTER HIS ORDER. The Jews don't see Melchizedek as still occupying his office- they didn't even know much about him. It was God almighty that said Jesus will be a priest forever just like Melchizedek.

Zikkyy:
"after the power of an endless life" has nothing to do with Melchizedek, it refers to Christ divine nature.

WRONG again. The bible said "Just like Melchizedek, there arose another priest who was made after the power of an endless life". You can juxtapose it with the first description saying "neither having beginning of days nor END OF LIFE".

vooks:
Which brings back to something I once said; Christ ascended ONCE, ten days to Pentecost, forty days after resurrection. There was never nothing like Jesus in high priestly garments sprinkling blood in heaven out of a jar any more than there was a lamb that was slain. This is imagery you would do well not to stretch. SDAs after their epic 1844 prophecy fail claimed that Jesus the High priest moved from the holy place to the holy of holies.

Which blood did Jesus sprinkle anyway? The shed and coagulated and dried blood on the cross?

Hebrews, the closest to the actual time of writing rejected Pauline authorship. Pauline authorship is a LATE tradition. I would proceed with caution and insist we don't know instead of authoritatively declaring the book Pauline.

My friend, Jesus ascended twice. You would have to ignore clear scriptures to suggest otherwise and if you reduce the discussion to coagulated blood and jars then it would be preposterous and absurd.

Now, I told you something and you should do well to study it. There is NOTHING that suggests any of these things being explained in Hebrews didn't happen in Heaven. The question you should ask yourself was who was in heaven to see these things and explain them? There are somethings that the book of Hebrews said that are only found in the book, without which we would NEVER have known or understood Christ's priestly role. So you should do well to get the full picture.

Zikkyy:
Melchizedek did not bless as King, Abraham received blessing from a priest (of the most high God).

Abraham did not relate with any other priest the same way, and you cannot say that Melchizedek was the only priest of the most high God.

Hebrews 7:4, 7 KJV

Now consider how great this man was, unto whom even the patriarch Abraham gave the tenth of the spoils. And without all contradiction the less is blessed of the better.

The scriptures ^^ tell us why he must have been great. Abraham met many other kings...he even rejected their gifts and said so that they wouldn't claim they made him rich. Yet he decided to accept word-of-mouth blessings from an ordinary man? Abraham was a prophet man. A prophet of God. He would only bow to a higher spiritual authority. Now you can tell us what type of spiritual authority could be higher than Abraham's. The same Abraham who had a covenant with God to usher in a savior.

2. Hope you know that it was the HOLY SPIRIT that was the actual creator of the world. Hope you know he is the doer of the spoken word. Hope you know he is the power of God. So when scriptures tell you how Jesus was conceived, you have to understand who actually metted out the conceiving. Maybe you should check the KJV of that verse you quoted to understand why the MSG mistranslated.

vooks:
1. Abraham offering tithe to him is not necessarily a sign of submission to him as a king. Dude was a priest of the Most high at the same time.
Your hypothesis is;
1. Jesus is Child of the Holy Ghost
2.Jesus is the Prince of Peace
3. Melchizedek is King of Peace
CONCLUSION
Melchizedek is Holy Ghost
You are closely following Theodotus II position on Melchizedek, and many others after him.
Is it really so? I don't think so. First, Jesus is never referred to a 'child of the Holy Ghost. Am sure you have in mind Matthew 1: 18. That is part of a statement/sentence and not a reference to Jesus. Here is your favorite version rendering of the same.
Matthew 1:18-25The Message (MSG)
18-19 The birth of Jesus took place like this. His mother, Mary, was engaged to be married to Joseph. Before they came to the marriage bed, Joseph discovered she was pregnant. (It was by the Holy Spirit, but he didn’t know that.) Joseph, chagrined but noble, determined to take care of things quietly so Mary would not be disgraced.
Next, Prince don't necessarily mean son of a King. God said he would make Solomon Prince all the days of his life (1 Kings 11:34),and in 14:7, He made Jeroboam 'prince over my people Israel'
How is it heretical? He is called Son of David another 'ordinary man' and 'Lion of the tribe of Judah' another 'ordinary tribe'. In fact, these references as used in heaven and as revealed to John in Revelation suggests some eternal Offices and titles of Christ are founded in flesh and blood. Just saying

vooks:
Agreed bro, there is nothing particularly spiritual or too hard about narrating history.
That Melchizedek is a king and or a specific place called Salem is not what the author won't share since he has already said that. It is anything but Salem was a spiritual city and Melchizedek was its king bla de bla....

Once again, Hebrews was never authored by Paul and there is zero Pauline about it but that is irrelevant to our discourse.

PS: At what point did Jesus become High priest after the order of Melchizedek?

Jesus became High Priest after his death and resurrection. These things happened after resurrection before final (second)ascension.

As per the Author of Hebrews. To me, the type of spiritual knowledge contained in this book alone shows that no other person bar Paul could have written it. Not a single soul.

vooks:
The big picture is, Hebrews extensively applies arguments from silence to draw parallels between Melchizedek and Christ.
1. Abraham gave a tithe of the spoils to King Melchizedek
2. Jesus is made a priest after the order of Melchizedek

Hebrews is just connecting these two not making a case for the mystical aspect of Melchizedek. Guy was just another king. There is not even the remotest hint of reverence like for the three guys at Mamre.

1. Abraham was not subject to any King. The Jews saw him as the greatest man that ever was. So Paul is telling them how Jesus was greater than Abraham and how it is doctrinally sound even according to the books of Genesis and Psalms that they (Jews) still hold dearly to by showing them that there was another 'man', a priest, who according to the scriptures, was greater than Abraham. So much so that Abraham gave him a tithe and received blessings from him. Paul argues that that Man- Melchizedek was the first in the line of a type of priests that Jesus came after. These priests have an endless life. It is very lucidly put that even though that Melchizedek wasn't Christ himself. He was SIMILAR to Christ and we know why: CHRIST WAS REFERRED TO AS THE CHILD OF THE HOLY GHOST, while to me Melchizedek was a manly form that the HOLY GHOST took after while he visited earth. That is why he can be regarded as KING OF PEACE whereas Jesus was referred to as PRINCE OF PEACE.

2. How can Jesus come after the order of an ordinary man? It is actually Heretical to suggest so.

Hebrews 5:10-11 KJV

Called of God an high priest after the order of Melchisedec. Of whom we have many things to say, and hard to be uttered, seeing ye are dull of hearing.

There were MANY things to say about Melchizedek and Jesus but the Jews were too spiritually dull to understand it. Trust me, if Paul was referring to history from a 'historic city' called Salem his fellow Jews would have known it.

The knowledge Paul was trying to communicate was spiritual.

vooks:
All Hebrew names have meanings. Regardless of what Salem means or meant, this guy was a King over that place. How could he be identified as a king over a fictitious/metaphorical city/kingdom? The main passage in Genesis rules out metaphor
This was not any of the -phanies