Please let's look at this story from a critical point of view. I'll explain these script statement by statement to prove a failed attempt to link characters in the good book.

Hebrews 7
1.For this Melchizedek, king of Salem, priest of the Most High God, who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings and blessed him, 2 to whom also Abraham gave a tenth part of all, first being translated “king of righteousness,” and then also king of Salem, meaning “king of peace,” 3 without father, without mother, without genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life, but made like the Son of God, remains a priest continually.

( Verse 3 rightly translated, simply means that the genealogy is not recorded, ie, the mother and father is not known or recorded and should not be confused for an immortal.
Just as some orphans do not know their parents.
Lol, you get the trick?)

11 Therefore, if perfection were through the Levitical priesthood (for under it the people received the law), what further need was there that another priest should rise according to the order of Melchizedek, and not be called according to the order of Aaron?
(Verse 11 simply means , the order of Melchizedek is perfect, hence, it is required since the order of Aaron isn't perfect...
Are you getting the gist?)

14 For it is evident that our Lord arose from Judah, of which tribe Moses spoke nothing concerning priesthood. 15 And it is yet far more evident if, in the likeness of Melchizedek, there arises another priest 16 who has come, not according to the law of a fleshly commandment, but according to the power of an endless life.

#Language structure
*Who has come not according to the law of fleshly commandment/order of Aron)
* Therefore, according to the power of endless life simply means, according to the order of Melchizedek stop putting abstract ideas in your heads.

Now let's look at the Errors
1aWhen something is according to an order, it means semblance, but jesus' mother/genealogy was known and recorded.
So someone was trying so hard to reconcile characters.
b. What was the need of selling the incarnation story when the context of Hebrews 7 was purely reincarnation concept(a popular Igbo concept). The whole concept of Hebrews, renders the Virgin birth story a fallacy.

2.a. Remember Melchizedek is already called king of peace and king of righteousness.
b. If the order of Melchizedek is already perfect according to the context of the story, what was the need of presenting another priest according to the order of Melchizedek?
Why not pray in Melchizedek's name?
If Melchizedek was non existent, it would make more sense to move away from the former (order of Aaron) to the later (order of the spirit that overwhelmed Mary or something)

This is why men should not make gods of the words of ordinary men such as themselves. The opinions and views recorded in the epistles are not meant to serve to replace the Truth as declared by God Himself. They are instead to be validated against that which is recorded as a Message from God.

The Word of God is the Word out of God's own mouth. For everything else, the law of Old states that by the account of 2 or 3 witnesses shall a truth be established. Jesus Christ said when 2 or 3 are gathered — proclaiming a truth— He is there in their midst— He stands as a stamp to that proclaimed. Implying that when there is only one witness to a "Truth", it is not of Him.

Broveens42:

Now let's look at the Errors
1aWhen something is according to an order, it means semblance, but jesus' mother/genealogy was known and recorded.
So someone was trying so hard to reconcile characters.
b. What was the need of selling the incarnation story when the context of Hebrews 7 was purely reincarnation concept(a popular Igbo concept). The whole concept of Hebrews, renders the Virgin birth story a fallacy.

He. 7:14 For it is clear that our Lord descended from Judah, and in regard to that tribe Moses said nothing about priests.
He. 7:15 And what we have said is even more clear if another priest like Melchizedek appears,
He. 7:16 one who has become a priest not on the basis of a regulation as to his ancestry but on the basis of the power of an indestructible life.
He. 7:17 For it is declared: “You are a priest for ever, in the order of Melchizedek.” [Psalm 110:4]

He. 7:16-17 makes it clear that the similarity between Jesus and Melchizedek is only in terms of indestructible life. Verse 16 completely discounts similarity based on ancestry. The big issue though is that people haven't clearly understood who Jesus Christ is. Incidentally, who Jesus Christ is is encapsulated in the combination Jesus + Christ.

He. 10:5 Therefore, when Christ came into the world, he said: “Sacrifice and offering you did not desire, but a body you prepared for me.

When Christ (the Anointing or Holy Spirit) came into the world of mankind, there was already a body prepared for him by God. The body prepared for him was the man Jesus. In Mt. 3:16 we see Christ enter into Jesus. What Jesus received in Mt. 3:16 was just an initial deposit of the Spirit (2Co. 5:5) which is God's guarantee of what is to come. The fullness of the Spirit comes only after a receipient of the initial deposit proves herself/himself worthy. How does a receipient of the initial deposit prove herself/himself worthy? It is by demonstrating the ability to consistently reject Satan's words or ways and hold on to God's words. Hence, in Mt. 4:1, the Spirit drove Jesus into the desert where he was tempted by Satan. There in the desert, Satan threw his words at Jesus, but Jesus always replied Satan with God's words.

Mt. 4:10 Jesus said to him, “Away from me, Satan! For it is written: `Worship the Lord your God, and serve him only.’“ [Deut. 6:13]
Mt. 4:11 Then the devil left him, and angels came and attended him.

Lk. 4:14 Jesus returned to Galilee in the power of the Spirit, and news about him spread through the whole countryside.

Jn. 1:14 The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, [Or the Only Begotten] who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.

Having proven himself worthy by consistently rejecting ways of Satan and holding on to God's words, God's angels attended to Jesus and imparted into him the fullness of the Spirit. It was at this point that the Word became flesh, by possessing the man Jesus.

Col. 1:19 For God was pleased to have all his fulness dwell in him.

Jn. 14:10 Don’t you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me? The words I say to you are not just my own. Rather, it is the Father, living in me, who is doing his work.

This is a lesson for all Christians who have received the first deposit of the Spirit. They can receive the fulness of the Spirit and become like Jesus (Jn. 14:12, 1 Jn. 3:2). Unfortunately, the knowledge has been lacking. People don't even know that Adam received the first deposit of the Spirit (Ge. 2:7), just like Jesus, but when Satan tried Adam he failed. He grieved the Holy spirit and the glory of God departed from him.

2.a. Remember Melchizedek is already called king of peace and king of righteousness.
b. If the order of Melchizedek is already perfect according to the context of the story, what was the need of presenting another priest according to the order of Melchizedek?
Why not pray in Melchizedek's name?
If Melchizedek was non existent, it would make more sense to move away from the former (order of Aaron) to the later (order of the spirit that overwhelmed Mary or something)

Re. 5:7 He came and took the scroll from the right hand of him who sat on the throne.
Re. 5:8 And when he had taken it, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb. Each one had a harp and they were holding golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints.
Re. 5:9 And they sang a new song: “You are worthy to take the scroll and to open its seals, because you were slain, and with your blood you purchased men for God from every tribe and language and people and nation.
Re. 5:10 You have made them to be a kingdom and priests to serve our God, and they will reign on the earth.”
Re. 5:11 Then I looked and heard the voice of many angels, numbering thousands upon thousands, and ten thousand times ten thousand. They encircled the throne and the living creatures and the elders.
Re. 5:12 In a loud voice they sang: “Worthy is the Lamb, who was slain, to receive power and wealth and wisdom and strength and honour and glory and praise!”

I think that Melchizedek should be one of the 24 elders of Re. 5:8. Melchizedek is not worthy for human beings to pray in his name. He never purchased any man with his blood for God. We have access to God by the blood of Jesus through the name of Jesus.

Kei144:


He. 7:14 For it is clear that our Lord descended from Judah, and in regard to that tribe Moses said nothing about priests.
He. 7:15 And what we have said is even more clear if another priest like Melchizedek appears,
He. 7:16 one who has become a priest not on the basis of a regulation as to his ancestry but on the basis of the power of an indestructible life.
He. 7:17 For it is declared: “You are a priest for ever, in the order of Melchizedek.” [Psalm 110:4]

He. 7:16-17 makes it clear that the similarity between Jesus and Melchizedek is only in terms of indestructible life. Verse 16 completely discounts similarity based on ancestry. The big issue though is that people haven't clearly understood who Jesus Christ is. Incidentally, who Jesus Christ is is encapsulated in the combination Jesus + Christ.

He. 10:5 Therefore, when Christ came into the world, he said: “Sacrifice and offering you did not desire, but a body you prepared for me.

When Christ (the Anointing or Holy Spirit) came into the world of mankind, there was already a body prepared for him by God. The body prepared for him was the man Jesus. In Mt. 3:16 we see Christ enter into Jesus. What Jesus received in Mt. 3:16 was just an initial deposit of the Spirit (2Co. 5:5) which is God's guarantee of what is to come. The fullness of the Spirit comes only after a receipient of the initial deposit proves herself/himself worthy. How does a receipient of the initial deposit prove herself/himself worthy? It is by demonstrating the ability to consistently reject Satan's words or ways and hold on to God's words. Hence, in Mt. 4:1, the Spirit drove Jesus into the desert where he was tempted by Satan. There in the desert, Satan threw his words at Jesus, but Jesus always replied Satan with God's words.

Mt. 4:10 Jesus said to him, “Away from me, Satan! For it is written: `Worship the Lord your God, and serve him only.’“ [Deut. 6:13]
Mt. 4:11 Then the devil left him, and angels came and attended him.

Lk. 4:14 Jesus returned to Galilee in the power of the Spirit, and news about him spread through the whole countryside.

Jn. 1:14 The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, [Or the Only Begotten] who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.

Having proven himself worthy by consistently rejecting ways of Satan and holding on to God's words, God's angels attended to Jesus and imparted into him the fullness of the Spirit. It was at this point that the Word became flesh, by possessing the man Jesus.

Col. 1:19 For God was pleased to have all his fulness dwell in him.

Jn. 14:10 Don’t you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me? The words I say to you are not just my own. Rather, it is the Father, living in me, who is doing his work.

This is a lesson for all Christians who have received the first deposit of the Spirit. They can receive the fulness of the Spirit and become like Jesus (Jn. 14:12, 1 Jn. 3:2). Unfortunately, the knowledge has been lacking. People don't even know that Adam received the first deposit of the Spirit (Ge. 2:7), just like Jesus, but when Satan tried Adam he failed. He grieved the Holy spirit and the glory of God departed from him.



Re. 5:7 He came and took the scroll from the right hand of him who sat on the throne.
Re. 5:8 And when he had taken it, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb. Each one had a harp and they were holding golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints.
Re. 5:9 And they sang a new song: “You are worthy to take the scroll and to open its seals, because you were slain, and with your blood you purchased men for God from every tribe and language and people and nation.
Re. 5:10 You have made them to be a kingdom and priests to serve our God, and they will reign on the earth.”
Re. 5:11 Then I looked and heard the voice of many angels, numbering thousands upon thousands, and ten thousand times ten thousand. They encircled the throne and the living creatures and the elders.
Re. 5:12 In a loud voice they sang: “Worthy is the Lamb, who was slain, to receive power and wealth and wisdom and strength and honour and glory and praise!”

I think that Melchizedek should be one of the 24 elders of Re. 5:8. Melchizedek is not worthy for human beings to pray in his name. He never purchased any man with his blood for God. We have access to God by the blood of Jesus through the name of Jesus.

You didn't get my point 2 did you?
The passage and context shows Melchizedek shouldn't even be mirrored with the word "continually", that's pure language structure, an attempt by NT writers to promote whatever.
Melchizedek REMAINS a priest CONTINUALLY.
The language structure didn't say "became a priest". So any other character who tries to mirror an attribute to remain a priest CONTINUALLY, means he(blical Jesus) has BECOME a PRIEST, a clear case of imitation, and can't be regarded as king of peace. Yes it is the endless life story of the character the NT writers were trying to imitate showing that the promises of endless life would bring everlasting peace naturally, but an imitation of that shows he isn't the king of peace.

This is the bigger issue, why reconcile a 'perfect' story in Melchizedek that's devoid of any sacrifice whatsoever with the character in biblical jesus.
Notice, the context of the entire story reserves sacrifice (of any kind) for the order of Aaron, according to OT.

Broveens42:
( Verse 3 rightly translated, simply means that the genealogy is not recorded, ie, the mother and father is not known or recorded and should not be confused for an immortal.
Just as some orphans do not know their parents.
Lol, you get the trick?)

You got the gist but you still haven't hit the right point.

To hit the right point you need to ask, why was details of such highly person who was said to be greater than Abraham himself could be hidden?

Then you can appreciate the silent point the writer of the book of Hebrew was driven at which is at the last part of verse 3 "...resembling the Son of God."

So it was Melchizedek the inspired writer of the Hebrew Bible made to be LIKE the Son of God.

[(Verse 11 simply means , the order of Melchizedek is perfect, hence, it is required since the order of Aaron isn't perfect...
Are you getting the gist?)

No! You got it wrong.

The writer isn't talking about PERFECTION here but the people in charge of the priesthood.

The Levith keep dying and replaced but Melchizedek was never recorded to have died, so get the point.

#Language structure
*Who has come not according to the law of fleshly commandment/order of Aron)
* Therefore, according to the power of endless life simply means, according to the order of Melchizedek stop putting abstract ideas in your heads.

No! You're the one who needs to get abstract ideas off your mind.

Here is it "Jesus became a priest, not by meeting the physical requirement of belonging to the tribe of Levi, but by the power of a life that cannot be destroyed."

Now let's look at the Errors

No errors whatsoever.

1aWhen something is according to an order, it means semblance, but jesus' mother/genealogy was known and recorded.
So someone was trying so hard to reconcile characters.

You don't even understand the book you're quoting yet acting like you know the intent of the writer.

Let me summarised it for you:

1. The writer is talking about PRIESTHOOD.

2. The writer notice a PRIEST in the Hebrew Bible who actually performed the function of a priest years before God even instituted the office of a priest and this person is a foreshadowing the SON OF GOD.

So it wasn't about just genealogy.

b. What was the need of selling the incarnation story when the context of Hebrews 7 was purely reincarnation concept(a popular Igbo concept). The whole concept of Hebrews, renders the Virgin birth story a fallacy.

You see ignorance in play, the writer point isn't even about incarnation but how Jesus fulfill the requirements to act as a PRIEST since Jesus was not from the tribe of Levi chosen by Aaron according to the law.

2.a. Remember Melchizedek is already called king of peace and king of righteousness.

Resembling the Son of God, don't forget that.

It's not the Son of God that resembles Melchizedek.

b. If the order of Melchizedek is already perfect according to the context of the story, what was the need of presenting another priest according to the order of Melchizedek?

I don't know how you people will just wake up and lie comfortably.

Where in that chapter did you read that the ORDER OF MELCHIZEDEK IS ALREADY PERFECT?

This is where you started injecting your own lie.

Why not pray in Melchizedek's name?

because Melchizedek never demanded that by himself.

If Melchizedek was non existent, it would make more sense to move away from the former (order of Aaron) to the later (order of the spirit that overwhelmed Mary or something)

You need to read that chapter with an open mind not just to satisfy your own perversion.

Emusan:


You got the gist but you still haven't hit the right point.

To hit the right point you need to ask, why was details of such highly person who was said to be greater than Abraham himself could be hidden?

Then you can appreciate the silent point the writer of the book of Hebrew was driven at which is at the last part of verse 3 "...resembling the Son of God."

So it was Melchizedek the inspired writer of the Hebrew Bible made to be LIKE the Son of God.



No! You got it wrong.

The writer isn't talking about PERFECTION here but the people in charge of the priesthood.

The Levith keep dying and replaced but Melchizedek was never recorded to have died, so get the point.



No! You're the one who needs to get abstract ideas off your mind.

Here is it "Jesus became a priest, not by meeting the physical requirement of belonging to the tribe of Levi, but by the power of a life that cannot be destroyed."



No errors whatsoever.



You don't even understand the book you're quoting yet acting like you know the intent of the writer.

Let me summarised it for you:

1. The writer is talking about PRIESTHOOD.

2. The writer notice a PRIEST in the Hebrew Bible who actually performed the function of a priest years before God even instituted the office of a priest and this person is a foreshadowing the SON OF GOD.

So it wasn't about just genealogy.



You see ignorance in play, the writer point isn't even about incarnation but how Jesus fulfill the requirements to act as a PRIEST since Jesus was not from the tribe of Levi chosen by Aaron according to the law.



Resembling the Son of God, don't forget that.

It's not the Son of God that resembles Melchizedek.



I don't know how you people will just wake up and lie comfortably.

Where in that chapter did you read that the ORDER OF MELCHIZEDEK IS ALREADY PERFECT?

This is where you started injecting your own lie.



because Melchizedek never demanded that by himself.



You need to read that chapter with an open mind not just to satisfy your own perversion.

You will continue dribbling yourself until you shoot yourself on the foot. It's pure language structure. If Melchizedek is the king of righteousness, then you should appreciate what the writer was trying to do; a mirror image for the character Jesus.
The context is that the order of Melchizedek is perfect because he is king of righteousness and peace. What's imperfect about a king of righteousness and peace?

Emusan:


You got the gist but you still haven't hit the right point.

To hit the right point you need to ask, why was details of such highly person who was said to be greater than Abraham himself could be hidden?

Then you can appreciate the silent point the writer of the book of Hebrew was driven at which is at the last part of verse 3 "...resembling the Son of God."

So it was Melchizedek the inspired writer of the Hebrew Bible made to be LIKE the Son of God.



No! You got it wrong.

The writer isn't talking about PERFECTION here but the people in charge of the priesthood.

The Levith keep dying and replaced but Melchizedek was never recorded to have died, so get the point.



No! You're the one who needs to get abstract ideas off your mind.

Here is it "Jesus became a priest, not by meeting the physical requirement of belonging to the tribe of Levi, but by the power of a life that cannot be destroyed."



No errors whatsoever.



You don't even understand the book you're quoting yet acting like you know the intent of the writer.

Let me summarised it for you:

1. The writer is talking about PRIESTHOOD.

2. The writer notice a PRIEST in the Hebrew Bible who actually performed the function of a priest years before God even instituted the office of a priest and this person is a foreshadowing the SON OF GOD.

So it wasn't about just genealogy.



You see ignorance in play, the writer point isn't even about incarnation but how Jesus fulfill the requirements to act as a PRIEST since Jesus was not from the tribe of Levi chosen by Aaron according to the law.



Resembling the Son of God, don't forget that.

It's not the Son of God that resembles Melchizedek.



I don't know how you people will just wake up and lie comfortably.

Where in that chapter did you read that the ORDER OF MELCHIZEDEK IS ALREADY PERFECT?

This is where you started injecting your own lie.



because Melchizedek never demanded that by himself.



You need to read that chapter with an open mind not just to satisfy your own perversion.

You still didn't get my point, do you? What's the need of introducing another character if not to sell a story of salvation by the writer. Melchizedek is already king of righteousness and peace, why trying so hard to imitate a character like you still wanna save?

Heb7:23
23 Also there were many priests, because they were prevented by death from continuing. 24 But He, because He continues forever, has an unchangeable priesthood. 25 Therefore He is also able to save to the uttermost those who come to God through Him, since He always lives to make intercession for them.
(Melchizedek didn't die in Heb 7:3 and continues as a priest, so the writer is only imitating the Melchizedek character while introducing another character for salvation. It's a clear language structure.)

When you introduce the salvation, you are changing the priesthood already without your knowledge(He is ALSO able to save ); Melchizedek is recorded as having an unchangeable priesthood because he's king of righteousness and peace. The Levites were never perfect enough to attain that status according to your good book

Melchizedek: King during the time of Abraham who received a tenth part of what Abraham got from the spoils of war. His genealogy wasn't mentioned yet Abraham paid him tithe.

Christ: Prince of Peace whose teachings has brought peace among people from different geographical locations in the first century so that they're able to cohabit and worship like a family. Christ's genealogy was unknown since his mother wasn't impregnated by any man.


Context

The laws Israelites were obeying to pay tithes says only the descendants of Levi should receive it from their brothers (other Israelites) but Abraham paid the first tithe to someone who is not a Levite so the priesthood does not necessarily have to be in line with Levites since Abraham himself paid tithe to another priest who is greater than Abraham the great grandfather of Levi {Hebrews 7:4-10} therefore if the priesthood and tithing never started with Levitical lineage Christians aren't mandated to continue paying tithes through the Levitical priesthood anymore because the priesthood has changed and the service also has changed! Hebrews 7:11-12

MaxInDHouse:
Melchizedek: King during the time of Abraham who received a tenth part of what Abraham got from the spoils of war. His genealogy wasn't mentioned yet Abraham paid him tithe.

Christ: Prince of Peace whose teachings has brought peace among people from different geographical locations in the first century so that they're able to cohabit and worship like a family. Christ's genealogy was unknown since his mother wasn't impregnated by any man.


Context

The laws Israelites were obeying to pay tithes says only the descendants of Levi should receive it from their brothers (other Israelites) but Abraham paid the first tithe to someone who is not a Levite so the priesthood does not necessarily have to be in line with Levites since Abraham himself paid tithe to another priest who is greater than Abraham the great grandfather of Levi {Hebrews 7:4-10} therefore if the priesthood and tithing never started with Levitical lineage Christians aren't mandated to continue paying tithes through the Levitical priesthood anymore because the priesthood has changed and the service also has changed! Hebrews 7:11-12

Slow down.. Don't get carried away yet.

Heb7:3b remains a priest CONTINUALLY
Heb 7:23 Also there were many priests, because they were prevented by DEATH from CONTINUING. 24 But He, because He CONTINUES FOREVER, has an UNCHANGEABLE priesthood.
(So the unchangeable priesthood is simply because He remains a priest continually, ie, without dieing)

*The priesthood of Melchizedek is unchanged (Heb7:3~ statement of fact for the character 'Melchizedek'; the contextual meaning for collection of statements from verse 1 to verse 3 of Hebrews 7, is that he's king of righteousness and peace that didn't die, hence, remains a priest CONTINUALLY.)

Now, the mode of worship has nothing to do with the authority as the old testament passage is only confirming the authority in Melchizedek to receive tithes as king of righteousness. His character remains unchanged and this is where the writer in Hebrew was trying to introduce another character to justify Melchizedek's perfect order of receiving tithes, though wasn't related to Levites.

In introducing that character(Jesus), the writer used the word, "ALSO able to save...." Which is a clear challenge of that authority of an unchangeable priesthood(did not die)

The writer only made reference on the necessity to change the order of Aaron where you mentioned the 'change of priesthood.'
Herein lies the error: why try to change or mirror something already perfect in Melchizedek, a non levite receiving tithes. It would make more sense changing from Aaron to Melchizedek, not Jesus

Broveens42:

(So the unchangeable priesthood is simply because He remains a priest continually, ie, without dieing)

The context is about priesthood that does not necessarily have to be through Levitical lineage as for Melchizedek he has parents and died like all other humans.

The Bible also compared Jesus to many Bible characters like Adam, Abraham, Moses, David, Zerubbabel just to mention a few, what each of these characters did in their life time that coincide with Jesus' earthly mission were used as comparisons.

So don't just conclude that Paul was saying Jesus is Melchizedek no it's the priesthood that does not necessarily have to be through Levites that Paul was talking about.

Thanks!

MaxInDHouse:


The context is about priesthood that does not necessarily have to be through Levitical lineage as for Melchizedek he has parents and died like all other humans.

The Bible also compared Jesus to many Bible characters like Adam, Abraham, Moses, David, Zerubbabel just to mention a few, what each of these characters did in their life time that coincide with Jesus' earthly mission were used as comparisons.

So don't just conclude that Paul was saying Jesus is Melchizedek no it's the priesthood that does not necessarily have to be through Levites that Paul was talking about.

Thanks!

Hahaha. The context you invented.
I'm talking from a place of authority as concerns languages.
You still didn't answer the salient questions I raised.
You can't talk about context when the original character was clearly SAID to be a priest CONTINUALLY because he didn't die and not because he saved once.

Why is their a need for you and the writer to imitate a perfect priesthood in Melchizedek?

Broveens42:

Hahaha. The context you invented.
I'm talking from a place of authority as concerns languages.
You still didn't answer the salient questions I raised.
You can't talk about context when the original character was clearly SAID to be a priest CONTINUALLY because he didn't die and not because he saved once.
Why is their a need for you and the writer to imitate a perfect priesthood in Melchizedek?

The point Paul was making was clearly expressed in verse 12 of the chapter:

"For since the priesthood is being CHANGED, it becomes necessary to CHANGE the Law as well"

Some believing Jews still secretly go to pay the tithe in the temple to Levites that's what led to Paul's letter regarding tithes.

Melchizedek was not Abraham's descendants and he collected tithe from Abraham so if we are to talk about Abraham paying tithe once and some of his descendants Jews now believe that they're doing God a favour by imitating their great grandfather Abraham what about the other seven children of Abraham since Abraham has paid the tithe in their behalf?

The context here is about CHANGE in the law that says Israelites should pay tithes to Levites. Moreover Jews are just two tribes out of twelve that makes up the children of Jacob so what happens to the ten tribes that has been lost?

So since the priesthood is no longer useful the law that says Israelites should pay tithes to Levites is no longer in force.

MaxInDHouse:


The point Paul was making was clearly expressed in verse 12 of the chapter:

"For since the priesthood is being CHANGED, it becomes necessary to CHANGE the Law as well"

Some believing Jews still secretly go to pay the tithe in the temple to Levites that's what led to Paul's letter regarding tithes.

Melchizedek was not Abraham's descendants and he collected tithe from Abraham so if we are to talk about Abraham paying tithe once and some of his descendants Jews now believe that they're doing God a favour by imitating their great grandfather Abraham what about the other seven children of Abraham since Abraham has paid the tithe in their behalf?

The context here is about CHANGE in the law that says Israelites should pay tithes to Levites. Moreover Jews are just two tribes out of twelve that makes up the children of Jacob so what happens to the ten tribes that has been lost?

So since the priesthood is no longer useful the law that says Israelites should pay tithes to Levites is no longer in force.

It's like you don't understand English or what?
Or you enjoy liking and sharing your own posts?

*Therefore, if perfection were through the Levitical priesthood (for under it the people received the law), what further need was there that another priest should rise according to the order of Melchizedek, and not be called according to the order of Aaron? 12 For the priesthood being changed, of necessity there is also a change of the law*
The language structure here is simply saying ...
" What further need was there that a priest should come (from a perfect order in Melchizedek) and not Aaron. So it's simply saying there was need to change(transient) from Aaron(law) to Some concept and what's that concept?
Simply a mirror image of a Melchizedek with an UNCHANGED(nature) priesthood.
This is a simple case of imitation by the writer..
That's the point I was trying to make

Broveens42:

*Therefore, if perfection were through the Levitical priesthood (for under it the people received the law), what further need was there that another priest should rise according to the order of Melchizedek, and not be called according to the order of Aaron? 12 For the priesthood being changed, of necessity there is also a change of the law*
The language structure here is simply saying ...
" What further need was there that a priest should come (from a perfect order in Melchizedek) and not Aaron. So it's simply saying there was need to change(transient) from Aaron(law) to Some concept and what's that concept?
Simply a mirror image of a Melchizedek with an UNCHANGED priesthood (,Nature)
This is a simple case of imitation by the writer..
That's the point I was trying to make

The simple logic is that Aaron is Man and earthly while Melchizedeck is Spirit and heavenly. Exactly where Jesus came from.

That is the connection

Broveens42:

It's like you don't understand English or what?
Or you enjoy liking and sharing your own posts?
*Therefore, if perfection were through the Levitical priesthood (for under it the people received the law), what further need was there that another priest should rise according to the order of Melchizedek, and not be called according to the order of Aaron? 12 For the priesthood being changed, of necessity there is also a change of the law*
The language structure here is simply saying ...
" What further need was there that a priest should come (from a perfect order in Melchizedek) and not Aaron. So it's simply saying there was need to change(transient) from Aaron(law) to Some concept and what's that concept?
Simply a mirror image of a Melchizedek with an UNCHANGED(nature) priesthood.
This is a simple case of imitation by the writer..
That's the point I was trying to make

Melchizedek is DEAD the point Paul was making is that Melchizedek never transfer the priesthood to anyone he served as priest once and was never mentioned afterwards so Jesus served as the high priest once and for all times.

But the case that led to all these is the law that says Israelites should pay tithes to Levites!

MaxInDHouse:


Melchizedek is DEAD the point Paul was making is that Melchizedek never transfer the priesthood to anyone he served as priest once and was never mentioned afterwards so Jesus served as the high priest once and for all times.

But the case that led to all these is the law that says Israelites should pay tithes to Levites!

Melchizedek didn't die according to Heb 7:23..
Simple English language, you still wana twist

Hahahaha when you run out of ideas, you can't help but stylishly align with me.
Your submission is nothing short of imitation of Melchizedek character, which isn't necessary. You are moving away from Aaron character to a character modelled after an already declared king of righteousness in Melchizedek, that's the point.

Dtruthspeaker:


The simple logic is that Aaron is Man and earthly while Melchizedeck is Spirit and heavenly. Exactly where Jesus came from.

That is the connection

When you say Jesus came from the Melchizedek concept, it's fine, but when the writer mirrors Melchizedek's character by saying ...He(Jesus) is ALSO able to save, the priesthood has been changed (nature, not transiet) because Melchizedek did not die according to Heb7:23 , Melchizedek was already declared king of righteousness and peace. His nature did not change (did not die), hence CONTINUES FOREVER as a priest.

Broveens42:


When you say Jesus came from the Melchizedek concept, it's fine, but when the writer mirrors Melchizedek's character by saying ...He(Jesus) is ALSO able to save, the priesthood has been changed (nature, not transiet) because Melchizedek did not die according to Heb7:23 , Melchizedek was already declared king of righteousness and peace. His nature did not change (did not die), hence CONTINUES FOREVER as a priest.

You are not taking cognisance of the different times in reference to salvation.

In Melchizedek's time God was very close to man such that people did directly encounter Him as proven by King Abimelech and Abraham and therefore salvation was handled directly by God upon those who related with Him.

And there was no Commandment of going to the High Priest for cleansing and salvation.

But by Jesus" time God was very very far from man and was even speaking to man through other men.

And The Commandment of cleansing and salvation was in force. Thus, Christ had to comply and raise up The Law of Priest and salvation hence the connection yet again.

Broveens42:

Melchizedek didn't die according to Heb 7:23..

Ọmọ Melchizedek is one of Adam's descendants so he has died just like all other humans!

MaxInDHouse:

Ọmọ Melchizedek is one of Adam's descendants so he has died just like all other humans!

Kai! Jw lies and fabrications plenty o.

When clearly the bible does not give His lineage. And the designation "King of Peace" should reasonably show every one WHO that is, Most especially as THAT KING'S SON, IS THE PRINCE OF PEACE in addition to lack of lineage.

No eye had seen the hell wey dey wait you.

Dtruthspeaker:

Kai! Jw lies and fabrications plenty o.
When clearly the bible does not give His lineage. And the designation "King of Peace" should reasonably show every one WHO that is, Most especially as THAT KING'S SON, IS THE PRINCE OF PEACE in addition to lack of lineage.
No eye had seen the hell wey dey wait you.

HELL simply means GRAVE!

No man has seen God at any point in time! John 1:18 compare to Exodus 33:20

But i have no business with you.

MaxInDHouse:


HELL simply means GRAVE!

No man has seen God at any point in time! John 1:18 compare to Exodus 33:20

But i have no business with you.

And the grave is not a good thing that is why hell is thrown into lake of fire along with liars and Satan.

Secondly, Abraham met with The King Righteousness, A Person Who had no beginning or ending. This cannot be ignored.

Dtruthspeaker:

And the grave is not a good thing that is why hell is thrown into lake of fire along with liars and Satan.

Lake of Fire: Extinction things no longer to be found on planet earth.

MaxInDHouse:


Lake of Fire: Extinction things no longer to be found on planet earth.

But shall be eternally living in the damnation of the heavenly planet. What a bad japa

Dtruthspeaker:

But shall be eternally LIVING in the damnation of the heavenly planet. What a bad japa

You can never find the word LIVING in any verse having to do with Lake of fire?

MaxInDHouse:


You can never find the word LIVING in any verse having to do with Lake of fire?

Matthew 13:42
and will throw them into the furnace of fire; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth

It is the living who weep end eat their teeth.

Dtruthspeaker:

Matthew 13:42
and will throw them into the furnace of fire; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth
It is the living who weep end eat their teeth.

"and they will pitch them into the fiery furnace. There is where their weeping and the gnashing of their teeth will be." Matthew 13:42

Correct translation!

Those people were mocking Jesus by weeping to stop their children from following Jesus and when they find out that such a child is strong in faith they will gnash their teeth at him just as they did to Jesus so Jesus is saying their acts will make them end up in the lake of Fire.

So instead of quoting controversial verses just quote the word "LIVING" in any verse having to do with the lake of Fire that will solve all the arguments.

Of course you can never ever find it because the Lake of Fire is an illustration that has to do with none existence so the word "LIVING" will totally negates the whole concept if it's found in the use of illustration.

MaxInDHouse:

Ọmọ Melchizedek is one of Adam's descendants so he has died just like all other humans!

If you say Melchizedek has died, then the mirror image is that Jesus has also died because he's a descendant of a human ,,(David) as recorded in your good book.
However you look at it, it's a case of imitation.

But Melchizedek didn't die according to Heb 7:23, hence CONTINUES FOREVER as a priest

Dtruthspeaker:


You are not taking cognisance of the different times in reference to salvation.

In Melchizedek's time God was very close to man such that people did directly encounter Him as proven by King Abimelech and Abraham and therefore salvation was handled directly by God upon those who related with Him.

And there was no Commandment of going to the High Priest for cleansing and salvation.

But by Jesus" time God was very very far from man and was even speaking to man through other men.

And The Commandment of cleansing and salvation was in force. Thus, Christ had to comply and raise up The Law of Priest and salvation hence the connection yet again.

Lol. Your second paragraph is a clear case of Sunday school stereotypes in those days.

Paul's salvation was handed unto him directly from biblical heaven, when he heard voices, so did John the Baptist hear voices and so many other characters post biblical jesus' era.
Also in the Old testament, OT god spoke to men through men, just like the NT god

Broveens42:

If you say Melchizedek has died, then the mirror image is that Jesus has also died because he's a descendant of a human ,,(David) as recorded in your good book.
However you look at it, it's a case of imitation.
But Melchizedek didn't die according to Heb 7:23, hence CONTINUES FOREVER as a priest

Of course Jesus died and resurrected but as for Melchizedek he never resurrected the only reason for comparison is the there has never been a priest before Melchizedek and his priesthood wasn't transferred to anyone.

MaxInDHouse:


Of course Jesus died and resurrected but as for Melchizedek he never resurrected the only reason for comparison is the there has never been a priest before Melchizedek and his priesthood wasn't transferred to anyone.

Lol.
The only reason for comparison was to create another character with a different principle from Aaron. That's the simple fact. Stop running away from the Aaron character.
But the context of Heb 7:23 is such that both characters didn't taste death, but the writer made so in error as Jesus tasted death.
Heb7
23 Also there were many priests, because they were prevented by death from continuing. 24 But He, because He continues FOREVER, has an unchangeable priesthood.
(The word "forever" doesn't in any way mean break in transmission type of death, and rising. It would be more fitting for the Jesus character when you simply say: "because he continues, has an unchangeable priesthood".
A simple "because he continues" would suggest he died, but wasn't stopped by death, like he miraculously escaped death.
The word "FOR(EVER) suggest Melchizedek N(EVER) died . It also suggest the Jesus character didn't die at any time as the writer tries to mirror an image.

Broveens42:

Lol.
The only reason for comparison was to create another character with a different principle from Aaron. That's the simple fact. Stop running away from the Aaron character.
But the context of Heb 7:23 is such that both characters didn't taste death, but the writer made so in error as Jesus tasted death.
Heb7
23 Also there were many priests, because they were prevented by death from continuing. 24 But He, because He continues FOREVER, has an unchangeable priesthood.
(The word "forever" doesn't in any way mean break in transmission type of death, and rising. It would be more fitting for the Jesus character when you simply say: "because he continues, has an unchangeable priesthood".
A simple "because he continues" would suggest he died, but wasn't stopped by death, like he miraculously escaped death.
The word "FOR(EVER) suggest Melchizedek N(EVER) died . It also suggest the Jesus character didn't die at any time as the writer tries to mirror an image.

Only Aaron's descendants are to be highpriest in Israel that's why his name was mentioned but the point of emphasis is Melchizedek and Jesus both never transfer their priesthood to anyone.