OLAADEGBU:

What do you know about a pre-incarnate theophany? Study the Scriptures and you will discover that this was not the only time Abraham experienced a theophany.

am not arguing theophany. i just want you to reconcile what you said with the fact that melchizedek was a priest. If Melchi was God, are you saying God is a priest of the most high God? if you say he is Jesus, are you saying Jesus was already functioning in his priestly office even before Abraham and prior to crucifixion? If Jesus was already priest, what necessitated the emergence of/switch to the Levi priesthood? these are my questions. If you are sure of what you saying about melchi's appearance being a theophany am sure you have answers to my questions. Thanks.

Zikkyy:


am not arguing theophany. i just want you to reconcile what you said with the fact that melchizedek was a priest. If Melchi was God, are you saying God is a priest of the most high God? if you say he is Jesus, are you saying Jesus was already functioning in his priestly office even before Abraham and prior to crucifixion? If Jesus was already priest, what necessitated the emergence of/switch to the Levi priesthood? these are my questions. If you are sure of what you saying about melchi's appearance being a theophany am sure you have answers to my questions. Thanks.

If you understood what a pre-incarnate theophany is you wouldn't be asking these questions.

lanxlot:
premarital sex isn't a sin? dats a shocker. bro, m beginning to suspect ur Expanded version of d bible....mayb u were d 1 dat did d expansion....dats crazy. ok, make a clear distinction between premarital sex and fornication....anh anh, Goshen d son of moses.

What does it matter to Goshen360, afterall he believes that sins do not affect a Christian.

So fornication, pre-marital sex, adultery, even murder cannot prevent him from heaven.

He is truly lawless like Mosthigh said.

OLAADEGBU:

If you understood what a pre-incarnate theophany is you wouldn't be asking these questions.

How did a priest end up a theophany

You cannot even defend your own post. This is one of the hazard of posting other peeps opinion.

Zikkyy:


Same priestly type (to the extent the priests don't die and remains in office forever) but Melchi did not handover to Jesus.

Handover??

Guy what are you talking about?

Not just a priest but a King over a certain Salem.

What if the three guys who visited Abraham were his neighbors with wives and kids? Would that be theophany?

Zikkyy:


How did a priest end up a theophany

You cannot even defend your own post. This is one of the hazard of posting other peeps opinion.

Zikkyy:


...and he was also a priest of the most high God. If truly he remains a priest forever, who is in currently serving as the high priest? Christ or Melchizedek?

Christ is.

Zikkyy:


The bit in blue and red font is proof that the Hebrew writer did not consider Christ and Melchizedek to be one and the same person.

I agree.

My broda,
am getting rusty, can't find nobody to fight here. Do me the honors, fight me

mbaemeka:


Christ is.

vooks:
Not just a priest but a King over a certain Salem.

What if the three guys who visited Abraham were his neighbors with wives and kids? Would that be theophany?

That word 'salem' is English rendering for 'Shalom'. Melchizedek was King of Absolute peace and also King of righteousness. There is nothing to suggest that Salem was a real city. Also, Abraham never felt any King was greater than him enough for him to receive a blessing from such a king. This is an aside from the fact that scriptures called Jesus PRINCE of peace and righteousness whereas Melchizedek was called KING of peace.

I believe the little evidences prove that he was a Theophany and not a ChristoPhany as the case maybe.

You my friend, are not seeing the big picture.

Hebrews 7:15-16 KJV

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

In the SIMILITUDE of Melchizedek there arose another Priest who is made after the power of an endless life- Jesus Christ.

vooks:
Theophanies came and went. Melchizedek was a King of a historical city Salem,was well known to Abraham

Heb 7:14
now consider how great this man was, to whom even the patriarch Abraham gave a tenth of his spoils.
What is stressed in Hebrews is the SIMILARITIES paralled in ministry not the nature of his being to that of Christ.

The Word became flesh when Jesus was born of Mary.This ought to put out of misery any belief in pre-incarnate appearances of Jesus. And don't take me to Daniel's fiery furnace

I heard Jews believed Melchizedek was Shem son of Noah. He outlived Abraham by 35 years and could have been the oldest guy at that time. Now, look at Job offering sacrifices for his kids. That was the order before Moses. The father was the priest and sometimes the grandfather....

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

mbaemeka:


That word 'salem' is English rendering for 'Shalom'. Melchizedek was King of Absolute peace and also King of righteousness. There is nothing to suggest that Salem was a real city. Also, Abraham never felt any King was greater than him enough for him to receive a blessing from such a king. This is an aside from the fact that scriptures called Jesus PRINCE of peace and righteousness whereas Melchizedek was called KING of peace.

I believe the little evidences prove that he was a Theophany and not a ChristoPhany as the case maybe.

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.

mbaemeka:
You my friend, are not seeing the big picture.

Hebrews 7:15-16 KJV

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

In the SIMILITUDE of Melchizedek there arose another Priest who is made after the power of an endless life- Jesus Christ.

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

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?

mbaemeka:
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:
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.

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.

mbaemeka:


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.

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'

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

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

mbaemeka:

That word 'salem' is English rendering for 'Shalom'. Melchizedek was King of Absolute peace and also King of righteousness. There is nothing to suggest that Salem was a real city. Also, Abraham never felt any King was greater than him enough for him to receive a blessing from such a king.

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

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.

mbaemeka:


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.

mbaemeka:

You my friend, are not seeing the big picture.

Hebrews 7:15-16 KJV

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

In the SIMILITUDE of Melchizedek there arose another Priest who is made after the power of an endless life- Jesus Christ.

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

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.

"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).

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

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.

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:


"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".

mbaemeka:
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.

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.

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.

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

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.

mbaemeka:

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.

@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?

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.

mbaemeka:

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.

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.

mbaemeka:

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.

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?

mbaemeka:

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

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).