Who was Melchizedek?
His Identity and Importance
This is a spinoff from our Solving Interpretive Challenges in the Book of Hebrews, a collection of articles examining a few of the most common interpretation difficulties and challenges that often puzzle readers of the book of Hebrews. In this article, we examine the identity and importance of the mysterious Old Testament (OT) High Priest Melchizedek.
Who was Melchizedek?
One of the most significant characters in the Scriptures is Melchizedek, the Priest King. Yet for all of his importance, we know so little about him. Scholars throughout the centuries have debated his true identity. Some early Jewish writings (Talmudic and Midrash entries) have suggested that he could be associated with one of the sons of Noah, such as Shem or Ham. During the Reformation, Martin Luther also suggested Shem, who lived about 600 years (Gen 11:10-11) but John Calvin to a more literal view, that he was a literal human priest-king in Canaan who worshipped the One True God. I think both Shem and Ham can be rejected since we have genealogical records on each of them (Gen 10:1), while Hebrews 7:3 states that Melchizedek was Without father or mother, without genealogy, without beginning of days or end of life, resembling the Son of God, he remains a priest forever. Based on the evidence that follows, we (and other Bible students throughout history) can narrow his identity down to two distinct possibilities. The first possibility is that he was a type of Christ. That is to say, he was an example, a picture and/or a foreshadowing of Christ. See our Typology in Leviticus article for more information on biblical types. The second possibility is that He was none other than a pre-incarnation appearance of Jesus Christ, otherwise known as a Theophany or Christophany. The majority opinion, particularly in our modern days in which many Bible interpreters place a de-emphasis on the supernatural, is that Melchizedek was the former, merely a human portrayed as a type of Christ. Our humble opinion aligns with the minority. We’ll attempt to examine the various arguments, for and against each position, and give what we believe is solid evidence to support our position.
Melchizedek’s Sudden Introduction
We’re first introduced to the mysterious character known as Melchizedek in the narrative of Abram (Abraham) returning to Canaan after rescuing his nephew Lot from an alliance of several invading foreign kings (Genesis 14:1-17). Then in verse 18, our subject character abruptly appears on the scene, seemingly out of nowhere. He is identified as Melchizedek, the king of Salem and the priest of the God Most High. Yet no other genealogical or royal lineage information is provided. In fact, the scriptures skip any introduction and simply state that Melchizedek king of Salem brought out bread and wine. He was priest of God Most High, and he blessed Abram, saying, “Blessed be Abram by God Most High, Creator of heaven and earth. And praise be to God Most High, who delivered your enemies into your hand.” Then Abram gave him a tenth of everything (Gen 14:18-20), which was considered to be a tithe. We’ll discuss the significance and importance of Abraham paying a tithe to Melchizedek below.
Additional Biblical Background Concerning Melchizedek
In addition to the brief account in Genesis, we find one of the royal Messianic Psalms of King David, that begins: The LORD says to my lord: “Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet” (Ps 110:1), David, speaking of the coming Messiah, declares that Melchizedek’s priesthood was and is an eternal one. The LORD has sworn and will not change his mind: “You are a priest forever, in the order of Melchizedek” (Ps 110:4, quoted in Hebrews 5:6).
When we get to the New Testament (NT), the author of Hebrews gives us a fuller description of our subject character: This Melchizedek was king of Salem and priest of God Most High. He met Abraham returning from the defeat of the kings and blessed him, and Abraham gave him a tenth of everything. First, the name Melchizedek means “king of righteousness”; then also, “king of Salem” means “king of peace.” Without father or mother, without genealogy, without beginning of days or end of life, resembling the Son of God, he remains a priest forever. Just think how great he was: Even the patriarch Abraham gave him a tenth of the plunder! (Heb 7:1-4).
The author of Hebrews also picked up on the significance of Abraham paying a tithe to Melchizedek. Just think how great he was: Even the patriarch Abraham gave him a tenth of the plunder! Now the law requires the descendants of Levi who become priests to collect a tenth from the people—that is, from their fellow Israelites—even though they also are descended from Abraham. This man, however, did not trace his descent from Levi, yet he collected a tenth from Abraham and blessed him who had the promises. And without doubt the lesser is blessed by the greater. In the one case, the tenth is collected by people who die; but in the other case, by him who is declared to be living. One might even say that Levi, who collects the tenth, paid the tenth through Abraham, because when Melchizedek met Abraham, Levi was still in the body of his ancestor (Heb 7:4-10). Thus in a sense, Levi the father of the Levitical priests who would later collect the tithes for the Lord actually paid them to Melchizedek.
Then, in the New Testament (NT) the author of Hebrews, beginning with chapter 4, verse 14 and continuing to the end of chapter 7, explains and expands on the parallels and similarities between the priesthoods of Jesus and Melchizedek:
This Melchizedek was king of Salem and priest of God Most High. He met Abraham returning from the defeat of the kings and blessed him, and Abraham gave him a tenth of everything. First, the name Melchizedek means “king of righteousness”; then also, “king of Salem” means “king of peace.” Without father or mother, without genealogy, without beginning of days or end of life, resembling the Son of God, he remains a priest forever.
Just think how great he was: Even the patriarch Abraham gave him a tenth of the plunder! Now the law requires the descendants of Levi who become priests to collect a tenth from the people—that is, from their fellow Israelites—even though they also are descended from Abraham. This man, however, did not trace his descent from Levi, yet he collected a tenth from Abraham and blessed him who had the promises. And without doubt the lesser is blessed by the greater. In the one case, the tenth is collected by people who die; but in the other case, by him who is declared to be living. One might even say that Levi, who collects the tenth, paid the tenth through Abraham, because when Melchizedek met Abraham, Levi was still in the body of his ancestor.
If perfection could have been attained through the Levitical priesthood—and indeed the law given to the people established that priesthood—why was there still need for another priest to come, one in the order of Melchizedek, not in the order of Aaron? For when the priesthood is changed, the law must be changed also. He of whom these things are said belonged to a different tribe, and no one from that tribe has ever served at the altar. For it is clear that our Lord descended from Judah, and in regard to that tribe Moses said nothing about priests. And what we have said is even more clear if another priest like Melchizedek appears, 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. For it is declared: “You are a priest forever, in the order of Melchizedek.” The former regulation is set aside because it was weak and useless (for the law made nothing perfect), and a better hope is introduced, by which we draw near to God. And it was not without an oath! Others became priests without any oath, but he became a priest with an oath when God said to him:
“The Lord has sworn and will not change his mind: ‘You are a priest forever.’”
Because of this oath, Jesus has become the guarantor of a better covenant. (Heb 7:1-22)
The primary purpose of this section in Hebrews is to show the superiority of the New Covenant Priesthood to the Old Covenant/Testament priesthood. Yet, for such a critical doctrine, the inspired writers of Scripture provide very little personal information on our mysterious character, or why He chose the True God of Israel. There’s obviously some gaps in the narrative between Abraham and Melchizedek. Yet, we know that in the Bible, God in His infinite wisdom, has given the exact amount of information that we need, but not necessarily all that we would sometimes like. Thus we are left to extract from the information God chose to provide.
The name Melchizedek comes from the Hebrew words melek, which means “king”, and tzedeq, which means “righteous”. Thus, his name likely means “My King is Righteous (or Righteousness)”. He is also called the King of Salem (or Jerusalem), and since Jerusalem means “City of Peace”, his name could also mean “King of Peace”. Incidentally, many believe that the original meeting in between Abram and Melchizedek was at the location where the City of Jerusalem would later be built. Melchizedek appears to Abraham in Genesis 14, seemingly out of nowhere, and congratulates Abraham for his military victory over several foreign kings. Abraham then gives Melchizedek a tenth of his spoils from his victory. This payment of a tithe to Melchizedek is a highly significant event, as we’ll now explain.
Arguments For and Against Each Position
As we noted above, The question of whether Melchizedek in the Bible was a pre-incarnate Jesus (a Christophany) continues to be a topic of theological debate among Christians, but with no definitive consensus. We now explore the evidence and reasoning behind each position, and counter-balance with claims from critics.
Three Arguments supporting Melchizedek as a historical human being and a type of Christ:
1. On the surface, the text in Genesis 14, appears to be take the form of historical narrative prose that portrays Melchizedek as a living historical person, a king of a historical place (Salem, likely Jerusalem). The counter-argument is that the author was using a literary device (typological language). Yet it seems highly unusual that a human king, particularly one of this importance, would have no genealogy, particularly when this was often a requirement for kingship.
2. Perhaps the most popular and effective argument for this position is that the author of Hebrews describes Melchizedek using the phrase “resembling Son of God” (Heb 7:3). As with the first argument, opponents note that the same verse also describes Melchizedek as “without father or mother, without genealogy, without beginning of days or end of life, and also notes that he remains a priest forever”.
3. Finally, proponents of the typology theory note that, we don’t find
an explicit or definitive statement anywhere in the scriptures that Melchizedek
was Jesus. While this is true, it is also an “argument from silence”, a
logical fallacy in which a person automatically concludes a statement is true
based solely on lack of evidence given to the contrary. There may be
multiple reasons that contrary evidence is not given, such as the opponent may
have chosen not to respond for a number of reasons.
Three Arguments supporting Melchizedek as a pre-incarnate appearance of Jesus Christ:
1. The inspired human author of Genesis (Moses) portrays Melchizedek as having no birth, death or genealogy, which would be highly unusual for such an important character. In addition, the author of Hebrews writes that He is “without father, without mother, without genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life”. The counter-argument is that the author is using a literary device (typological language) that limits Him to merely a “type” of Christ.
2. Some theologians interpret the bread and wine that Melchizedek brought out (Gen 14:18) as looking forward to the Last Supper (see Matthew 20:17-29). This would provide a closer connection to Jesus, but some critics disagree.
3. Some of the writings of the early church fathers contained reflections on Melchizedek’s divine or messianic significance, but some stopped short of specifically identifying Him as the pre-incarnate Christ. In addition, some of the Targum, (first and second century translations and commentary from about the first century AD) contain similar speculation.
Linguistics / Literary Devices
Before we go any further, we acknowledge that our conclusions will heavily depend on how we interpret the various literary devices used by the various divinely-inspired Bible authors (Moses, David, the unknown author of Hebrews). The material concerning Melchizedek in Genesis and Hebrews is written as historical narrative, while the Messianic Psalm 110 is written in Hebrew poetry. Thus we should attempt to consider the appropriate rules of each genre. See the genre articles regarding Historical Narratives, Literalism, and Hebrew Wisdom Poetical Literature for additional information. In our case, we see the various literary devices as giving neither position an open or shut case. We know that the biblical account of Melchizedek at least points to the eternal priesthood of Jesus, but stops short of actually verifying whether or not he was Jesus Himself.
At this point, it appears that we have a draw, with arguments from both sides cancelling themselves out.
That said, I believe that there are two additional arguments in favor of a Theophany / Christophany that are much less dependent on linguistics. The first is based on the extreme rarity of a King-Priest in biblical times, and second, the fact that Melchizedek is consistently portrayed as greater than Abraham. We now expound on these two topics.
Rarity and Superiority of a King-Priest in the Bible
There were only two persons in the entire Bible that are named as both priest and king, Melchizedek and Jesus the Messiah. Why such a rarity? From the time of Moses, God had established that all legitimate kings would come from the line of Judah, and all legitimate priests would come from the tribe of Levi. Jesus could trace His human ancestry from Mary, who was a Judahite. In Israel, all high priests had to be direct descendants of Aaron (brother of Moses), a Levite. Since the kings came from the line of Judah, they we strictly forbidden from performing duties that was reserved for the priests. In one instance, King Uzziah broke this law by burning incense in the temple. As a result of performing this priestly duty, God struck him with leprosy.
In a somewhat limited sense, we can probably think of David who, about a thousand years after Abraham, conquered Jerusalem and made it the capital of Israel, could be considered a king-priest. He certainly represented God to his people, but took a very limited role in any priestly duties. Some traditional early Jewish writings even appear to apply Psalm 110 to David, but was later correctly applied to the Messiah. Jesus Himself applied this psalm to Himself during His first advent (Mt 22:42-45).
So, did Jesus, a descendent of Judah, also violate this prohibition by usurping the role reserved to the Levites? The short answer is no! The Israelite system of worship was established under the Old Covenant, but Jesus ushered in the New Covenant. Returning again to the Messianic Psalm 110, The Lord has sworn and will not change his mind: “You are a priest forever, in the order of Melchizedek”. Thus, Jesus is revealed to be the ultimate High Priest of the heavenly temple (see Hebrews 8:1-6). There was an excellent article published in 2019 by the Master’s Seminary, founded by the late great pastor John MacArthur, that goes deeper into this subject. I encourage our readers to refer to The Supremacy of the King-Priest for additional info regarding this argument.
Melchizedek Greater than Abraham
Earlier, we noted Abraham paying a tithe to Melchizedek. It is very difficult to over-emphasize the importance of this act. To explain, we begin with a short summary of the history of tithing and offerings. The first offering to God came shortly after Adam and Eve was expelled from the Garden of Eden (Genesis 3). In the next chapter (Gen 4), we find their two sons, Cain and Abel, each bringing an offering to God. The Lord accepted Abel’s offering but rejected Cain’s. This led to Cain murdering his brother Abel and as a result, he was banished to the land of Nod (see Genesis 4:1-16). We next move forward almost 2000 years to the days of Abraham and Melchizedek (~2100 BC), in which Abraham pays a tithe to Melchizedek.
The first direct mention of the word “tithe” (Hebrew maser) in the Bible occurred over 600 years later (mid 15th century BC). Moses made the first direct mention of the tithe during the desert wanderings in Leviticus 27:13. A tithe of everything from the land, whether grain from the soil or fruit from the trees, belongs to the LORD; it is holy to the LORD (Lev 27:13). At that time, the law would thus require the priests from the tribe of Levi (the son of Jacob/Israel and grandson of Abraham) to collect a tenth from their fellow Israelites, primarily for the furnishings, upkeep and worship at the Tabernacle. Yet, it was Abraham who paid the monetary tribute to Melchizedek rather than the reverse. This act signified that Melchizedek was considered greater than Abraham because a tithe is always paid to the greater party.
Next. when Abraham gave Melchizedek a tenth of his spoils, he received a blessing from him
(Gen 14:20). This also indicates Melchizedek’s superiority because in
biblical tradition, even though all men are created equal, the one with superior
spiritual authority always blesses the one with inferior spiritual authority or
prominence.
Again, the author of Hebrews reminds the reader of Melchizedek’s greatness: Just think how great he was: Even the patriarch Abraham gave him a tenth of the plunder! Now the law requires the descendants of Levi who become priests to collect a tenth from the people—that is, from their fellow Israelites—even though they also are descended from Abraham. This man, however, did not trace his descent from Levi, yet he collected a tenth from Abraham and blessed him who had the promises. And without doubt the lesser is blessed by the greater (Heb 7:4-7).
The Importance of Abraham in the Bible
It is extremely difficult to ignore the prominent role that Abraham played in the Scriptures. The Abrahamic Covenant formed the basis of many of God’s OT promises. It began by God calling Abraham from a foreign land (Ur / modern day Iraq) to settle in the land of Canaan as a permanent possession (Gen 13:14-17; 15:18-21). This calling also came with the promise of making his descendants into a great nation (Gen 12:1-3). In reality, his descendants would form many great nations (Gen 12:3). In addition, all believers throughout history are considered children of Abraham (Gal 3:7-9). Indeed, all subsequent covenants in the Bible are built on the basis of the Abrahamic covenant!
The Apostle Paul, who wrote many of the theological letters in the NT, named Abraham as the biblical model of righteousness being received by faith even under the Old Covenant. Referring back to Genesis 15:6 and 22, he wrote in Romans 4:1-3: What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh, discovered in this matter? If, in fact, Abraham was justified by works, he had something to boast about—but not before God. What does Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness.
In addition, Abraham receives two separate entries in what is commonly called the Hall of Faith chapter in the Bible, Hebrews 11 (verses 8-12 and 17-19).
Finally, we note that Abraham was/is considered the human father of all three major theistic religions, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Each of these religions recognize a creator God who is separate from his creation. Judaism traces their line from Abraham, known as Avraham Avinu, or “our father Abraham”, via his son Isaac the father of Jacob / Israel (Gen 21 and 26). Islam traces their line via Abraham’s son Ismael (Gen 17:15-19 25:12-18). Finally, Christianity traces their origin though Abraham’s great-grandson Judah, grandson of Isaac and son of Jacob/Israel. Thus, to the three major religions, there is no human considered of greater status than Abraham, at least no one who did not also have a divine nature, that is Jesus Christ Himself.
The Significance of Melchizedek being Greater than Abraham
In our two previous sections above, we’ve seen that Abraham was arguably the most important human born of man in the Bible. In addition, we’ve also laid out the biblical claims that clearly show Melchizedek’s superior spiritual authority as compared to Abraham. We now look at an encounter in the Temple between Jesus and the Jewish spiritual leaders found in the 8th chapter of the Gospel of John, verses 12-59. The dispute began when Jesus announced to the people at the Temple that “I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life”. The Pharisees immediately interrupted Him, claiming that His testimony was not valid based on his own witness (based on a loose interpretation of Deuteronomy 19:15). Yet many of the people believed in Him (v27-32). To those, Jesus proclaimed, “If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free” (v31-32).
Further on in the conversation, Jesus says, “I know that you are Abraham’s descendants. Yet you are looking for a way to kill me, because you have no room for my word. I am telling you what I have seen in the Father’s presence, and you are doing what you have heard from your father“ (v37-38). The Pharisees then answered that Abraham was their father, but Jesus replied that they belonged to their father the devil (see v 39-47). They then accused Jesus of being demon possessed (v48-52). When Jesus denied being possessed, which Jesus denied, then promised that anyone who obeyed His words would never see death (v51). This further set off the Pharisees. We read:
At this they exclaimed, “Now we know that you are
demon-possessed! Abraham died and so did the prophets, yet you say that
whoever obeys your word will never taste death.
Are you greater than our father Abraham?
He died, and so did the prophets. Who do you think you are?”
Jesus
replied, “If I glorify myself, my glory means nothing. My Father, whom you
claim as your God, is the one who glorifies me. Though you do not know
him, I know him. If I said I did not, I would be a liar like you, but I do
know him and obey his word. Your father Abraham rejoiced at the thought of
seeing my day; he saw it and was glad.”
“You are not yet fifty years
old,” they said to him, “and you have seen Abraham!”
“Very truly I tell you,” Jesus answered, “before
Abraham was born, I am!” At this, they picked
up stones to stone him, but Jesus hid himself, slipping away from the temple
grounds (Jn 8:52-59).
Incidentally, when Jesus stated “Your father Abraham rejoiced at the thought of seeing my day; he saw it and was glad”, most readers interpretation is that Abraham saw a future vision of the first century Christ. I believe that Jesus could have been speaking of the time a covenant was made in Genesis 15 or the appearance of the pre-incarnate Christ to Abraham in Genesis 18 just before God destroyed the city of Sodom (Genesis 18). Also, the author of Hebrews was likely referring to the second event when he wrote “Do not forget to show hospitality to strangers, for by so doing some people have shown hospitality to angels without knowing it” (Heb 13:2).
Thus, the Bible appears to place a strong emphasis on the importance of Abraham as the greatest human figure of the Bible, while at the same time declaring the spiritual superiority of Melchizedek over Abraham. This leads me to believe that Melchizedek is not merely a human, but was most likely a pre-incarnate appearance of Jesus Christ.
The Superior Priesthood of Christ
The author of Hebrews goes into greater details regarding the Messiah’s superior priesthood “in the order of Melchizedek” (6:20), particularly in comparison with that of the Levites. God had selected this Jewish tribe, beginning with Aaron, the brother of Moses, to serve as priests (Numbers 18). Yet, their temporary service faded in comparison with the permanence of Melchizedek and the Christ). Hebrews 7:11-26 describes the inadequacy of the Levitical priesthood, and the need for a superior one. The Levitical priesthood, based on works, was wholly inferior to the permanent Messianic priesthood based on grace. In addition, the Levitical priests had to offer constant sacrifices, both for their own personal sins and for those of their fellow Hebrews. Jesus however, who lived a perfectly sinlessness life, was uniquely qualified to be a one-time-for-all offering, totally adequate to appease God’s righteous anger against all of our sins.
Next in chapter 8, the author clearly delivers the main point of the issue: Now the main point of what we are saying is this: We do have such a high priest, who sat down at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven, and who serves in the sanctuary, the true tabernacle set up by the Lord, not by a mere human being (Heb 8:1-2). Don’t miss the importance of Jesus sitting at the right hand of the father. If you’ve ever done a study regarding the symbology and meaning of the various pieces of furniture in the Temple, you’ll note that there was no chair in the Holy of Holies. That’s because the High Priest never sat down. Why is this? It’s because his work was never done. But when Christ completed His one-time-for-all sacrifice, His work was complete, so He is now sitting at the right hand of the Father, signifying that the work of our redemption is done.
Re-Visiting Linguistics: A Priest Forever in the Order of Melchizedek
Even if something is only mentioned one time in the Bible, it is still important because the Divine Author intended it to be included. But when something is mentioned multiple times, we should really pay extra attention. I’m speaking of the phrase, “You are a priest forever, in the order of Melchizedek”. As we’ve mentioned, it originally appeared in the Messianic Psalm 110:4 “forever” or “to eternity” (Hebrew le'olam) . The author of Hebrews then repeated the phase three times (5:6, 7:17 and 7:21). So let's take a closer look, in particular at the terms “forever” and “order”.
We first look at the Greek word used for “order” (taxis). According to Mounce’s Complete Expository Dictionary of Old & New Testament Words (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2006), pg 1288), taxis is used in the Bible to designate “order as in series, succession, a distinctive class, such as an order of priests. Yet, the Bible names only one priest (Melchizedek), with no mention of any successors. If Melchizedek is a human king-priest, then this appears to introduce a difficultly. If however, Melchizedek was a pre-incarnate appearance of Christ, then He is the eternal Priest-King who needs no successor. In addition, the Greek phrase used for “forever“ is eis ho aion, indicating an unlimited duration of time, with particular focus upon the future—‘always, forever, forever and ever, eternally’ (see Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament: Based on Semantic Domains (New York: United Bible Societies, 1996, pg 640).
There is no word in Hebrew that directly translates as “eternity”. Therefore OT writers used the Hebrew wordʿôlām, that basically means “distant time”, to refer to a period of long duration, encompassing both past and future time. It also can be used to describe a portion of time in a person’s life, their entire life, or even a broader period extending to the end of an age. When the word ôlām is used when referring to God (or Christ), it always signifies eternity, either eternity past “from ôlām” or eternity future “to ôlām”.
Thus, these linguistics appear to point to Melchizedek being an eternal person, that is, to the Messiah as the eternal Priest-King.
Concluding Thoughts
As we’ve noted above, due to the linguistics used in the Scripture accounts, I don’t think that that either position (Melchizedek being either a historical person and type of Christ, or being a pre-incarnate appearance of Christ), is a slam-dunk. I note again that, particularly in our modern anti-supernatural views of Scripture, our view that Melchizedek was a theophany is the minority view today. Each of us can examine the evidence and decide for ourselves.
That said, I’d also like to add one personal thought that is intended not as additional evidence, but just a personal observation. Jesus Christ, as God Himself, was / is omnipresent, yet we see Him manifesting Himself personally in a number of occasions. Examining the various pre-incarnate theophanies in Scripture, I don’t completely understand the intrinsic details of His dual human / divine nature. Theologically speaking, His omnipresence refers to His ability as the second Person of the Trinity, to be present everywhere at once in His divine nature. At the same time, His human nature is located in a specific place, typically at the right hand of the Father in heaven. This is, He could be anywhere or everywhere at once, yet He often chose to manifest Himself quite often among His creatures, particularly man.
We also note the attribute of God’s humility in Theophanies. The Father and/or the Son could handle any issues that came up on Earth without leaving the comfort of Heaven (except certain events during Christ's first advent, of course), but both Father and Son on occasion chose to made a special appearance among those who were made in their image. Christ loved us so much that He died for us. I have to believe that He enjoyed revealing Himself to His creation in various forms.