who the heck is Melkizedec? who cares?

[PilgrimPassingThru]

Seems like it is placing one thing beside another comparing, the Holy Ghost teaches us by way of comparing spiritual things with spiritual.

When Paul spoke to them who desired to be under the law he asked them do you not hear the law? Gal 4:21 So they desired to be under the law but were not really hearing it. In order to bring clarity he uses the law to show an allegory, to help to that particular end.

We can see (for example) again in the things of Abraham (the two women) and what they are (an allegory) because Abraham is a prophet and God has told us how he spoken by them.

So Paul could say,

Gal 4:24 Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar. (as they answer in something else)

And again because Abraham was a prophet and as God has said,

Hosea 12:10 I have also spoken by the prophets, and I have multiplied visions, and used similitudes, by the ministry of the prophets,

Whether a parable (as is shown in Christ) or other diverses ways, such as an allegory or a similitude these are shown in Abraham, and these things moreso of spiritual things

1 Cr 2:13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth,
but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.

We see an allegory is found in the two women (being covenantal) of the prophet Abraham and likewise what is referred to as a similitude as is also shown in Melchezidek who appeared to him (which brings forth a picture of our high priest) set apart from the priesthood under Aaron) which was before the same.

So in light of Hosea 12:10 it could be understood as far more evident for that after the similitude of Melchisedec there ariseth another priest (Heb 7:15) The law having shadow of the good things to come, even Christ being come an high priest of the same good things which were to come

He is depicted as setting forth the body of Christ unto Abram ( the bread and the wine)

Gen 14:18 And Melchizedek king of Salem brought forth bread and wine: and he was the priest of the most high God.

Jesus said,

John 5:39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.

Hebrews also says, Heb 1:1 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds.

These things are fun to search through

 

[badger58]

Another bit, to help those that are digging through all the data.

Similitude | Definition of Similitude by Merriam-Webster


www​.merriam-webster.com/.../similitude
likeness, similarity, resemblance, similitude, analogy mean agreement or correspondence in details. likeness implies a closer correspondence than similarity which often implies that things are merely somewhat alike

Another bit) This one is at the top of the list for me.



Simple Definition of context

1
: the words that are used with a certain word or phrase and that help to explain its meaning

2
: the situation in which something happens : the group of conditions that exist where and when something happens


Source: Merriam-Webster's

 

[badger58]

This is not just another bit)
This is the most important ingredient to your bible study!

3 Bible Verses about
Guidance Of The Holy Spirit


Most Relevant Verses



Isaiah 63:11-14


Then His people remembered the days of old, of Moses Where is He who brought them up out of the sea with the shepherds of His flock? Where is He who put His Holy Spirit in the midst of them, Who caused His glorious arm to go at the right hand of Moses, Who divided the waters before them to make for Himself an everlasting name, Who led them through the depths? Like the horse in the wilderness, they did not stumble; read more.



1 Kings 18:12

Verse Concepts







"It will come about when I leave you that the Spirit of the LORD will carry you where I do not know; so when I come and tell Ahab and he cannot find you, he will kill me, although I your servant have feared the LORD from my youth.


Psalm 139:7-10


Where can I go from Your Spirit? Or where can I flee from Your presence? If I ascend to heaven, You are there; If I make my bed in Sheol, behold, You are there. If I take the wings of the dawn, If I dwell in the remotest part of the sea, read more.



Luke 4:1

Verse Concepts







Jesus, full of the Holy Spirit, returned from the Jordan and was led around by the Spirit in the wilderness

 

[badger58]

Well that was sloppy, sorry bout that, its hard to snip out of studies when you are taking them from one way and then tossing them up.

But anyway, I hope there is significant enough scriptures to help you come to whatever conclusion is the sum of the truth to you.

Still searching, haven't come to a conclusion yet, but found some answers and more questions in this piece. Much of which agrees
with your position.
Seeing how much has been written about this topic is a bit overwhelming, but I will take a brake and then push on
Jesus Christ as the Reincarnation of Melchizedek
Another incarnation of Jesus is the Old Testament figure known as Melchizedek, the High Priest and King of Salem. It is clear from the Book of Hebrews that Melchizedek was not an ordinary man, assuming he even was a man. A careful examination of the evidence concerning the existence of Melchizedek reveals him to be a previous reincarnation of Jesus. There are strong parallels between Melchizedek and Jesus: both are the Son of God, priest of the Order of Melchizedek, King of Righteous, King of Peace, the Messiah, appointed by God, eternal priesthood, and preexistent. Besides the Biblical evidence, there exists evidence from the discoveries of early Christian texts in 1945 and the Dead Sea Scrolls in 1947. There is also extra-Biblical revelations that support this Melchizedek-Jesus connection.



Table of Contents
1. Identical Characteristics of Melchizedek and Jesus
a. Identical Sonship: Son of God
b. Identical Order of High Priesthood: Melchizedek
c. Identical Symbol of Rule: King of Righteousness
d. Identical Right to Rule: Appointed by God
e. Identical Title: King of Peace
f. Identical Term of Priesthood: Eternal
g. Identical in Likeness: Priest
h. Identical Age: Pre-Existent
i. Identical Association with: Abraham
j. Identical Use of Ritualistic Symbols: Bread and Wine
k. Identical Title: Anointed One, the Messiah

2. Christian Gnosticism Affirms Jesus to be Melchizedek Reincarnated
3. Dead Sea Scrolls Revealed the Messiah to be a Reincarnation of Melchizedek
4. NDEs of Edgar Cayce Reveals Jesus to be Melchizedek Reincarnated

1. Identical Characteristics of Melchizedek and Jesus

 

[PilgrimPassingThru]

Volume of the book speaks of Jesus Christ, I think it was Herod who thought Jesus was like a reincranated John and yet others thought the Elijah for to come was the man Elijah personified and when asked about who men say that he (the Son of God) was they were thinking reincarnation also. That in the scriptures is knowing him by what men say (how they reason things out) but not after the testimony.

Good luck on your search Badger, I will be unsubscribing

 

[badger58]

Still searching, haven't come to a conclusion yet, but found some answers and more questions in this piece. Much of which agrees
with your position.
Seeing how much has been written about this topic is a bit overwhelming, but I will take a brake and then push on
Jesus Christ as the Reincarnation of Melchizedek
Another incarnation of Jesus is the Old Testament figure known as Melchizedek, the High Priest and King of Salem. It is clear from the Book of Hebrews that Melchizedek was not an ordinary man, assuming he even was a man. A careful examination of the evidence concerning the existence of Melchizedek reveals him to be a previous reincarnation of Jesus. There are strong parallels between Melchizedek and Jesus: both are the Son of God, priest of the Order of Melchizedek, King of Righteous, King of Peace, the Messiah, appointed by God, eternal priesthood, and preexistent. Besides the Biblical evidence, there exists evidence from the discoveries of early Christian texts in 1945 and the Dead Sea Scrolls in 1947. There is also extra-Biblical revelations that support this Melchizedek-Jesus connection.



Table of Contents
1. Identical Characteristics of Melchizedek and Jesus
a. Identical Sonship: Son of God
b. Identical Order of High Priesthood: Melchizedek
c. Identical Symbol of Rule: King of Righteousness
d. Identical Right to Rule: Appointed by God
e. Identical Title: King of Peace
f. Identical Term of Priesthood: Eternal
g. Identical in Likeness: Priest
h. Identical Age: Pre-Existent
i. Identical Association with: Abraham
j. Identical Use of Ritualistic Symbols: Bread and Wine
k. Identical Title: Anointed One, the Messiah

2. Christian Gnosticism Affirms Jesus to be Melchizedek Reincarnated
3. Dead Sea Scrolls Revealed the Messiah to be a Reincarnation of Melchizedek
4. NDEs of Edgar Cayce Reveals Jesus to be Melchizedek Reincarnated

1. Identical Characteristics of Melchizedek and Jesus

Ecc 3:11 He hath made every thing beautiful in his time: also he hath set the world in their heart, so that no man can find out the work that God maketh from the beginning to the end.

 

[badger58]

Ecc 3:11 He hath made every thing beautiful in his time: also he hath set the world in their heart, so that no man can find out the work that God maketh from the beginning to the end.

The DEAD SEA SCROLLS have some interesting revelations.
Check this out!
A careful analysis of the scroll provides numerous indications that the author(s) pictured Melchizedek as being both identical with and distinct from Yahweh God. For instance, the God (Elohim) of Psalm 82:1 who takes his stand in the assembly of God (El) to judge the other gods (Elohim) is said to be Melchizedek. The document also applies Psalm 7:7-8, which speaks of Yahweh judging, to Melchizedek thereby identifying him as Yahweh God (El)! The statement in Isaiah 52:7, "Your God (Elohim) reigns," is interpreted by the author(s) of the scroll to be a reference to Melchizedek reigning as God. Additionally, Melchizedek is said to atone for the sins of the righteous. These actions of atoning and judging are normally associated with God himself.

 

[1LonelyKnight]

The DEAD SEA SCROLLS have some interesting revelations.
Check this out!
A careful analysis of the scroll provides numerous indications that the author(s) pictured Melchizedek as being both identical with and distinct from Yahweh God. For instance, the God (Elohim) of Psalm 82:1 who takes his stand in the assembly of God (El) to judge the other gods (Elohim) is said to be Melchizedek. The document also applies Psalm 7:7-8, which speaks of Yahweh judging, to Melchizedek thereby identifying him as Yahweh God (El)! The statement in Isaiah 52:7, "Your God (Elohim) reigns," is interpreted by the author(s) of the scroll to be a reference to Melchizedek reigning as God. Additionally, Melchizedek is said to atone for the sins of the righteous. These actions of atoning and judging are normally associated with God himself.

Fact is, there is only one God. In messiah as Melchizadek-IAN he is the ultimate rejector of evil and evil systems, doing away with any other notion of Jew gods (El, Adonai, Jehovah, Hashem, Baal, no-ah and etc.). He is the teacher of righteousness, the Sar Shalom (prince of Salem, prince of peace, prince of Jeru-Salem, etc.). The assembly of [jew] gods is done away with, Eli, that is, r-ELI-gion and Eloi having forsaken the righteous teacher are dismissed, forewarned and in imminent condemnation along with all other 'gods of this world'.

 

[badger58]

Fact is, there is only one God. In messiah as Melchizadek-IAN he is the ultimate rejector of evil and evil systems, doing away with any other notion of Jew gods (El, Adonai, Jehovah, Hashem, Baal, no-ah and etc.). He is the teacher of righteousness, the Sar Shalom (prince of Salem, prince of peace, prince of Jeru-Salem, etc.). The assembly of [jew] gods is done away with, Eli, that is, r-ELI-gion and Eloi having forsaken the righteous teacher are dismissed, forewarned and in imminent condemnation along with all other 'gods of this world'.

"Dogmatism" is the logical fallacy of "[p]roposing that there simply cannot be any other possible way of making sense of and engaging with an issue but the one you represent." Dogmatism is "[t]he unwillingness to even consider the opponent’s argument. . . the assertion that one’s position is so correct that one should not even examine the evidence to the contrary."




Dogmatism in Christianity, I think, comes primarily from fear. If we believe we are saved by faith, and we define faith primarily in terms of having the right set of beliefs, then anything that challenges those beliefs must be resisted as evil. Our thinking becomes defensive rather than inquiring, didactic rather than exploratory, closed rather than open. We see our role as the instructors and correctors of others, rather than as listeners and learners.




We all want in our heart of hearts to be listened to and understood. But dogmatism strips us of our ability to listen and understand. We become fundamentally unable to do unto others as we would have them do unto us.




In the end, all we have is spiritual pride.

 

[1LonelyKnight]

"Dogmatism" is the logical fallacy of "[p]roposing that there simply cannot be any other possible way of making sense of and engaging with an issue but the one you represent." Dogmatism is "[t]he unwillingness to even consider the opponent’s argument. . . the assertion that one’s position is so correct that one should not even examine the evidence to the contrary."




Dogmatism in Christianity, I think, comes primarily from fear. If we believe we are saved by faith, and we define faith primarily in terms of having the right set of beliefs, then anything that challenges those beliefs must be resisted as evil. Our thinking becomes defensive rather than inquiring, didactic rather than exploratory, closed rather than open. We see our role as the instructors and correctors of others, rather than as listeners and learners.




We all want in our heart of hearts to be listened to and understood. But dogmatism strips us of our ability to listen and understand. We become fundamentally unable to do unto others as we would have them do unto us.




In the end, all we have is spiritual pride.

Facts are not dogmatic. Where explanations are required they are given. The assertions presented in the dead sea scrolls reveal Jesus as messiah fulfilling not only the dead sea scroll revelations and requirements but in Jesus all the prophetic demands of messiah. There is no disagreement that Jesus is a priest on the order of Melchizadek, in fact he is the ultimate Melchizadekian.

What has not been explained or clarified that makes one think that fact = dogma? Come let us reason together ...

 

[badger58]

Facts are not dogmatic. Where explanations are required they are given. The assertions presented in the dead sea scrolls reveal Jesus as messiah fulfilling not only the dead sea scroll revelations and requirements but in Jesus all the prophetic demands of messiah. There is no disagreement that Jesus is a priest on the order of Melchizadek, in fact he is the ultimate Melchizadekian.

What has not been explained or clarified that makes one think that fact = dogma? Come let us reason together ...

Greetings 1Lonelyknight,
I should have given you, the entire article. My apologies.
I rarely read something that I agree with 100%, but I do with this.
I find it very profound and enlightening. It really resonates with me, especially after spending some time in this chat room. Peace!
I stumbled upon this article.
I hope you find this blog as enlightening as I did.
It will be well worth your time. I promise!Saved by Being Right: Christianity and Dogmatism



In the Christian group I belonged to in college, we believed we had all the answers.

Other Christians might differ from us in doctrine, but we knew the truth, straight from the Bible. "God said it, I believe it, and that settles it," we would say. We even knew why everyone didn't see things the same way we did. They were deceived. Or they were "in compromise" with sin and were trying to justify themselves. Or they were "lukewarm" and just didn't want to "pay the price" to really "press forward in the things of God."

I remember the time I mentioned to an older church member that I wondered about young-earth creationism. I asked her if maybe the earth wasn't six thousand years old. Maybe God didn't intend the "days" of Genesis 1 to be viewed as 24-hour periods?

She became very upset. "It was evening, and it was morning, one day," was what the Bible said. How could I possibly be questioning that? If we were going to start changing the meaning of Bible words, who knew where it could end? If we started to believe the wrong things, what would happen to us?

I shut up. But I couldn't help seeing what was behind her eyes as she put me back on the straight and narrow.

Fear.

Oh, there was fear of the leadership, of course. No one wanted the pastors to decide a demonic spirit of deception was upon any of us. They would take us into a private room where a group of the most trusted members would spend hours shouting at the demon to come out of us. In the worst case scenario, we could be subjected to public rebuke in front of the whole congregation, or even be excommunicated.

But the fear went deeper than that. It was in essence a fear of not believing properly-- a fear that we could find ourselves on a slippery slope towards actually falling away from Christ.

"It's very important what you believe," they told us. Whole sermons were preached on this. We were saved by faith in Christ, and though we were supposed to enter a trusting personal relationship with Christ through that faith, what "faith" meant, ultimately, was believing the right things. Hebrews 11:6 was constantly repeated to us: "But without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him."

Belief is high priority in Christianity. Even apart from the spiritually abusive, controlling segments, it's high priority. One of the most famous things Jesus said was, "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life." (John 3:16, Emphasis added.) And Paul said, "If you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved." (Romans 10:9, Emphasis added.)

But there's a problem. Belief, as most often understood in the modern Western world means "Mental acceptance of and conviction in the truth, actuality, or validity of something" or "Something believed or accepted as true, especially a particular tenet or a body of tenets accepted by a group of persons." The word also has a third meaning, "The mental act, condition, or habit of placing trust or confidence in another," but when we say, "I believe in God" or "I believe in the Resurrection of Christ," that third meaning isn't usually what we're talking about.

But Jesus and Paul spoke of belief primarily in that third sense. Belief in something as an accepted truth was not nearly as important as trust and confidence-- not in a set of tenets, but in Christ, the Father God and the Holy Spirit. Belief in doctrine was meant to spring out of that trust-- not the other way around.

If you ask most Christians straight out, they will usually say that they do believe it's trust in Christ that saves them. And yet so many times, we live our lives as if the really important thing was what we mentally hold to be true-- or even simply that we hold the approved opinions.

And the problem with this, of course, is that if every thought and opinion must be the "right" one according to our religious group, we are in danger of being so right-thinking that we never actually think at all.

Theologian and Bible scholar Peter Enns, Ph.D. says:

The scandal of the Evangelical mind is that degrees, books, papers, and other marks of prestige are valued–provided you come to predetermined conclusions. . . that doctrine determines academic conclusions.

Evangelicalism is not fundamentally an intellectual organism but an apologetic one. It did not come to be in order to inspire academic exploration but to maintain certain theological distinctives by intellectual means. These intellectual means are circumscribed by Evangelical dogma. . . As an intellectual phenomenon, the Evangelical experiment is a defensive movement.

How many times have you talked to a Christian who asserts that your disagreement with him or her is in fact a moral failing? That your problem is lack of faithfulness to God or disrespect for the Bible? For many of us, it doesn't seem possible that someone could carefully and prayerfully examine a Bible text and end up honestly seeing it differently than we (and our minister or pastor) see it.




Christians can come to believe that God gave us minds not for the purpose of learning and exploring the world He gifted to us, or for growing in our understanding of God, God's ways, and ourselves-- but for holding onto to our beliefs and dogmas against all comers.


"Dogmatism" is the logical fallacy of "[p]roposing that there simply cannot be any other possible way of making sense of and engaging with an issue but the one you represent." Dogmatism is "[t]he unwillingness to even consider the opponent’s argument. . . the assertion that one’s position is so correct that one should not even examine the evidence to the contrary."




Dogmatism in Christianity, I think, comes primarily from fear. If we believe we are saved by faith, and we define faith primarily in terms of having the right set of beliefs, then anything that challenges those beliefs must be resisted as evil. Our thinking becomes defensive rather than inquiring, didactic rather than exploratory, closed rather than open. We see our role as the instructors and correctors of others, rather than as listeners and learners.




We all want in our heart of hearts to be listened to and understood. But dogmatism strips us of our ability to listen and understand. We become fundamentally unable to do unto others as we would have them do unto us.




In the end, all we have is spiritual pride.




And the Bible actually warns us against this. Paul said in 1 Corinthians 8:1-2, "Knowledge puffs up while love builds up. Those who think they know something do not yet know as they ought to know. But whoever loves God is known by God." And Jesus said to the Pharisees in John 9:41, "If you were blind, you would not be guilty of sin; but now that you claim you can see, your guilt remains."




We aren't meant to believe we have all the answers, or to believe that's even possible. We're meant to walk humbly with God, to not think of ourselves more highly than we ought to (Romans 12:3). We aren't supposed to be one another's mental police, but one another's servants.




To my readers who are Christians: if "He who began a good work in you will carry it on to completion until the day of Christ Jesus (Philippians 1:6)," we don't need to be afraid. We can be free to explore, to examine, to seek greater understanding in all things. Having a difference of opinion is not a slippery slope to heresy. Questioning is not a slippery slope to apostasy.




Questioning is a way of appreciating the complexity of the universe God placed us in. And allowing others to think differently is a way of appreciating our own complexity as human beings.



"There is no fear in love. But perfect love drives out fear, because fear has to do with punishment. The one who fears is not made perfect in love." 1 John 4:18. It's time to let go of fear of not being right.




Because we're not saved by being right. We're saved by trusting in Christ.

 

[working4christ2]

who the heck is Melkizedec?

Biblically he was a King, Priest and a Prophet.

Throughout the OT GOD makes use of "PRIEST"

[h=3]Exod.28[/h]

1. [1] "Then bring near to you Aaron your brother, and his sons with him, from among the people of Israel, to serve me as priests -- Aaron and Aaron's sons, Nadab and Abi'hu, Elea'zar and Ith'amar.
2. [4] These are the garments which they shall make: a breastpiece, an ephod, a robe, a coat of checker work, a turban, and a girdle; they shall make holy garments for Aaron your brother and his sons to serve me as priests.
3. [41] And you shall put them upon Aaron your brother, and upon his sons with him, and shall anoint them and ordain them and consecrate them, that they may serve me as priests

So we see clearly here that we Catholics did NOT invent the use of priest; NOR did we invent the use of Priest having a role in sin forgiveness:


Leviticus 4:26
But the fat he shall burn upon it, as is wont to be done with the victims of peace offerings: and the priest shall pray for him, and for his sin, and it shall be forgiven him

[h=3]John.20 Verses 19 to 23 [19] On the evening of that day, the first day of the week, the doors being shut where the disciples were, for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood among them and said to them, "Peace be with you."[/h]

1. [20] When he had said this, he showed them his hands and his side. Then the disciples were glad when they saw the Lord. [21] Jesus said to them again, "Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, even so I send you."
   [22] And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and said to them, "Receive the Holy Spirit.
   [23] If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained"
   
   While Catholic Priest are empowered in ways that the OT priest never even conceived of {Mt 10: 1-8, John 17:17-20, Mt 28:18-20}, the TRADITION of God using them for sin forgiveness has age-old history to support this reality.
   
   God Bless youPatrick
   working4christ2

 

[1LonelyKnight]

Thanks for the article it has some good insights but leaves out a few things also. I agree that discussing different viewpoints on scripture does not mean a person is not moral. When we analyze scripture we do so using a hermeneutics process, a part of which is exegesis. This process is intricate and requires study, discipline an open mind, honesty and introspection.

Using this approach given scriptural background and support we develop a doctrinal precept, a form of systematic theology. In the face of such an approach, simply declaring 'dogmatism' becomes it's own fallacy. Scripture reveals itself (res ipsa
loquitur) when we exhaust this process.

Has the discussion not refuted partial truths and has it not threaded together the meaning of Melchizadekian - if not then question (and assert) on. Do consider the things others have revealed, search them out, open your heart and give time for reflection and introspection. If one seeks to find a predetermined conclusion in a study they will do so. But when one's mind is open and truth laid out - let the truth prevail - for the truth shall set you free.

 

[1LonelyKnight]

Biblically he was a King, Priest and a Prophet.

Throughout the OT GOD makes use of "PRIEST"

[/COLOR][h=3]Exod.28[/h]

1. [1] "Then bring near to you Aaron your brother, and his sons with him, from among the people of Israel, to serve me as priests -- Aaron and Aaron's sons, Nadab and Abi'hu, Elea'zar and Ith'amar.
2. [4] These are the garments which they shall make: a breastpiece, an ephod, a robe, a coat of checker work, a turban, and a girdle; they shall make holy garments for Aaron your brother and his sons to serve me as priests.
3. [41] And you shall put them upon Aaron your brother, and upon his sons with him, and shall anoint them and ordain them and consecrate them, that they may serve me as priests

So we see clearly here that we Catholics did NOT invent the use of priest; NOR did we invent the use of Priest having a role in sin forgiveness:


Leviticus 4:26
But the fat he shall burn upon it, as is wont to be done with the victims of peace offerings: and the priest shall pray for him, and for his sin, and it shall be forgiven him

[h=3]John.20 Verses 19 to 23 [19] On the evening of that day, the first day of the week, the doors being shut where the disciples were, for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood among them and said to them, "Peace be with you."[/h]

1. [20] When he had said this, he showed them his hands and his side. Then the disciples were glad when they saw the Lord. [21] Jesus said to them again, "Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, even so I send you."
   [22] And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and said to them, "Receive the Holy Spirit.
   [23] If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained"
   
   While Catholic Priest are empowered in ways that the OT priest never even conceived of {Mt 10: 1-8, John 17:17-20, Mt 28:18-20}, the TRADITION of God using them for sin forgiveness has age-old history to support this reality.
   
   God Bless youPatrick
   working4christ2

We are discussing here a unique, non Aaronic, non Levitical priesthood - a priest on the order of Melchizadek. Reading through there seems to be some understanding that this high priest would be "called out" (ekklesia) from the common religion(s) and into a higher teaching and system of living. While Catholic priests do declare Melchizadek in each mass, the Melchizadekian is not a Nicolaitan.

 

[badger58]

Thanks for the article it has some good insights but leaves out a few things also. I agree that discussing different viewpoints on scripture does not mean a person is not moral. When we analyze scripture we do so using a hermeneutics process, a part of which is exegesis. This process is intricate and requires study, discipline an open mind, honesty and introspection.

Using this approach given scriptural background and support we develop a doctrinal precept, a form of systematic theology. In the face of such an approach, simply declaring 'dogmatism' becomes it's own fallacy. Scripture reveals itself (res ipsa
loquitur) when we exhaust this process.

Has the discussion not refuted partial truths and has it not threaded together the meaning of Melchizadekian - if not then question (and assert) on. Do consider the things others have revealed, search them out, open your heart and give time for reflection and introspection. If one seeks to find a predetermined conclusion in a study they will do so. But when one's mind is open and truth laid out - let the truth prevail - for the truth shall set you free.

Brother 1Lonelyknight,
I appreciate your post here very much.
You show yourself to be one of His disciples, and one who has a noble heart like the Berians.
I have and will continue to give consideration to all opposing views. I hope that others in the chat room will take time to read this
article, its a lesson for all of us. Peace!

 

[badger58]

“The destiny of your soul is not predicated upon acceptance of a specific dogma that happens to be "correct." A loving God does not dole out eternal condemnation because one has selected the wrong doctrine or misinterpreted scripture. On the contrary, your endeavor to understand God and the nature of the universe is a testament to your devotion.


Mark Ireland

 

[1LonelyKnight]

“The destiny of your soul is not predicated upon acceptance of a specific dogma that happens to be "correct." A loving God does not dole out eternal condemnation because one has selected the wrong doctrine or misinterpreted scripture. On the contrary, your endeavor to understand God and the nature of the universe is a testament to your devotion.


Mark Ireland

I fear this is the problem with Ireland. Rejection of sound doctrinal principles is the basis for the fall of man. Discussing biblical doctrines does not make one immoral - not understanding biblical doctrines does not make one immoral - understanding and rejecting them does. To appeal to 'a loving god' denies the nature of god in terms of justice. Be not deceived god is not mocked. God is patient not willing that any should perish but that all would come to a saving knowledge and repent. Let those who teach another gospel be anathema, maranatha.

 

[badger58]

I fear this is the problem with Ireland. Rejection of sound doctrinal principles is the basis for the fall of man. Discussing biblical doctrines does not make one immoral - not understanding biblical doctrines does not make one immoral - understanding and rejecting them does. To appeal to 'a loving god' denies the nature of god in terms of justice. Be not deceived god is not mocked. God is patient not willing that any should perish but that all would come to a saving knowledge and repent. Let those who teach another gospel be anathema, maranatha.

I can't judge the man or any other to have a problem. I have my hands full trying to get the beam out of my own eye.
All I know is that I can't stop thinking just because someone tells me that they've already thought of that , and rejectet it.

Your time is limited, so don't waste it living someone else's life. Don't be trapped by dogma - which is living with the results of other people's thinking. Don't let the noise of others' opinions drown out your own inner voice. And most important, have the courage to follow your heart and intuition. Steve Jobs
Read more at: Your time is limited, so don't waste it living someone else's life. Don't be trapped by... - Steve Jobs at BrainyQuote

 

[badger58]

We are discussing here a unique, non Aaronic, non Levitical priesthood - a priest on the order of Melchizadek. Reading through there seems to be some understanding that this high priest would be "called out" (ekklesia) from the common religion(s) and into a higher teaching and system of living. While Catholic priests do declare Melchizadek in each mass, the Melchizadekian is not a Nicolaitan.

My conclusion after much study(I know I will get flack for this but) I think Mechizedek is the Holy Spirit.
The verse that says: Jesus is a priest AFTER the order of Melchizedek, would seem to suggest that Jesus is a priest in the same way, but it does not suggest that Jesus was above Melchizedek. (to me that's the way it reads) Not a salvation issue, but it is very interesting. Of the Trinity, the Holy Spirit is the most mysterious. It makes sense that if He came in flesh, He would me the most mysterious man in all of the Bible.

 

[badger58]

My conclusion after much study(I know I will get flack for this but) I think Mechizedek is the Holy Spirit.
The verse that says: Jesus is a priest AFTER the order of Melchizedek, would seem to suggest that Jesus is a priest in the same way, but it does not suggest that Jesus was above Melchizedek. (to me that's the way it reads) Not a salvation issue, but it is very interesting. Of the Trinity, the Holy Spirit is the most mysterious. It makes sense that if He came in flesh, He would me the most mysterious man in all of the Bible.

Brothers and sisters,
(my thoughts)
For six thousand years, men have tried to get back to the garden! That dream has been put to song by Joni Mitchel. Here are the lyrics.
Woodstock

by Joni Mitchell


play


Printer-friendly version of this lyric


I came upon a child of God
He was walking along the road
And I asked him where are you going
And this he told me
I'm going on down to Yasgur's farm *
I'm going to join in a rock 'n' roll band
I'm going to camp out on the land
I'm going to try an' get my soul free

We are stardust
We are golden
And we've got to get ourselves
Back to the garden

Then can I walk beside you
I have come here to lose the smog
And I feel to be a cog in something turning
Well maybe it is just the time of year
Or maybe it's the time of man
I don't know who I am
But you know life is for learning

We are stardust
We are golden
And we've got to get ourselves
Back to the garden

By the time we got to Woodstock
We were half a million strong
And everywhere there was song and celebration
And I dreamed I saw the bombers
Riding shotgun in the sky
And they were turning into butterflies
Above our nation

We are stardust
Billion year old carbon
We are golden
Caught in the devil's bargain
And we've got to get ourselves
back to the garden

I suggest to you, my brothers and sisters that we have found the way back.
Yes, we have found what men have been searching for! We have been touched by"The Rose of Sharon" we have been anointed with" the balm of Gilead" we have been touched by the" the Love of Jesus". The dove of " the Holy Spirit" has rested upon us!
I suggest to you my brothers and sister's that: We have been welcomed back to the the GARDEN. Our Father has longed for this moment! A throng of Angels are cheering us on.
I pray that these words bless you.
Peace