After the Order of Melchizedek Free Essays

Adventist International Institute of Advanced Studies Theological Seminary â€Å"After the Order of Melchizedek† A Term Paper Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement for the Course: THST 619 Doctrine of the Sanctuary by Ralph D Bock October 2009 Table of Contents CHAPTER 11 INTRODUCTION1 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM4 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY4 PURPOSE OF THE STUDY4 DELIMITATION5 METHODOLOGY5 CHAPTER 27 TYPOLOGY OF JESUS AND MELCHIZEDEK7 WHAT IS TYPOLOGY? 7 WHO IS MELCHIZEDEK? 8 AFTER THE ORDER OF MELCHIZEDEK10 CHAPTER 316 SUMMARY, FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION16 BIBLIOGRAPHY19 CHAPTER 1 Presentation WHAT IS THE MEANING OF THE PHRASE â€Å"AFTER THE ORDER OF MELCHIZEDEK? † PSALM 110 SPEAKS ABOUT A PERSON WHO IS A KING AND A PRIEST, BUT IN THE HISTORY OF ISRAEL THERE WAS NEVER SUCH A KING. It may be the case THAT THE PSALM SPEAKS ABOUT A FUTURE KING-PRIEST. Clearly IT DEALS NOT WITH A HISTORICAL KING, BUT WITH THE MESSIAH. We will compose a custom exposition test on After the Order of Melchizedek or then again any comparable point just for you Request Now [1] The forecast of Jesus’ brotherhood as indicated by the request for Melchizedek demonstrated that the Aaronic organization was short lived (Heb 7 sections 11â€14), and imperfectâ€that is, salvation from sinâ€was impractical through the Aaronic ministry. This implied God proposed to change the religious law, making it workable for one who was not a relative of Aaron to turn into a High Priest. When the new High Priest after the request for Melchizedek showed up, the run of the mill organization would end (refrains 15â€19). Christ became minister, not based on genealogical ties, yet by an awesome announcement. His brotherhood is lasting in light of the fact that His life is indestructible. [2] This is brought in scriptural philosophy typology. Regardless of whether typology can genuinely be grasped in the translation of certain messianic predictions is by a wide margin the most disputable inquiry. One zone of OT typology was that of normal people who filled in as models both of others inside the OT and of Christ; also, the Melchizedek of Genesis 14:18-20 filled in as an individual sort of the Messiah inside the OT, as displayed in Psalm 110:4; and that the writer of the Book of Hebrews used the Melchizedekian typology previously utilized inside the OT group to advance his contentions for the matchless quality of the ministry of Jesus to that of the Levites. [3] Matthew Henry and et al. reference to Hebrew 7. that Melchizedek met Abraham coming back from the salvage of Lot, Melchizedek’s name, â€Å"King of Righteousness,† without a doubt reasonable to his character, stamped him as a kind of the Messiah and his realm. The name of his city connoted â€Å"Peace;† and as King of Peace he exemplified Christ, the Prince of Peace, the incomparable Reconciler of God and man. Nothing is recorded regarding the start or end of his life; therefore he normally took aft er the Son of God, whose presence is from everlasting to everlasting, who had nobody that was before Him, and will have nobody come after Him, in His brotherhood. All aspects of Scripture praises the incomparable King of Righteousness and Peace, our sublime High Priest and Savior; and the more we look at it, the more we will be persuaded, that the declaration of Jesus is the soul of prescience. [4] There are solid equals among Melchizedek and Jesus: both are the Sons of God, cleric of the Order of Melchizedek, King of Righteous, King of Peace, selected by God, everlasting brotherhood, and previous. Proclamation of the Problem The difficult this paper embraces is typified in the inquiries: What was so extraordinary about the request for Melchizedek? For what reason would God compare the request for Melchizedek to that of Jesus if there where no confidence to it? Noteworthiness of the investigation The examination is huge on the grounds that it will investigate the intertextual investigation of Melchizedek corresponding to Jesus Christ. The examination is indispensable in light of the fact that it will add to the information on bringing to center the significance of Jesus’ ministry as better and more lifting and capable than address the issues of God’s individuals during the end long periods of earth’s history. Motivation behind the Study The primary purpose of this paper is to give a more clear perspective on the unrivaled and superb impression of Jesus’ ministry as viable enough for the individuals of God. In actuality, Jesus Christ is the main genuine religious middle person among God and humankind. The ministries of Aaron and Melchizedek serve just as good examples of Christ’s viable service. â€Å"For there is one God, and there is one arbiter among God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself as a payment for all, the declaration to which was borne at the best possible time† (1 Tim. 2:5,6). [5] Delimitation The paper will be delimited to the couple of pericopes about Melchizedek in Genesis 14, Psalm 110 and the letter to the Hebrews section 7. Approach This is a subjective exploration that depicts Melchizedek and Jesus’ brotherhood from Jewish and Christian sources. Part 1 is a depiction of the presentation that incorporates the criticalness of study, reason and the delimitation of the examination. Part 2 contains the writing survey that extrapolates sources from Jewish, Christian, and non-Christian writing to explain Melchizedek and Jesus’ organization as applicable to the arrangement of salvation. Part 3 is the end with the emphasis on the rundown and discoveries of the examination work. Section 2 TYPOLOGY OF JESUS AND MELCHIZEDEK WHAT IS TYPOLOGY? Precisely what is a sort? Philosophically, a sort might be characterized as â€Å"a figure or ensample of something future and pretty much prophetic, called the ‘Antitype’†. [6] Muenscher says a sort is â€Å"the predetermined delegate connection which certain people, occasions, and foundations of the Old Testament bear to comparing people, occasions, and establishments in the New†. 7] Wick Broomall has a brief proclamation that is useful: â€Å"A type is a shadow thrown on the pages of the Old Testament history by a fact whose full exemplification or antitype is found in the New Testament revelation†. [8] We would, in rundown, recommend the accompanying definition, which we rework from Terry: A sort is a genuine, magnified occurring in history which was supernaturally appointed by the omniscient Go d to be a prophetic image of the beneficial things which he purposed to bring to realization in Christ Jesus. Who is Melchizedek? The ID of Melchizedek has been profoundly bantered throughout the entire existence of the congregation. Jewish custom has recognized Melchizedek with Shem, the child of Noah who, after the order in Genesis, endure the flood and inhabited when Abraham was alive and was his contemporary for a hundred years. Christian custom has proposed various understandings to distinguish who Melchizedek was. Origen said that Melchizedek was a holy messenger. Others have suggested that he was the Holy Spirit in human structure. Numerous Christians, old and contemporary, have said this is a traditional case of a Christophany in the Old Testament, that is, Melchizedek was Jesus Christ himself, who appeared to Abraham in human structure. The idea of Christophany ought to be dismissed on the grounds that it repudiates the announcement in the book of Hebrews that Jesus was assigned a Priest after the request for Melchizedek. On the off chance that Melchizedek was Christ, at that point how could Christ himself become a Priest in the resemblance of Melchizedek? [9] Ellen White wrote in the Review and Herald that it was Christ that spoke through Melchizedek, the minister of the Most High God. Melchizedek was not Christ, yet he was the voice of God on the planet, the agent of the Father. And all through the ages of the past, Christ has spoken; Christ has driven His kin, and has been the light of the world. [10] Another view is that Melchizedek was a sort of Christ. The typological translation recommends that the brotherhood of Melchizedek was a kind of Christ’s ministry. As Melchizedek was a minister of the Most High God, so was Jesus. As Melchizedek was a lord, so was Jesus. Both Melchizedek and Jesus were illustrious ministers. In the people of Melchizedek and Jesus the workplaces of minister and lord were joined. For this paper we are going to concentrate on the view that Melchizedek was a kind of Jesus. After The Order of Melchizedek The Lord has sworn and won't alter his perspective: You are a minister everlastingly after the request for Melchizedek (Ps 110,4). In contrast to the conventional ministers, for whom it was conceivable to be of holy plunge but then not really work as clerics (cf. Deut 18,6-8; Lev 21,17-23), the ministry of Jesus minister was sworn unto Him by God Himself to be after the request for Melchizedek. He was not of any clerical plunge since he was not of the clan of Levi, nor was he a minister in the feeling of somebody who was really utilized as a haven specialist and was completing asylum obligations on an everyday premise. In any case, his brotherhood was more perpetual and suffering than that of some other minister, since whether he was working in the haven and ‘doing the job’ of cleric, he was by definition an arbiter among individuals and god for an amazing remainder. [11] Christ was a minister of God after the â€Å"order of Melchizedek† (Psalm 110:4; Hebrews 5:6,10; 6:20; 7:11,17). The word â€Å"order† (taxis) means a â€Å"arrangement. † In this association, it implies â€Å"of comparative arrangement,† I. e. , the idea of, or â€Å"just like Melchizedek†. The importance is this: in some sense the royal organization of Jesus would be comparable in nature to that of Melchizedek. Note the reference to Psalm 110:4 above, and see that Christ made the utilization of this Psalm to Himself in Matthew 22:43-45[12] It was not that Melchizedek was â€Å"without father, without mother† actually, or tha