Was Melchizedek Christ when he blessed Abram?

Question

I am doing research on Melchizedek. So any information will be helpful.

Answer 1

Facts about Melchizedek

1. King of Salem, ancient Jerusalem (Heb 7:1; Gen 14:18).
2. Priest of God in Abraham's day (Heb 7:1; Gen 14:18).
3. He met Abraham returning from his military victory (Heb 7:1; Gen 14:16-18).
4. Abraham gave him one-tenth of the spoils (Heb 7:2; Gen 14:16-24).
5. Melchizedek was called King of righteousness (Heb 7:2).
6. He was called King of Salem, or King of Peace (Heb 7:2; Gen 14:18).
7. He had no descent (Greek: agenealogetos ( NT:35), without genealogy); without recorded father or mother; and without recorded beginning of days or end of life (Heb 7:3,6). He had a father, mother, birth, and death, but these were not recorded, so that he could be a type of Christ who was an eternal being really without beginning and ending (Mic 5:2; Isa 9:6-7; John 1:1-2; Heb 1:8; Rev 1:8-11).
8. He made a type of Christ, so that Christ could be made a priest after his order (Heb 7:3; 5:6,10; 6:15-20; 7:1-10,15-21). As God Christ was not begotten, was not God's Son, and had no birth or death. Only as man did the second person of the Divine Trinity have a begetting, a father, a mother, a birth and a death (note, Acts 13:33).
9. He was an ordinary man (Heb 7:4).
10. He was greater than Abraham (Heb 7:4-7).
Twofold Purpose of Paul:
1. To show that Jesus Christ was the Person prophesied of in Ps 110, which psalm the Jews uniformly held to refer to the coming Messiah
2. To answer the objections of the Jews against Christ's priesthood on the grounds that He did not come from priestly stock and could not be the antitype of Aaron or fulfill Lev 21:10-15. From the Jewish viewpoint Christ would be further disqualified because:
(1) No proselyte could be a priest
(2) No slave could be a priest
(3) No bastard could be a priest (Jews accused Him of being illegitimate)
(4) No son of a Nethinim (temple servant of the priest) could be one
(5) No man whose father exercised a base trade such as the carpenter trade. Many Jews considered Him unfit to be a priest because of this.
Here Paul shows that it was not necessary for the priest to come from a particular stock, for Melchizedek was a priest of the most high God and not from Abraham or Aaron: He was a Canaanite. Jews considered any person not in the regular genealogies of Israel to be without father and without descent or genealogy. Then, too, Jews considered Melchizedek to be without father and without mother because he was a righteous man and should not be classed with the heathen. This special phraseology was not uncommon when a person was unknown or obscure. Such was their way of signifying that the parents were unknown.

Answer 2

I don't believe he was Christ. He pre-figured Christ.
Of course the other passages to look at are Psalm 110 and Hebrews.
The main reason I don't believe he was an incarnation of Christ (which occurs a number of times in the Old Testament, Genesis 18:1ff for example) - but the reason Melchizedek was not Christ is because he is explained as being the King of Salem, which is to say, Jerusalem. Therefore being a king of an existent city, I believe he was a historical figure, who was representative of the coming Christ, much the same as Joshua the high priest in Zechariah 3:8-10.

Answer 3

king of righteousness, the king of Salem

All we know of him is recorded in Gen. 14:18-20. He is subsequently mentioned only once in the Old Testament, in Ps. 110:4. The typical significance of his history is set forth in detail in the Epistle to the Hebrews, ch. 7. The apostle there points out the superiority of his priesthood to that of Aaron in these several respects, (1) Even Abraham paid him tithes; (2) he blessed Abraham; (3) he is the type of a Priest who lives for ever; (4) Levi, yet unborn, paid him tithes in the person of Abraham; (5) the permanence of his priesthood in Christ implied the abrogation of the Levitical system; (6) he was made priest not without an oath; and (7) his priesthood can neither be transmitted nor interrupted by death: "this man, because he continueth ever, hath an unchangeable priesthood."

The question as to who this mysterious personage was has given rise to a great deal of modern speculation. It is an old tradition among the Jews that he was Shem, the son of Noah, who may have survived to this time. Melchizedek was a Canaanitish prince, a worshipper of the true God, and in his peculiar history and character an instructive type of our Lord, the great High Priest (Hebrews 5:6, 7; 6:20). One of the Amarna tablets is from Ebed-Tob, king of Jerusalem, the successor of Melchizedek, in which he claims the very attributes and dignity given to Melchizedek in the Epistle to the Hebrews.

Answer 4

There's only one mention of him in the entire Old Testament and yet he is known as the great High Priest. He would not be Jesus because the earthly appearance of heavenly beings always has an overt purpose. Melchizedek is too obscure a figure to be anything other than what scripture tells us he is; the great High Priest. I agree with the person who said he had to be an historical figure, because he was also known as the King of Salem.
Also, why would Abram tithe to him if he was God? Tithes are for earthly uses; not heavenly.

Answer 5

Yes; Melchizedek was a type of High Priest - none other than Jesus Christ - the "God" of the Old Testament ! Abram was later, to become Abraham - Father (Patriarch) of the "Faithful".

Answer 6

That is a belief that's out there. I forget the term but some say that Melchizedek (I'm trusting your spelling...) was an appearance of Jesus in the Old Testament.

That's all just speculation but I don't have a problem with it.

Answer 7

Melchizedek was a Christ, but not THE Christ.
Christ is a greek word, from the Hebrew Messiah, both mean "annointed one". Two groups of people were annointed, preists and kings-Melchizedek was both. Jesus was also both King of Kings and Eternal High Priest, the only other one to be both priest (Levite from his mother Mary) and king (from his "father" Joseph).

Answer 8

Yes, but Melchizedeks and christs are not individuals, they’re titles, so there are many. So Jesus and Mel from the OT are not the same person. Christians will say they are the same because they cannot reconcile how Mel had “no beginning of days” and was “without genealogy”.

Answer 9

I do not believe he was Christ, but a type of Christ. See Hebrew 7:15 or you can read the whole Chapter to get a clearer picture. Love, be bless.

Answer 10

Hello! I like your question. I tend to believe that Jesus manifested Himself to Abram as Melchizedek. Jesus is the High Priest in the order of Melchizedek, as it states in the book of Hebrews. Jesus showed Himself several times prior to becoming the Incarnate Christ who took on flesh. He did so when he wrestled with Jacob, when He stood before Joshua ere he went to war. So yes friend, I believe there were times when Jesus came and visited saints of God in the Old Testament before He would take on flesh and lay aside all He had rights to as the Son of God. He was the glory of God not seen in the cloud as in the old covenant. Jesus the Great High Priest put His blood upon the mercy seat sealing our salvation's purchase. God bless.