We know, Melchizedek was a High Priest of the Jews. The author of Hebrew speaks seeks to reconcile the two sides of his account of Jesus through the concept of priesthood.
Jesus is the great High Priest, and the work of a priest is to reconcile the human race to God. But in order to do that, he must be authorized by God. There Jesus is called the Son, and we have noted that in Jewish society, to be a son was at the same time to be the agent of the father.
The prophets of old had also been agents of God, but Jesus, as the Son, is superior to the prophets.
Melchizedek
![Melchizedek](https://mahasoe.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/IMG_20210227_234711-1024x768.jpg)
The author of Hebrews present Jesus as –
- Sent by God, originating in God and the agent of God, and as such already present in the mind or purpose of God before his appearing in world history
- A wholly human being who is in solidarity with all men and women
However, it has been suggested that in the two opening chapters of Hebrews the author is attacking an ‘angel’ christology’ that is to say, an interpretation of the person of Christ as an angelic being. The author points out that if Jesus Christ is to effect reconciliation as high priest; then he must have been fully and totally a human being, for only one who completely shared the human condition could be relevant to that condition and be a representative – a pioneering representative of his fellow human beings. The earthly, human, historical experience is essential to the Son in his priestly work. But a priest is not complete simply by sharing in human lot. His office is to bring something from God into that human condition, to bring grace, and hope and empowerment.
High Priest
The controlling image of Jesus for the Hebrews is that of the High Priest. More specifically, it is the legendary figure of Melchizedek to whom the writer turns. According to Genesis, Abraham, on returning victoriously from a battle, was met by Melchizedek, described as the king of Salem and priest of God most high (El Elyon).
The writer of Hebrews elaborates on the figure of Melchizedek, partly by inference from the passage in Genesis, partly, it must be said, from pious imagination. King of Salem is allegorically interpreted as ‘king of peace’, while Melchizedek is rendered ‘king of righteousness (sedeq)’, and both titles are applied to Jesus.
It argued further that Melchizedek must have been superior to Abraham; for he blessed Abraham, and it beyond dispute that the inferior is blessed by the superior. Furthermore, Abraham paid him tithes. From the absence of any details about Melchizedek in the Genesis account, Hebrews claims that he is without father or mother or genealogy, and has neither beginning of days nor end of life, but resembling the Son of God, he continues a priest forever (7:3).
The characterization of Melchizedek
The characterization of Melchizedek then used to establish the superiority of Christ’s priesthood over the Levitical priesthood of Israel. That levitical priesthood tied to members of the tribe of Levi, that to the way, it was passed on through physical descent.
Melchizedek does not have this physical link; he is without a father or mother, and this is taken to mean that his priesthood derives directly from God. The priesthood of Jesus was like that of Melchizedek; for did not God say to the messiah to be in Psalm 110; ‘Thou art a priest forever, after the order of Melchizedek?’
Christ’s priestly office was indeed bestowed by God and had nothing to do with birth or ancestry; just as Matthew in his gospel indicates that descent from David is not important in spite of the genealogy; at the beginning of the gospel. This is how the author of Hebrews describes the unique priesthood of Jesus Christ; – in its exercise, from the Levitical priesthood, and in what respects it is superior. (John Macquarie, Jesus Christ in Modern Thought, pp. 127 – 131).
Jesus is the high priest
Jesus’ portion regarding the temple does indeed seem at first is exclude the possibility of his ascribing to him a high priestly function. Even if the cleansing of the temple means only the pursing; and not the rejection of it there are still sayings of Jesus; which clearly call into question the temple cult itself-such as that in Matt. 12:6 (for example).