If you haven't yet, please read Hebrews 7... it's not long, but the author does a better job laying out the argument for two orders of priesthood and the difference between the two better than I can in this post. If you've read it already, fantastic. It's interesting to note how Christ derived his status as Priest not from a physical descendant obligation of Law (the house of Levi... Christ was obviously the "Lion of Judah") but rather from his indestructible Life (the Hebrews author aligns this to the order of Melchizedek). Note that the House of Levi, who offered sacrifices to cleanse themselves of their sins before they could offer sacrifices to cleanse others, is the same house (religious leaders of the day presumably were of Levi) that ultimately sent Jesus, the Lamb of God, to the "altar"... which cleansed everyone... is that the fulfillment of the Law? I never did understand exactly how Christ did "fulfill" the law.
Ok. After some wrestling with who this Melchizedek could be, I've decided that is less important than what he did for now (maybe later after we discover what he did we can reassess his identity). The most important feature about him is that when Abram's 380 servant army defeated the four kings of Mesopotamia, he ran into Melchizedek, King of Salem (which is apparently, King of Jerusalem). Melchizedek was a native Canaanite before Moses and God's command to destroy and kill everything in Canaan... moreover, he was the High Priest-King of Jerusalem before it was Jerusalem... just the King of Salem (Salem meaning Peace.... so High Priest and King of Peace?... Christ was the Prince of Peace.... hmmm... did Melchizedek hold higher authority than Christ?... well only God has that authority, right?). Anyway, the interesting thing is that when Abram met Melchizedek, Abram gave Melchizedek a tithe: 10% of all the spoils of the recent war... in return Melchizedek gave him... ... a blessing ... and ... bread and wine. What? That's right, bread and wine.
In modern terms, Melchizedek offered Abram communion and a blessing and received an offering of tithe. But wait... this is a number of generations before Moses... how is this possible?
What if... what if the "new covenant" is not new at all... from this, it seems that the breaking of bread and drinking of wine, the body and blood of Christ, were given to Abram before the law of Moses even came into existence (millennia before Christ's actual sacrifice). We know from the Hebrews passage that the Law made nothing perfect, instead all it served to do was point out our imperfections and (from Romans) our need for a Savior. This event in Genesis does more to prove the unchanging nature of God than any other passage of the Bible.
Now, who was Melchizedek?... does it destroy substitutional attonement to think of him as a preincarnate Jesus Christ (I've learned the theological term is "Christophany")? I'm not sure at this point... but the author of Hebrews says this man Melchizedek has not birth nor death... no mother or father... is he then God in flesh?... is it possible for God to be in flesh and not be Jesus Christ?... was it Jesus Christ?... or was this just a man outside of Abraham's seed who heard the calling of God? If that is true, then for those outside of Abraham's seed who heard the calling of God, was the Mosaic Law applicable, or were they to bypass all that and simply adhere to this "new covenant" of love which was not as "new" as it before seemed?
I'm afraid that this, as all good research does, has opened more doors than it has closed... but the treatise on God's nature that it has offered is one of the most valuable that I've experienced in a long time. Fascinating.
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
We want a King!
Israel was ruled by judges who interpreted a Written Law (written by God) for 400 years until Saul, the first King of Israel. The elders and judges, abiding by an authoritative written Law, it seems, was God's ideal form of government. Israel, decided differently: *the italics and bold are my emphasis*
4 So all the elders of Israel gathered together and came to Samuel at Ramah. 5 They said to him, "You are old, and your sons do not walk in your ways; now appoint a king to lead us, such as all the other nations have."
6 But when they said, "Give us a king to lead us," this displeased Samuel; so he prayed to the LORD. 7 And the LORD told him: "Listen to all that the people are saying to you; it is not you they have rejected, but they have rejected me as their king. 8 As they have done from the day I brought them up out of Egypt until this day, forsaking me and serving other gods, so they are doing to you. 9 Now listen to them; but warn them solemnly and let them know what the king who will reign over them will do."
10 Samuel told all the words of the LORD to the people who were asking him for a king. 11 He said, "This is what the king who will reign over you will do: He will take your sons and make them serve with his chariots and horses, and they will run in front of his chariots. 12 Some he will assign to be commanders of thousands and commanders of fifties, and others to plow his ground and reap his harvest, and still others to make weapons of war and equipment for his chariots. 13 He will take your daughters to be perfumers and cooks and bakers. 14 He will take the best of your fields and vineyards and olive groves and give them to his attendants. 15 He will take a tenth of your grain and of your vintage and give it to his officials and attendants. 16 Your menservants and maidservants and the best of your cattle and donkeys he will take for his own use. 17 He will take a tenth of your flocks, and you yourselves will become his slaves. 18 When that day comes, you will cry out for relief from the king you have chosen, and the LORD will not answer you in that day."
19 But the people refused to listen to Samuel. "No!" they said. "We want a king over us. 20 Then we will be like all the other nations, with a king to lead us and to go out before us and fight our battles."
21 When Samuel heard all that the people said, he repeated it before the LORD. 22 The LORD answered, "Listen to them and give them a king." Then Samuel said to the men of Israel, "Everyone go back to his town."
What is the moral? Maybe it's that elections have consequences?
I think more fascinating as a study of God's ideal is that the people of Israel, until this point, were a free people who lived within the confines of a written standard of law... a written law (the Law of Moses) upheld by judges and elders. In the new testament, we see a similar structure for ideal construction of a church.
We had a very similar set up in the original work of our US Constitution. We were to live very free lives while allowing judges and elders (congress) to make the important decisions regarding the law, the interpretation thereof, and stability of our nation. We were to choose those who we allowed to borrow power. However, over time, even with the blessings we had, our fathers chose "a King". With that King came all the woes Samuel fortold to the elders of Israel.
Admittedly, per our constitution, our government explicitly derives her sovereignty from the will of the people, not from the will of God. However, I NEED to clarify that our form of government was written for a "moral and religious" people, and that it is unfit for anyone but. That being said, with such people, the will of the people is a reflection of God's will (note: this is not who we are anymore, I fear).
Perhaps the broader message is that when we start thinking of our decisions as being better than God's (and not being an extension or reflections of God's will), we set ourselves up for less than what God desires for us--we get a King!
4 So all the elders of Israel gathered together and came to Samuel at Ramah. 5 They said to him, "You are old, and your sons do not walk in your ways; now appoint a king to lead us, such as all the other nations have."
6 But when they said, "Give us a king to lead us," this displeased Samuel; so he prayed to the LORD. 7 And the LORD told him: "Listen to all that the people are saying to you; it is not you they have rejected, but they have rejected me as their king. 8 As they have done from the day I brought them up out of Egypt until this day, forsaking me and serving other gods, so they are doing to you. 9 Now listen to them; but warn them solemnly and let them know what the king who will reign over them will do."
10 Samuel told all the words of the LORD to the people who were asking him for a king. 11 He said, "This is what the king who will reign over you will do: He will take your sons and make them serve with his chariots and horses, and they will run in front of his chariots. 12 Some he will assign to be commanders of thousands and commanders of fifties, and others to plow his ground and reap his harvest, and still others to make weapons of war and equipment for his chariots. 13 He will take your daughters to be perfumers and cooks and bakers. 14 He will take the best of your fields and vineyards and olive groves and give them to his attendants. 15 He will take a tenth of your grain and of your vintage and give it to his officials and attendants. 16 Your menservants and maidservants and the best of your cattle and donkeys he will take for his own use. 17 He will take a tenth of your flocks, and you yourselves will become his slaves. 18 When that day comes, you will cry out for relief from the king you have chosen, and the LORD will not answer you in that day."
19 But the people refused to listen to Samuel. "No!" they said. "We want a king over us. 20 Then we will be like all the other nations, with a king to lead us and to go out before us and fight our battles."
21 When Samuel heard all that the people said, he repeated it before the LORD. 22 The LORD answered, "Listen to them and give them a king." Then Samuel said to the men of Israel, "Everyone go back to his town."
What is the moral? Maybe it's that elections have consequences?
I think more fascinating as a study of God's ideal is that the people of Israel, until this point, were a free people who lived within the confines of a written standard of law... a written law (the Law of Moses) upheld by judges and elders. In the new testament, we see a similar structure for ideal construction of a church.
We had a very similar set up in the original work of our US Constitution. We were to live very free lives while allowing judges and elders (congress) to make the important decisions regarding the law, the interpretation thereof, and stability of our nation. We were to choose those who we allowed to borrow power. However, over time, even with the blessings we had, our fathers chose "a King". With that King came all the woes Samuel fortold to the elders of Israel.
Admittedly, per our constitution, our government explicitly derives her sovereignty from the will of the people, not from the will of God. However, I NEED to clarify that our form of government was written for a "moral and religious" people, and that it is unfit for anyone but. That being said, with such people, the will of the people is a reflection of God's will (note: this is not who we are anymore, I fear).
Perhaps the broader message is that when we start thinking of our decisions as being better than God's (and not being an extension or reflections of God's will), we set ourselves up for less than what God desires for us--we get a King!
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)