14:18 Who was Melchizedek? An historical character or something other?

Introduction: In Genesis 14 Abram is approached a blessed by a somewhat shadowy figure named Melchizedek. We are told in scripture that this figure is the king of Salem and a Priest of the God Most High, creator of Heaven and Earth. Scripture also reports that Abram paid a tithe of ten percent of everything to this priest. It seems to be a pretty straightforward text, but the sheer number of ideas asserted from different sources as to the identity of this priest and his later mention in Psalms would say differently. The Old and New Testament Student: The author of this source immediately recognizes Melchizedek as a priest-king of Jerusalem and alludes to Egyptian history to assert a case that this priest-king was an actual, historical person. The author presents letters sent form vassal princes of the area in question to the Egyptian ruler. Of these was a prince of an area known as Salim, or Salem. This name was also the name of its patron god who was the god of peace. Disturbingly, this patron god was also associated with a Babylonian sun god. At any rate, this, according to the author is the etymology of the name Jerusalem and would show that Melchizedek was in fact the king of Salem and a Canaanite priest of its patron god. While this does seem a reasonable explanation of the origin for the name of Jerusalem, there is some difficulty with this view. Although it seems possible that Abram and Melchizedek were using the same name to identify two completely different gods just as some modern Christians are led astray by the confusion of terms shared by Mormonism and Islam, it would seem impossible for Abram to pay a tithe to the priest of a pagan god. "Melchizedek." In Encyclopedia of the Dead Sea Scrolls: This source seems to assert the view that Melchizedek is one in the same as the Christ. The author immediate attacks the validity of the Genesis 14 account and asserts that the Melchizedek encounter was inserted at a later time. She bases her argument mainly on an early age for the Genesis text and a different view of Melchizedek found in cave 11 of Qumran. The reconstructed texts states that Melchizedek is the, heavenly high priest, eschatological savior of the righteous ones; as the instrument of God, he will be judge on the day of atonement at the time of God's final judgment This author also gives some time to authors of antiquity such as Philo and Josephus Philo seems to elude that Melchizedek was a self- taught priest of God and Josephus explains that the name Melchizedek means righteous king and that, the original founder of Jerusalem was a Canaanite chief, who was the first to officiate as priest of God and the first to build the temple. In the end, this author seems to discount all

other sources based on an accepted earlier date for the text of the document of cave 11 and asserts that Melchizedek is a form of Christ that was inserted into the story. Some of this authors work seems to have a great merit. Much of the research, although discounted by the author seems to support the above reference and the agreement of sources seems to lend validity. However, I would think it a mistake to devalue a multitude of agreeing sources in favor of one simply because of an accepted dating of the material. Melchizedek; New Catholic Encyclopedia: This source takes yet another approach using some of the same sources as above. According to this author Melchizedek may be an angelic being such as the archangel Michael. Again, this author uses the idea of an accepted date of the Dead Sea Scrolls as much earlier than other textual sources an asserts that the notion of Melchizedek being a human as Christian legend. This author also uses a text titled the Visions of Amram to enforce the presentation of Melchizedek as an angelic being equated with Michael who would battle Belial for the hearts of men. These two beings were reported to have power over all mankind and Amram was supposed to choose between the two. This source seems much like the one directly preceding. The only difference would seem to be the interpretation of what superhuman being this character might have been. Again, this author seems to discount all other material in favor of a text that is believed to be older. My Personal View: It would seem to me that Melchizedek was an historical human being who held the office of priest and king over early Jerusalem; known at the time as Salem. First, I base my view on the scriptural evidence. When Abram is confronted with this person, he pays tithe. This tithe, as I understand it would be paid to God through Melchizedek as priest of God. Abram does not treat this person as anything other than a person, nor does Melchizedek bring any special revelation from God like other beings; who were more than simple humans in scripture. Also, the other king doesnt seem disturbed by the presence of a stranger, but rather accepts the presence of Melchizedek as someone who was known. The sources above give much agreement on the idea that Salem would later become Jerusalem and that the king of Salem would also be a priest. I would doubt that Abram would pay tithe to a priest of a pagan god and if he did, I would think that scripture would include a correction by God for such an action. We see Abram scolded heavily for lying about the true identity of Sarah so it would seem hard to believe that God would let such a transgression go unattended. Works Cited:

The Old and New Testament Student Coverage: 1889-1892 (Vols. 9-15) JSTOR Subjects(s): Religion JSTOR Collection(s): Arts & Sciences III Collection, For-Profit Academic Arts & Sciences III Collection Published by: The University of Chicago Press ISSN: 01905937 "Melchizedek." In Encyclopedia of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Ed. Lawrence H. Schiffman, James C. VanderKam, Annette Steudel. Oxford Biblical Studies Online. 29-Nov-2013. <http://www.oxfordbiblicalstudies.com/article/opr/t264/e318>. Melchizedek New Catholic Encyclopedia Vol. 9. 2nd ed. Detroit: Gale, 2003. p474-475. COPYRIGHT 2003 Gale, COPYRIGHT 2006 Gale, Cengage Learning P. W. SKEHAN