Hebrews 7:3 says about Melchizedek, priest of the Most High God," without father, without mother, without genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life, but made like the Son of God, he abides a priest perpetually." Any comments on this Scripture you'd like to make?

On page 74 of the book "The Doctrine of the Trinity" (1998 ed.), Anthony Buzzard and Charles Hunting make some good points concerning Melchizedek. First of all, Melchizedek was a "man." Hebrews 7:4 says "observe how great this man was." Obviously then, he had parents, though they are not named. When verse 3 says he was "without father, without mother, without genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life," it simply means that his genealogy is not recorded in the Scriptures. As stated in verse 6, his "genealogy is not traced," meaning not traced in recorded history. Surely he DID have a "beginning of days" or he would not have existed and we would be reading nothing about him at all. Verse 3 also says he was "made like the Son of God," namely, Jesus, a man who also had parents. Noah's son Shem lived to be 600 years old and was alive in Abraham's day. Jewish tradition has long held that Shem was Melchizedek. To say that Melchizedek was a priest "perpetually" may simply mean that, like his genealogy or lineage, there is no record of when Melchizedek's priesthood began or ended.

I was just watching Dave Ramsey in his Financial Peace University DVD series, and he mentions Jesus popping into history as "Melchizedek." Do you think people really believe that Jesus was Melchizedek before he was born as "Jesus?"


Here's another question: Do you think Jesus existed before he existed or in other words, do you believe that Jesus was something or someone else before he was conceived/begotten/supernaturally & divinely created by God in the Virgin Mary? What do you think?

Sadly, there are many who make the mistake of thinking Melchizedek was Jesus. That makes me wonder why, then, Jesus had to go through the process of being born as a baby in order to come into the world. If he was Melchizedek, he could have made a similar appearance in the first century and not wasted 30 years in training as a Jewish boy while growing into manhood. He would have had the experience of at least thousands of years that would far surpass what a human could learn in a mere 30 years.

Of course, there is plenty of evidence in the Scriptures that Melchizedek was not Jesus. Hebrews 1:1, 2, says: "Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son." According to the inspired writer, Jesus did not appear to Abraham or anyone else as God's agent or prophet until what the writer calls "these last days."

God sent angels to speak to the prophets, but none of them was God's Son, as shown at Hebrews 1:5: "For to which of the angels did God ever say, 'You are my Son.'"?

Hebrews 7:3 specifically says that Melchizedek was "like" the Son of God, not that he actually was God's Son. And Melchizedek was not even an angel, for Hebrews 7:4 says he was a "man." Verse 6 alludes to his "genealogy," noting that it did not come from the Levites, but he belonged to a descending line of humans nevertheless.

If Jesus had existed before he was conceived, it is very strange that Luke did not mention this when telling Theophilus of Jesus' origin and geneology. Luke quoted an angel who said that Jesus would be called "Son of God" expressly due to his virgin conception and birth. Obviously, Jesus was God's Son because God became his father at the time he was miraculously conceived by the virgin girl Mary, and not before. It is noteworthy that the angel said "for that reason the holy Child shall be called the Son of God." (Luke 1:35) Surely the reason was not because Jesus existed prior to when his mother Mary became pregnant.

I again credit Anthony Buzzard and Charles Hunting for making readers aware of this interesting information in their book "The Doctrine of the Trinity -- Christianity's Self-Inflicted Wound."

Hi frank, I'd like to discuss this a little further. We are studying Melchizedek and I am a little confused.
1. how come his name is spelled 2 ways? In the king james version it is spelled melchisedek.
2. who wrote the book of hebrews or wrote the story of melchizedek. I am trying to find out about his parents but it says there is no documents on his parents, life or death. My pastor asked me to find out about his parents. Do you think this is a trick question? It doesn't even state where he was born.

Can you help me get a better understanding of this please?

Hi Kanika,

Depending upon the Bible translation one uses, his name is spelled Melchisedech, Melchisedec, Melchizedek, or Melchisedek. In the original King James Version, it was spelled as Melchizedek in the Old Testament and Melchisedek in the New Testament. These variations in spelling are due to the Hebrew, Greek or Latin language that translators used in developing the Bible in English. His name is spelled in other ways in modern languages. The same is true even of the name of Jesus, which is spelled as Gesù in Italian, Yésua in Arabic, Yēsū in Chinese, Iisoús in Greek, and so on.

The letter to the Hebrews is anonymous. Some think it was written by the apostle Paul, and some think it was by Barnabus, but we can't know for sure. The oldest view seems to be Paul.

Yes, I think your pastor has asked you a trick question. The Bible itself says Melchizedek is "without father, without mother, without genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life." That simply means there is no way to know who his parents were, since they are not mentioned in the Bible anywhere.

Thanks for asking, and I hope this is helpful.

Yes and thank you so much.

Can you explain one more thing to me? I was reading and this came up.

The Second Book of Enoch (also called "Slavonic Enoch") is apparently a Jewish sectarian work of the 1st century CE.[2] The last section of the work, the Exaltation of Melchizedek, tells how Melchizedek was born of a virgin, Sofonim (or Sopanima), the wife of Nir, a brother of Noah. The child came out from his mother after she had died and sat on the bed beside her corpse, already physically developed, clothed, speaking and blessing the Lord, and marked with the badge of priesthood. Forty days later, Melchizedek was taken by the archangel Gabriel (Michael in some manuscripts) to the Garden of Eden and was thus preserved from the Deluge without having to be in Noah's Ark.

What do you think this is means?

If we believe the Bible, we know that the flood was global and would have inundated the area where Eden was once located. Noah did not have a brother or sister-in-law who survived the global flood. There are many stories from ancient times that offer no help in understanding the Bible. These stories originated among people and tribes who worshiped demon gods, so obviously many of such stories originate with demon worship and not with worship of the true God. If the writer was indeed a Jew of the first century, we know he was not inspired since the Jews had been rejected by God who was now dealing with the disciples of Jesus by means of the holy spirit and the writings of the apostles and other first-century Christians.

All the best.

Thanks frank, you're the best!!!