Questions and Answers
“Was Melchizedek really never born, and did he die?”
After introducing Melchizedek, king of Salem (i.e., Jerusalem), to us, the writer of Hebrews gives this mysterious description: “Without father, without mother, without genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life, but made like the Son of God…” (7:3). What are we to conclude from this? Was the writer speaking literally? Was Melchizedek really never born? Is he still alive today?
Melchizedek, a man who filled the role of both king and priest, appears in three important places in Scripture.
The first time we see him is in Genesis 14, after Abraham and his men have defeated Chedorlaomer and the kings who were with him over the kidnapping of Abraham’s nephew Lot. Hearing of these tidings, Melchizedek meets Abraham in the valley of Shaveh, bringing bread and wine for his famished army. Two significant gestures occur that make this encounter important to the inspired record. One, Melchizedek, a king but also “a priest of God Most High,” blesses Abraham. Two, Abraham, the father of all Jews, pays tithes to Melchizedek. Then, as quickly as he appeared, Melchizedek mysteriously vanishes into thin air.
We don’t read about the illustrious king-priest again until we get to a messianic psalm of David (Ps. 110). Here we read of the Messiah, “The Lord has sworn and will not change His mind, ‘You are a priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek’” (v. 4). All priests under the Law of Moses were of the Levitical order. But the Messiah’s priesthood would follow a different path, one leading back before Moses to the old king of Salem who blessed Father Abraham.
Finally, we come to the book of Hebrews, which has more to say about Melchizedek than any other book of the Bible. In chapter seven, the writer points out the two significant gestures mentioned earlier in the Genesis account—Melchizedek’s blessing and Abraham’s paying of tithes (7:6). Then this application is made:
But without any dispute the lesser is blessed by the greater. …And, so to speak, through Abraham even Levi, who received tithes, paid tithes, for he was still in the loins of his father when Melchizedek met him (7:7-10).
All these things make Melchizedek a perfect type of Christ. Like the Son of God, Melchizedek seemingly has no beginning or end, therefore he remains a priest perpetually (7:3). Also, having received tithes from Abraham, Melchizedek has proven his supremacy to the Jewish system of religion, as has Jesus Christ. Jesus is the fulfillment of Psalm 110:4, and the point the writer of Hebrews attempts to make is that He is a better high priest than any of the priests under the Law of Moses (8:6).
But what of the statement that Melchizedek had “neither beginning of days nor end of life?” It is my opinion that this is a figurative statement, spoken in the language of typology. Because the book of Genesis omits the information regarding Melchizedek’s origins, he becomes a fitting type of Jesus Christ, the eternal Son of God. We do not have to interpret the statement literally to reflect some unique, immortal condition belonging to Melchizedek. Guy N. Woods says,
These omissions of details, by the Holy Spirit, through the writer of Hebrews, were designed, so the sacred text informs us, as indisputable evidence of the superiority of the priesthood of Christ to that of Levi. Because of these omissions Melchizedek was a type of Christ—his priesthood a preview of the priesthood of Christ
Questions & Answers, vol. 1, p. 302
Let’s assume for a moment that the writer of Hebrew meant for his statement to be taken literally. Can we harmonize the implications of such a statement with the rest of the Bible? Melchizedek would not be human, for he would not have descended from Adam and Eve, the parents of the whole human family (Acts 17:26). Moreover, he would not even be created because he would have no beginning. This places the king in a position above man, above the angels, and equal to God Himself. The absurdity of this implication forces us to defer to another explanation.
The truth is, when reading typology, we must look for the point of the analogy. And the point, in this instance, is the supremacy of the high priesthood of Jesus Christ over that of the Levites under the Mosaical Law.
