• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The Truth About Melchizedek

Ben Masada

Well-Known Member
Amen, Ben, good post. I too have had many conversations concerning the king of Salem and the "Order of Melchizedek". With one mention in scripture and making this into a superhero, I don't know maybe it is "Straining at a gnat and swallowing a camel."
JMHO, but you give Sha'ul too much noterity, he wasn't the author of RT. this came with the destruction of all the Hebrew texts written by the apostles.
Otherwise all you have written here is very good.

Shalom

Shalom Ronald, have you ever read Galatians 4:21-31? He compares the Sinaitic Covenant with Hagar the slave woman, and the Jews to her son Ishmael. Then, he compares his new covenant with Sara, the free woman and his Christians with Isaac. At the end, he urges to cast out the slave woman with her son altogether because they are not supposed to share the inheritance of the Kingdom of God with Christianity. This is what I call Replacement Theology. And I wonder why so many Jews are going for such a nonsense. Hosea was right when he declared that "My People perish for lack of knowledge." (Hosea 4:6)
 

Ben Masada

Well-Known Member
Before the levitical priesthood, the eldest tribal member usually filled the office of family priest. Many theologians believe Melchisidec was Shem, Noahs son. Shem would have been alive at this time according to scripture. And Shem would have been the oldest living member of Abraham's tribe.


According to the Scriptures! Please, show me where it is written that Shem would have been alive at this time. IMHO, apart from Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and the 12 Tribes who came from Jacob, anyone else was a pagan. Priests among them there were, but pagan priests. Only the Patriarchs were priests of the Most High God, until the Levite Priesthood was established with Aaron as the first priest. Melchizedek as a priest of the Most High was a Pauline gloss with the intent to introduce Jesus whom he made a Christ of in Antioch, (Acts 11:26) and whom he made a priest according to Melchizedek with the intent to discard the Levitical priesthood. That's Replacement Theology.
 

kylixguru

Well-Known Member
Yes, and he didn't mess with Abram for two reasons: First, because he was afraid to lose Jerusalem; and second, because he acknowledged in Abram the Priest of God, the Most High. And then, a pagan king, the max persona for the justice Arcane in Persona 3? Not even in his dreams!
Answer me this. Who was Tamar? A heathen grand-daughter of a heathen king or a choice heir from the son of Noah?
 

Pegg

Jehovah our God is One
Yes, I said to one of them, but they preach Replacement Theology to the whole world as they distort the image of Judaism in the process. Why do you care? he said. Just stay Jewish yourself and leave them alone.


he sounds like a wise man... another jewish priest is reported to have said the same thing in the first century

Acts 5:34 But a certain man rose in the San′he‧drin, a Pharisee named Ga‧ma′li‧el, a Law teacher esteemed by all the people, and gave the command to put the men outside for a little while. 35 And he said to them: “Men of Israel, pay attention to yourselves as to what YOU intend to do respecting these men. 36 For instance, before these days Theu′das rose, saying he himself was somebody, and a number of men, about four hundred, joined his party. But he was done away with, and all those who were obeying him were dispersed and came to nothing. 37 After him Judas the Gal‧i‧le′an rose in the days of the registration, and he drew off people after him. And yet that man perished, and all those who were obeying him were scattered abroad. 38 And so, under the present circumstances, I say to YOU, Do not meddle with these men, but let them alone; (because, if this scheme or this work is from men, it will be overthrown; 39 but if it is from God, YOU will not be able to overthrow them otherwise, YOU may perhaps be found fighters actually against God.” 40 At this they gave heed to him, and they summoned the apostles, flogged them, and ordered them to stop speaking upon the basis of Jesus’ name, and let them go.
 

Danmac

Well-Known Member
According to the Scriptures! Please, show me where it is written that Shem would have been alive at this time. IMHO, apart from Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and the 12 Tribes who came from Jacob, anyone else was a pagan. Priests among them there were, but pagan priests. Only the Patriarchs were priests of the Most High God, until the Levite Priesthood was established with Aaron as the first priest. Melchizedek as a priest of the Most High was a Pauline gloss with the intent to introduce Jesus whom he made a Christ of in Antioch, (Acts 11:26) and whom he made a priest according to Melchizedek with the intent to discard the Levitical priesthood. That's Replacement Theology.


According to Bible figures:
• It was 1,656 years from Adam to the Flood; 427 years from the Flood to Abraham.
• Adam's life overlapped Methuselah's by 243 years.
• Methuselah's life overlapped Noah's by 600 years, Shem's by 98 years.
• There were 126 years between the death of Adam and the birth of Noah.
• Noah lived 350 years after the Flood; he died two years before birth of Abraham.
• Shem lived from 98 years before the Flood until 502 years after the Flood.
• Shem lived until 75 years after Abraham entered Canaan.
• Noah lived to see the 9th generation of his own descendants.
 
Last edited:

Ben Masada

Well-Known Member
According to Bible figures:
• It was 1,656 years from Adam to the Flood; 427 years from the Flood to Abraham.
• Adam's life overlapped Methuselah's by 243 years.
• Methuselah's life overlapped Noah's by 600 years, Shem's by 98 years.
• There were 126 years between the death of Adam and the birth of Noah.
• Noah lived 350 years after the Flood; he died two years before birth of Abraham.
• Shem lived from 98 years before the Flood until 502 years after the Flood.
• Shem lived until 75 years after Abraham entered Canaan.
• Noah lived to see the 9th generation of his own descendants.


You haven't proved anything. Not a single quotation to verify your assertions. Anyways, there is no need. It was a tradition among the Eastern tribes, Hebrews or not, to exaggerate the age of their Patriarchs as a honor and respect to be paid them. On the contrary, that was a time when life was rather too short by comparison to today's longevity. For example, Abraham was about 60 and Sara 50 when Abraham had that vision with angels in human form came to inform him about the birth of Isaac and what was about to happen to sodom. So, there is no way Shem was still alive by the time of Abraham. No one could have ever lived more than 100 years. To live a long life at that time was a sign of great respect. And long life was figured about from 70 to 100 years.
 
Last edited:

Ben Masada

Well-Known Member
he sounds like a wise man... another jewish priest is reported to have said the same thing in the first century

Acts 5:34 But a certain man rose in the San′he‧drin, a Pharisee named Ga‧ma′li‧el, a Law teacher esteemed by all the people, and gave the command to put the men outside for a little while. 35 And he said to them: “Men of Israel, pay attention to yourselves as to what YOU intend to do respecting these men. 36 For instance, before these days Theu′das rose, saying he himself was somebody, and a number of men, about four hundred, joined his party. But he was done away with, and all those who were obeying him were dispersed and came to nothing. 37 After him Judas the Gal‧i‧le′an rose in the days of the registration, and he drew off people after him. And yet that man perished, and all those who were obeying him were scattered abroad. 38 And so, under the present circumstances, I say to YOU, Do not meddle with these men, but let them alone; (because, if this scheme or this work is from men, it will be overthrown; 39 but if it is from God, YOU will not be able to overthrow them otherwise, YOU may perhaps be found fighters actually against God.” 40 At this they gave heed to him, and they summoned the apostles, flogged them, and ordered them to stop speaking upon the basis of Jesus’ name, and let them go.


In no way, absolutely, I would compare what that Rabbi told me with what Gamaliel advised the authorities not to interfere with the disciples of Jesus. The Rabbi today spoke out of fear because we have lost thousands of Jews throughout History to Christianity through pogroms, blood libels, Christian Crusades, Christian Inquisition and last but not least, the Holocaust. How can you compare today with the First Century? No religious institution in the History of the world has killed more Jews than Christianity.
 

Ben Masada

Well-Known Member
Please answer who Tamar is.

You know, the young woman who Judah bore twins through.

Who was she?


Tamar was probably one of Judah's nieces, since at that time females of the families of the Patriarchs or of the Israelites were not taken into account. But, I am sure they were as numerous as the boys. Tamar could have been one of the family, because she had the right to demand that the law of Yibbum be fulfilled. That is, the law that gave a widow the right to be taken in marriage by the brother of her dead husband if she had been left without children. (Deut. 25:5)
 

Ben Masada

Well-Known Member
Answer me this. Who was Tamar? A heathen grand-daughter of a heathen king or a choice heir from the son of Noah?


I have answered above in post #50. I don't think she was either of the options you present here in this post of yours. If you insist that you are right, please, quote the Scriptures. I usually don't take people's word for it.
Ben
 

kylixguru

Well-Known Member
I have answered above in post #50. I don't think she was either of the options you present here in this post of yours. If you insist that you are right, please, quote the Scriptures. I usually don't take people's word for it.
Ben
In post #50 you blathered out unsubstantiated assertions.

Here are some references that perhaps you will benefit from knowing.

"And Melchizedek is Shem, the son of Noah." (Talmud, Tr. Nedarim 32)
"Tamar was the daughter of Shem, [who is] identified with Melchizedek king of Salem, Priest of God the Most High. (Midrash Rabbah, Vol.2, Soncino Press translation, 1983, p. 796)
For additional references to Melchizedek = Shem in the Oral Torah see also: 1) Jerusalem Targum on Genesis 14:18; 2) Midrash 126b; 3) Talmud, Tr. Nedarim 32b; 4) Martin Buber, Midrash Agada, fn. 18, p. 30.


I believe that Melchizedek was indeed Shem, son of Noah. Tamar was his daughter/grandaughter.
 

Ben Masada

Well-Known Member
In post #50 you blathered out unsubstantiated assertions.

Here are some references that perhaps you will benefit from knowing.

"And Melchizedek is Shem, the son of Noah." (Talmud, Tr. Nedarim 32)
"Tamar was the daughter of Shem, [who is] identified with Melchizedek king of Salem, Priest of God the Most High. (Midrash Rabbah, Vol.2, Soncino Press translation, 1983, p. 796)
For additional references to Melchizedek = Shem in the Oral Torah see also: 1) Jerusalem Targum on Genesis 14:18; 2) Midrash 126b; 3) Talmud, Tr. Nedarim 32b; 4) Martin Buber, Midrash Agada, fn. 18, p. 30.


I believe that Melchizedek was indeed Shem, son of Noah. Tamar was his daughter/grandaughter.


Since we returned from exile in Babylon, we have been under the New Covenant, according to Jeremiah 31:31. According to this Covenant, we are no longer to be taught or under the obligation to adopt the opinions of any other people even if they are or were the wisest among even the Jews. The Word of God has since then been written in our own hearts and not in tables of stone. (Jer. 31:34) Before that exile I could blindly accept the opinion of another man. Now, no more. God's Word is not in heaven or beyond the sea that we should wonder who will go up to heaven or across the sea to bring it to us so that we can obey it. It has been so close to us as our own heart and eyes. We have only to reach for it and do it. (Deut. 30:11-14) It means that, if it is not in the Scriptures, and I mean the Tanakh, don't waste your time with extra-Biblical quotations because I am under no obligation to accept other people's opinions on the matter. I also have a mind of my own.
 

kylixguru

Well-Known Member
Since we returned from exile in Babylon, we have been under the New Covenant, according to Jeremiah 31:31. According to this Covenant, we are no longer to be taught or under the obligation to adopt the opinions of any other people even if they are or were the wisest among even the Jews. The Word of God has since then been written in our own hearts and not in tables of stone. (Jer. 31:34) Before that exile I could blindly accept the opinion of another man. Now, no more. God's Word is not in heaven or beyond the sea that we should wonder who will go up to heaven or across the sea to bring it to us so that we can obey it. It has been so close to us as our own heart and eyes. We have only to reach for it and do it. (Deut. 30:11-14) It means that, if it is not in the Scriptures, and I mean the Tanakh, don't waste your time with extra-Biblical quotations because I am under no obligation to accept other people's opinions on the matter. I also have a mind of my own.
You are not under a new covenant. You were handed Aholah's cup when you predictably rejected your Messiah. You are in exile and have been since Masada. Your fate is tied in with the fate of those of the northern kingdom. Your redeption into the new covenant won't take place until after Joseph's takes place and he comes to rouse you up and gather you as the new Moses. All of this can be established firmly with only the Tanakh. Thus, you are obliged to consider it in all gravity.
 

Danmac

Well-Known Member
You haven't proved anything. Not a single quotation to verify your assertions. Anyways, there is no need. It was a tradition among the Eastern tribes, Hebrews or not, to exaggerate the age of their Patriarchs as a honor and respect to be paid them. On the contrary, that was a time when life was rather too short by comparison to today's longevity. For example, Abraham was about 60 and Sara 50 when Abraham had that vision with angels in human form came to inform him about the birth of Isaac and what was about to happen to sodom. So, there is no way Shem was still alive by the time of Abraham. No one could have ever lived more than 100 years. To live a long life at that time was a sign of great respect. And long life was figured about from 70 to 100 years.


The figures I gave you are taken from the king james bible. Where are you getting your figures?
 

Ben Masada

Well-Known Member
The figures I gave you are taken from the king james bible. Where are you getting your figures?


The KJV of the Bible is an adulerated version translated by redactors based on Christian pre-conceived notions, whose intent was to promote the Pauline policy of Replacement Theology.

I was married here in Israel with a Yemenite lady, the daughter of a Yemanite Rabbi, the father of nine children, who did not know or chose not to know when they had been born. And to any question about their age, the answer was "Ad 120 bezrat HaShem!" Then, he told me that it was forbidden to calculate the age of a Jew. You know, a superstition among them that by calculating the yeas of one's life the years to live are decreased. Then, he showed me an old book about the respect to old age by exaggerating their age to numbers beyond reality.
 

Ben Masada

Well-Known Member
You are not under a new covenant. You were handed Aholah's cup when you predictably rejected your Messiah. You are in exile and have been since Masada. Your fate is tied in with the fate of those of the northern kingdom. Your redeption into the new covenant won't take place until after Joseph's takes place and he comes to rouse you up and gather you as the new Moses. All of this can be established firmly with only the Tanakh. Thus, you are obliged to consider it in all gravity.


I have no problem with considering and being considered only within the Tanakh, but according to Judaism and not Mormonism. You are a Christian and that's how you should live your life. Obey the Noahide laws and every thing will be okay with you. Jesus was not my Messiah, and neither was he yours. Your Messiah was Paul, who organized Christianity since the day he founded it in Antioch, about 30 years after Jesus had been gone. (Acts 11:26)
 
Last edited:

kylixguru

Well-Known Member
I have no problem with considering and being considered only within the Tanakh, but according to Judaism and not Mormonism.
The Tanakh says what it says whether a Mormon or Jew is reading it. If you are unwilling to have a dialog with me about the Tanakh just because I had a Mormon upbringing, how can you justify this as non-bigotry?

You are a Christian and that's how you should live your life. Obey the Noahide laws and every thing will be okay with you.
I didn't appoint you to be my judge. I know who I am and what laws are binding upon me.

Jesus was not my Messiah, and neither was he yours.
He came as a divine advent of God with a very specific role to fulfill that my salvation and your salvation depended upon. Before God could receive Israel as His Bride again, she had to be released from the law of her husband. God had to come to earth in the flesh and be put to death. By way of His death, we were freed from the requirements of the law and able to be remarried to God in a new covenant.

Until this took place, any man (or God) taking Israel to be a wife in a covenant would be counted as an adulterer. This is why both Assyria and Babylon were destroyed. They were the "men" with whom the "two sisters" (Aholah and Aholibah) committed adultery. They too were put to death according to the law.

Had Aholah's cup not been decreed to be given into Aholibah's hands to drink deep and wide from, Judah would have been eligible to be established as a sovereign political entity under the legitimate kingship Jesus was qualified to perform on their behalf. But, there is a larger scale plot entwined in all of this that you seem to not understand.

Your Messiah was Paul, who organized Christianity since the day he founded it in Antioch, about 30 years after Jesus had been gone. (Acts 11:26)
Ben, I do not identify myself as a Christian or as a Mormon. I reject the vast majority of what they believe, as they believe it. Very few people even understand Paul. He was one individual who understood things as I do because at some point he caught the vision of the larger scale plot that I am talking about. I could establish the truth of all my points without a single reference to Paul's writings.

You are simply in denial of a good many things that you appear unwilling to have a dialog about. You do not have strict integrity to what is in the Tanakh. Rather, you have adopted a perspective that props up a Jew-centered world at the expense of the rightful place of the scattered kin of the northern kingdom and your birthright brother Joseph who sits in a seat of power you know not of, but who could save you once you realize your soul is dead and in need of some nourishment that could bring it back to life.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Danmac

Well-Known Member
The KJV of the Bible is an adulerated version translated by redactors based on Christian pre-conceived notions, whose intent was to promote the Pauline policy of Replacement Theology.

I was married here in Israel with a Yemenite lady, the daughter of a Yemanite Rabbi, the father of nine children, who did not know or chose not to know when they had been born. And to any question about their age, the answer was "Ad 120 bezrat HaShem!" Then, he told me that it was forbidden to calculate the age of a Jew. You know, a superstition among them that by calculating the yeas of one's life the years to live are decreased. Then, he showed me an old book about the respect to old age by exaggerating their age to numbers beyond reality.

so are you telling me that we do not have the tanakh as part of our KJV bible?
 

Danmac

Well-Known Member
You are simply in denial of a good many things that you appear unwilling to have a dialog about. You do not have strict integrity to what is in the Tanakh. Rather, you have adopted a perspective that props up a Jew-centered world at the expense of the rightful place of the scattered kin of the northern kingdom and your birthright brother Joseph who sits in a seat of power you know not of, but who could save you once you realize your soul is dead and in need of some nourishment that could bring it back to life.
Wow! We need more Christians with that kind of theology. Frubals to you sir.
 
Top