Was Melchisedec the Pre-incarnate Christ?

Dor...thanks for the clarification on the Mormon use of the Melchizedek title and its meaning. So it is used with regard to the rank and file as opposed to the heirarchy? That is interesting.

Juan...As you know I don't view the bible as an historical work but rather as a compendium of literature, that is and was divinely inspired, but a collection of works that points to certain truths rather than rendering them to us as literal truths. In short it is always open to interpretation in every ensuing generation. Great literature, such as the Bible, cannot be fixed in time but must grow in meaning with the needs of humanity in the present. Thanks for your interest in my approach.

Chris...Thank you for your very interesting analysis from Wiki on the origins of the Zedek concept. So if I read what you posted correctly, the Zedek name is likely specifically connected with the oldest place names for Jerusalem. The ancients placed great value and importance in place names as this was one of the first conditions used to facilitate the changes from nomadic communities into permanently placed communities.

As I mentioned elsewhere, if it is true, as some scholars believe, that the portable tabernacle from the desert was housed inside of the first Jerusalem Temple, then this would be another indicator of the Hebrew tribe's transition from nomadic status to permanence in this specific place since they believed to be nearest to their G-d in this place, and not just in any particular stucture.

As I said earlier there must have been something very special to the ancients about the mount upon which Jews, Christians , and now Muslims have built such a great part of their histories and traditions. Evidently, the spiritual presence of the Zedek Deity was so dominant and prevalent in this place that it took precedence over all others, especially so with the onset of the Melchizedek priesthood.

Wil et all... as Juan observed my approach is different from traditional interpretations of the Deity phenomenon throughout time, but as you all have observed, there is some sort of consistent pattern to all these contacts with humanity over time as described in the Bible. Yes, I believe that Jesus lived in the flesh 2,000 years ago, but after death his spirit likely became the first time traveler, going backwards and forwards in time to accomplish G-d's ultimate plans and purposes through the actions of those in whom He chose to dwell. As I said, it's pretty crazy on the face of it, but it works for me. Kinda' reminds me of one of my favorite TV programs of all time, Quantum Leap.

flow....;)
 
wil said:
It seems this line of thought is far from conventional. (Makes sense it would appeal to me then, yes?)

It causes us to change the old testament to fit the new paradigm...ie Jesus said, Jesus doesn't lie, therefor....and then a new line of thought exists...

All those folks that thought they saw G-d are now mistaken, corrected, or are they is it just that this interpretation indicates that when G-d crosses the boundary of the heavenly plane and the earthly one and is visible with our eyes in this light...it is the Christ we see.

The book of Enoch...out or in...would that be Christ with him too? if so, guess so...

So the unseeable, unknowable needs to wrap itself in something (burning bush etc. for us to see and that something when in human form is the Christ...

In trying to get my mind wrapped around this one...which really seems a stretch mostly because it is coming from not my 'what if, let's explore' friends, but from my 'this is the way it is' brothers and sisters... so what really confuses me now is we can take and modify, interpret to this point...but contemplating the thought that it wasn't Christ, but their higher selves, that they talked with, wrestled with, walked with is out of the question? Even if their higher selves is their Christ self? I see this thinking sooo very right next to my understanding that I can't identify the line between them that makes this plausable, acceptable, required even (as otherwise Jesus would have been telling an untruth..) yet my thinking is unacceptable, herecy, blasphemous?

Thank you so much for your patience with me here.

Im not quite sure how your twisting this around in your head.. so Im just going to say that the bible was written about Jesus... the OT is leading up to the gospel of Jesus Christ. It sets the way for an acceptance of Jesus as our Messiah.and showing us how to be free from a condemning law and how we are justified by faith.

The joy for some us Christians in reading the OT is looking for Jesus in it.. Even the levitical books.. oh my goodness...all the laws on sacrificing and priesthood.. doesnt anyone realize that we accepting Christ as Lord and Savior of your life puts US in the priesthood? That we are told to be holy as God is holy..what makes for holiness is sacrificing we are told how to sacrifice in the NT under the new covenant...

There are no "higher" selves in my bible.. no "christ" selves other than our born again new creation status.. We are all sinners born again by the grace of God. We are dead in the flesh and made alive in the Spirit.. my bible says that we are dead unless we accept the gift of salvation... and that means accepting Christ as the Way the Truth and the LIFE. The OT people were justified by faith because they accepted God with Faith.. The same way we are justified by faith because we believed in the Lord Jesus Christ.

Your thinking is blasphemous to me because you are leaving out the diety of Jesus Christ... You are replacing my God with yourself... You are worshipping another god...Yourself. But your a sinner like Im a sinner and I love you and continue to pray for you and others that I have come to know on this forum.. because thats what Jesus told us to do.. Love everyone as He has loved me. How can I do less....I live to please Him.
 
Faithfulservant said:
... doesnt anyone realize that we accepting Christ as Lord and Savior of your life puts US in the priesthood? That we are told to be holy as God is holy.....
Namaste FS, see, this is where I am stuck poe-tay-toe, poe-tah-toe, toe-may-toe, toe-mah-toe.

You say we are to be holy as G-d is holy...I see that Christ is holy as G-d is holy (ie one in the same) I say higher self or Christ self as something to be attained...I don't see the difference.

You say you look through the old testament to see Christ, I look in you to see Christ. I see us as expressions of G-d sometimes heavily vieled curtains closed, but inside their somewhere is the presence, is Christ waiting, waiting, waiting to come out.

I don't worship another G-d, I don't worship myself or others. It is so complete so all encompassing, I just don't see the difference.
 
Back
Top