Shem & Melchizedek

[daqq]

It's almost certainly correct. I don't know Heiser from Heineken, but I do know...

Every Middle Eastern city had a patron deity. Every king over a city had a regnal name commemorating them in relation to that deity. The kings of Babylon were Nabo-nidus, and Nebu-chadnezzar and Nabo-polassar, because Nebo was the patron god of Babylon during their dynasty.

That a dynastic successor of Melchizedek has a Tsedeq/Zedek/Zadok in their name is evidence enough to conclude the matter.

Now, remind me, who was High Priest under David? And whose priestly lineage was the most important among the Levites from that time down?

Hmmm, so you suppose that the line of Zadok refers back originally to the local god of the Canaanites just because the same basic root word with the same meaning is used in both ancient languages? There are those who claim to be righteous and just but are not or were not, (Canaanites), and then there are those who truly are or were, (Tzaddokim). However, I believe "Yithro", ("His Excellency"), Raguel was the dynastic successor to Melki-Tzedek, then Moshe married into that line by way of one of seven little birdies, (Tzipporah, the daughter of "His Excellency" Raguel), then of course Yhoshua ben Nun received the charge from the Father by way of the hands of Moshe and was placed before Eleazar and the congregation, and so on from there, (for the Melki-Tzedek Elohim Priesthood is above that of Ahron and the Leviim).

 

[Wick Stick]

Hmmm, so you suppose that the line of Zadok refers back originally to the local god of the Canaanites just because the same basic root word with the same meaning is used in both ancient languages? There are those who claim to be righteous and just but are not or were not, (Canaanites), and then there are those who truly are or were, (Tzaddokim).

Not just for that reason.

First, it probably bears saying that the "local god" attached to the city of Jerusalem, is the God. History will bear me out in this.

But I also see the entire Levitical priesthood as being part of the Canaanite camp. It fits the pattern... or rather, it is part of the pattern. For as much antipathy as there is in the Bible between Israelites and Canaanites (and their antitypes), they are so intertwined, from such an early point in the book, that they can only be told apart by their behavior, and that only in retrospect. The tares grow with the wheat, and are indistinguishable until harvest.

But since we are post-harvest for those priests, it should be a simple enough matter to look back on their works and see that the Priests and Levites, collectively, were never the wheat, and always the tares. From inception, the sons of Aaron were evil, and the Lord destroyed them. In reality, their entire priesthood was instituted by God (alongside the monarchy) as a punishment and a curse. They are there to lade the burden on those who seek to establish their own righteousness. They are Zadokites and Sadducees only in an ironic sense - the men who declared themselves righteous!

As regards both kings and priests, who are with few exceptions proven wicked, we find a pattern in those few exceptions. Only those who were brought in from outside, as replacements when the wicked were deposed, and the succession changed, are ever actually righteous. This to foretell the day when the Levitical priesthood would be diannulled, and replaced.

The truly righteous follow the concern of the prophets, who were in a state of perpetual antipathy with the priests.

However, I believe "Yithro", ("His Excellency"), Raguel was the dynastic successor to Melki-Tzedek, then Moshe married into that line by way of one of seven little birdies, (Tzipporah, the daughter of "His Excellency" Raguel), then of course Yhoshua ben Nun received the charge from the Father by way of the hands of Moshe and was placed before Eleazar and the congregation, and so on from there, (for the Melki-Tzedek Elohim Priesthood is above that of Ahron and the Leviim).

The Melchizedek priesthood belongs to the King of Salem/Jebus/Jerusalem. This is the only requirement, and the basis on which both David and Jesus laid claim to it. I believe the individuals you mentioned all fail to meet this requirement, unless there is something I am missing?

 

[daqq]

Not just for that reason.

First, it probably bears saying that the "local god" attached to the city of Jerusalem, is the God. History will bear me out in this.

But I also see the entire Levitical priesthood as being part of the Canaanite camp. It fits the pattern... or rather, it is part of the pattern. For as much antipathy as there is in the Bible between Israelites and Canaanites (and their antitypes), they are so intertwined, from such an early point in the book, that they can only be told apart by their behavior, and that only in retrospect. The tares grow with the wheat, and are indistinguishable until harvest.

But since we are post-harvest for those priests, it should be a simple enough matter to look back on their works and see that the Priests and Levites, collectively, were never the wheat, and always the tares. From inception, the sons of Aaron were evil, and the Lord destroyed them. In reality, their entire priesthood was instituted by God (alongside the monarchy) as a punishment and a curse. They are there to lade the burden on those who seek to establish their own righteousness. They are Zadokites and Sadducees only in an ironic sense - the men who declared themselves righteous!

As regards both kings and priests, who are with few exceptions proven wicked, we find a pattern in those few exceptions. Only those who were brought in from outside, as replacements when the wicked were deposed, and the succession changed, are ever actually righteous. This to foretell the day when the Levitical priesthood would be diannulled, and replaced.

The truly righteous follow the concern of the prophets, who were in a state of perpetual antipathy with the priests.


The Melchizedek priesthood belongs to the King of Salem/Jebus/Jerusalem. This is the only requirement, and the basis on which both David and Jesus laid claim to it. I believe the individuals you mentioned all fail to meet this requirement, unless there is something I am missing?

There are just about two of everything, (good and bad).

For instance Shalem-Yerushalem is this city:

Judges 1:1-8 KJV
1 Now after the death of Joshua it came to pass, that the children of Israel asked the LORD, saying, Who shall go up for us against the Canaanites first, to fight against them?
2 And the LORD said, Judah shall go up: behold, I have delivered the land into his hand.
3 And Judah said unto Simeon his brother, Come up with me into my lot, that we may fight against the Canaanites; and I likewise will go with thee into thy lot. So Simeon went with him.
4 And Judah went up; and the LORD delivered the Canaanites and the Perizzites into their hand: and they slew of them in Bezek ten thousand men.
5 And they found Adonibezek in Bezek: and they fought against him, and they slew the Canaanites and the Perizzites.
6 But Adonibezek fled; and they pursued after him, and caught him, and cut off his thumbs and his great toes.
7 And Adonibezek said, Threescore and ten kings, having their thumbs and their great toes cut off, gathered their meat under my table: as I have done, so God hath requited me. And they brought him to Jerusalem, and there he died.
8 Now the children of Judah had fought against Jerusalem, and had taken it, and smitten it with the edge of the sword, and set the city on fire.

But that Yerushalem is not the same as the one which belongs to Benyamin:

Judges 1:21 KJV
21 And the children of Benjamin did not drive out the Jebusites that inhabited Jerusalem; but the Jebusites dwell with the children of Benjamin in Jerusalem unto this day.

These are two different Yerushalemim, (<---yes, plural, lol), and the one which is famous is not the one which belongs to Yhudah but rather belongs to Benyamin and lies in the south at the borden of Yhudah and Benyamin in the south. But the one which is Salem-Shalem, (Peace), is found in the sides of the north and lies within the territory of Yhudah beyond Yarden. The entire setting of the events recorded in the Gospel accounts just dramatically changed locations if you search the scriptures and find this to be true and discover the massive implications, (and, yes, there are a few places where Yhudah beyond Yarden still appears in the Gospel accounts, for example Matthew 4:25, 19:1, Mark 10:1).

1 Chronicles 2:20-22
20 And Hur fathered Uri, and Uri fathered Bezaleel.
21 And afterward Hezron went in to the daughter of Machir the father of Gilead, and he took her when he was a son of sixty years. And she bore him Segub.
22 And Segub fathered Yair, who had twenty three cities in the land of Gilead.

Yes, Yhudah beyond Yarden, that is to say, the cities of Havoth-Yair. :chuckle:

 

[Caino]

Macaventia Melchizedek was an incarnate celestial being. He was on the earth for roughly 90 years on an emergency mission. It was this Melchizedek, the visible representative of God, who established the agreement with Abram. By the time of the writing of the Melchizedek narrative, the Hebrews no longer believed in the incarnation, so they had God coming down from heaven and dealing directly with Abram.

After the agreement with Melchizedek 3 celestial beings appeared to Abram at the trees of Mamre.

The Father fragment or Thought Adjuster that indwelt Melchizedek while on earth also indwelt Jesus while he was on his incarnate mission.