leauki posts

Scripture discloses that the institution of the New Covenant priests are not from one family, as was the Aaronic priesthood. The NC priesthood is a lasting priesthood, one "without father, without mother, without genealogy" Hebrews 7:3. The priests of the NC are now called "according to the order of Melchisedech," not according to the order of Aaron." 7:11, becasue the priesthood being translated, it is necessary that a translation also be made of the law." 7:12.

St.Paul goes on in chapter 8...

1 Now of the things spoken, the sum is: We have such an high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of majesty in the heavens;

2 A minister of the holies, and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord hath pitched, and not man.

3 For every high priest is appointed to offer gifts and sacrifices: wherefore it is necessary that he also should have something to offer:

4 If then he were on earth, he would not be a priest: seeing there would be others who should offer gifts according to the law,

5 Who serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things. As it was answered to Moses, when he was to finish the tabernacle: See* (saith he) that thou make all things according to the pattern which was shewn thee on the mount.

6 But now he hath obtained a better ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better testament, which is established on better promises.

7 For if the former had been faultless, there should not indeed a place have been sought for a second.

8 For finding fault with them, he saith: *Behold, the days shall come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new testament with the house of Israel and with the house of Juda,

9 Not according to the testament which I made with their fathers, on the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt: for they continued not in my testament: and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.

10 For this is the testament, which I will make to the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord: I will give my laws into their mind, and I will write them in their heart: and I will be their God, and they shall be my people:

11 And they shall not teach every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying: Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest of them:

12 Because I will be merciful to their iniquities, and their sins I will remember no more.

13 Now in saying a new, he hath made the former old. And that which decayeth and groweth old, is near its end.

KFC posts:

Christ institued the priesthood and the Holy Mass at the Last Supper. Just as was the OC priesthood, the NC priesthood are ordained to offer Sacrifice to God. The NC priesthood is reaffirmed by St,Paul here in Hebrews 8.

Start with v. 3, which says all high priests are ordained to offer up to God some gifts and sacrifices....Christ our Eternal High Priest is in Heaven, and His priests on earth are, on the infinite merits and satisfaction of CHrist'd death and passion, offering up to God gifts and sacrifices in His name. The daily sacrifice of the Holy Mass all over the world from sun up to sun set is foretold by Malachais, 1:10-11. Malachais is describing "the clean oblation" first offered by Melchisedech, a priest, who offered to God sacrifice under the form of bread and wine. In St.John 6 Christ told His followers that He is the Bread of Life promising the Eucharist. We know Psalm 109 predicted Christ would be a priest "accodring to the order of Melchisedech, that is offering a sacrifice in bread and wine. The Holy Mass fits the bill and CHrist instituted the Holy Mass at the Last Supper when He said, of the bread and wine, this is My Body, this is My Blood, given for you....take and eat ....do this for a  commemoraton of Me.

In Verse 4 and 5 St.Paul tells us that Christ could not be a priest according to Judaism becasue He was of the tribe of Juda and not of Levi. He also tells us that the priesthood and its functions of the sacrifices under the Old Mosaic law were shadows of the heavenly things in the New Covenant becasue of Christ's Sacrifice on the Cross.

Verse 6 is that Christ has obtained a more excellent ministry, priesthood, a mediator between God and man. The priesthood brings greater graces and blessings.      

None of that even begins to answer my question.

I didn't want to know why Catholic priests see themselves as priests of the type of Melchizedek rather than Aaron, I wanted to know how Melchizedek could have been a legitimate priest if his religion was not divinely inspires and priestly.

Investigating further I found that the Greek word for "priest" (in the "kohen" sense) is ιερέας (iereas?).

And then I ran into this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priest#Terminology

The English word priest is ultimately from Latin presbyter, the term for "elder", especially elders of Jewish or Christian communities in Late Antiquity. [...] This word did not refer to a religious function, the word for "priest" being Latin sacerdos, Greek hiereus.

(It's apparently "hiereus".)

No, Lula, I don't think you can make the case that the New Testament speaks of "priests" in the kohen sense based on the coincidence that Germanic languages used a Greek word meaning "elder" to mean what is "hiereus" in Greek.

If we were discussing this same issue here in any non-Germanic (or possibly non-European) language, that coincidence wouldn't even have occured to us and would never have become an argument at all.

(I really love how lingustics can be used to prove or disprove theories about historic events!)

For what it's worth, I checked my Hebrew "New Testamant" and the word used is "zeqnim". It means "old", "oldster", "grandfather", "scholar", "wise man".

This doesn't prove anything except that whoever translated the Greek into Hebrew (I assume they started from the Greek), didn't think the word should be "kohen" (priest).

The short answer is Melchisedech belongs to a priesthood established by God in pre-Mosaic times. So Melchisedech's priesthood was Divinely inspired.

The long answer....

We know something about Melchisedech from reading Genesis 14:18-20; Ps. 75 (76):3; and 109 (110):4; and Hebrews 5:6-10; 7:1-17.

Melchisedech (Heb. melki-sedeq, my king is justice, or (the god) Sedec is my king) was Priest-King of Salem.

From Genesis we learn that Melchisedech was v.18, "the priest of the Most High God", 19 blessed him and said, "Blessed be Abram, by the most High God who created heaven and earth. 20 And blessed be the Most High God by whose protection the enemies are in thy hands. ...."

Melchisedech was a priest of the one true God. He had knowledge of God....He was El-Elyon, the Most High God which is the same name as Abraham's God.

The Catholic Encyclopedia has

[Gr. Melchisedek , from the Hebrew meaning "King of righteousness (Gesenius)] was King of Salem (Gen. xiv, 18-20) who, on Abraham's return with the booty taken from the four kings, "bringing forth bread and wine, for he was the priest of the most high God, blessed him", and received from him "the tithes of all" (v. 20). Josephus, with many others, identifies Salem with Jerusalem, and adds that Melchisedech "supplied Abram's army in a hospitable manner, and gave them provisions in abundance. . .and when Abram gave him the tenth part of his prey, he accepted the gift" (Ant., I, x, 2).

The Jewish historian Flavius Josephesus 37-100AD, refers to Melchisedech as a "prince of Canaan" who founded and was high priest of Jerusalem.

Besides Josephesus, we can link Salem to Jerusalem and connect Melchisedech as an ancient predecessor of David in Jerusalem.  

In Psalm 75 (76):2-3, Salem is paralled to Sion (Jerusalem, the ancient Jebusite city captured only centuries later by David).  Also, in the days of the Israelite invasion of Canaan the name of the ruler of Jerusalem was Adonisedec. Note the similiarity of his name...Heb. adoni-sedeq, my lord is justice, or (the god) Sedeq is my lord.  

The act of Abram's paying tithes to the priest of Jerusalem provides the historical antecedent to accept David and David's priest Sadoc as successors of Melchisedech to whom their father Abraham gave tithes.

This is the link that allows the later development seen in Psalm 109 (110):4. This Psalm commemorates the accession of some unknown successor of David (Christ), to the throne of Jerusalem. David became King of Jerusalem where Melchisedech had ruled, so the Psalmist says the later Davidic King (Christ) became "a priest according to the order of Melchisedech" by his accession. Following the promise of Nathan to David, the messianic hopes of Israel were expressed in terms of the Davidic line, and so Melchisedech entered this sacred plan.

Psalm 110:4 adds fuirther revelation to that of Genesis....the promised Messias, a descendant of David, will not only be a King, which they already knew, but also a Priest and He will not be a priest of Aaron.  He will be a priest by a new dispostion of God, according to the Hebrew text of St.Paul "after the manner of Melchisedech".

Where do you get that?

All I get from my Hebrew and Aramaic dictionaries is meanings related to "priest", "service", "perform (rites)", "be enriched", and "flourish". Where would "bridge" or "guardian" come in?

since a half truth is a whole lie, I have to call this a lie Lula.  Yes, Timothy was young.  An elder was one who was mature in the faith.  It's not speaking about fleshly youth but spiritual maturity.  It's a physical word used for a spiritual meaning.  Timothy was an elder.  Young in the flesh but mature in the spirit.  He was NOT A PRIEST.  He was an elder.  Big diff.  If he were a priest then the Greek word for priest would have been used as it is elsewhere.  It was not.  For good reason that you just can't accept. 

no, that can't be true because we are called the priesthood of believers both by John and Peter.  And they used the word Priests then.  The writer to the Hebrews also used the word priests.  There is a definition purpose in their using of these two words.  To argue is to argue against the one who breathed the words.  You need to take it up with God. 

You're not understanding the whole concept Lula.  You're stuck on the physical "priest" and not on the whole concept of what God was doing here.

Moses was given a blueprint for the tabernacle where God would dwell among His people until a more permanent house could be built in Jerusalem.  Everything in the temple had significance.  In order to understand the purpose of the tabernacle (and priests) we need to go all the way back to Genesis where we read that the Lord used to walk with Adam and Eve in Eden showing the close intimate fellowship they enjoyed with the Creaor before sin entered in.  After that Adam and Eve were banished from the immediate presence of God and since that day the goal of salvation has been to restore that face to face communion between God and His people. 

The tabernacle was the vehicle thru which God manifested His presence among Israel and later Solomon's Temple.  His presence would fill first the tabernacle and later the Temple.  Now the people had a tent/Temple where they could meet the Creator.  It still did not go far enugh.  Sin had not yet been atoned for and only a select few (priests) could enter into the tabernacle and enjoy God's presence.  Once sin had been atoned for all had access to God, not only the priests. 

The Jerusalem Temple did fall but Christ is the true temple in whom we now meet.  In Christ we have access to the holy place in heaven where we can commune with God.  Just as the tabernacle reminded Israel of God's presence so too does the cross remind us that have access to the Lord.  No longer are priests needed to mediate us because Christ now is our mediator. 

God has met us face to face in Christ and we can be assured that He will never leave the temple that He is building in His son with us as living stones (1 Peter 2).  We are now part of the holy temple that God is making His church to be. 

That's why John wrote "and has made us kings and priests to God"...Rev 1:6

"and has made us unto our God kings and priests and we shall reign on the earth."  5:10

The true temple is NOT in the stones and beauty of Jerusalem's worship center but in the resurrected body of Jesus.  We are now the priesthood of believers. 

Just as the original Paradise was a place where man and God communed together so the ultimate paradise is a place of eternal communion between man and God thru Christ.  That's why the veil was torn down.  Full access to the throne. 

Therefore, Priests are no longer needed.  That's why elders were named instead. 

at the risk of repeating myself (yet again) I can see once you put in Luther (as your attack) you've lost the argument.  I've consistently only given you scripture by going to the original language while you constantly go to man's opinion.  You give us RCC commentaries or homilies to back up your argument totally ignoring what is right in front of you.  When I get you into a corner, using ONLY scripture you lash out with the "L" word.   Time and time again you do this.  Convenient Lula. 

Not once, have I quoted Luther or used ANY of his writings in my defense of the gospel.  Not once have you successfully shown us where Christ has reinstated the priesthood. 

I'm done here. 

Who said that the "Old Mosaic Covenant" is no more?

We still have an Aaronic priesthood and Temple rites.

We just don't have a Temple at the moment.

1. Where does it say that in the Christian Bible?

2. How can it be a priesthood to the manner of Melchizedek when you told us earlier that Judaism (and not Melchizedek's religion) was the first priestly and divine religion?

And a tautology is something that is tautological.

"All those who admit the reality that it is" must be the most curious and pointless authority I have ever been told about.

What about commandments 11 to 613? Do you eat pork?

Either way, those commandments for the Jewish people. You don't have to worry about them.

And yes, they are in effect and will be until the end of time.

First, where does the JE say that? Second, the JE is not a religious authority.

Third, Phannias was not the last priest, he was the last High Priest. And he wasn't even from a priestly family.

The priesthood still exists and the Samaritans still have a High Priest.

You really shouldn't pretend to speak for other people or religions if you don't even know these things!

Quote the exact statement in the NT that claims to create a new priesthood (based on whatever priesthood you want).

But make sure the NT really mentions priests this time, and not elders.

I am not reading through a large collection of irrelevant quotes. Just quote the very sentence that established the priesthood.

I know. That's a given. What I wanted to know is how he could have been a real priest when you said that Judaism (founded 500 years later) was the _first_ priestly and divine religion.

Either Melchizedek was a real priest and his religion was priestly and divine.

Or Judaism was the first priestly and divine religion and Melchizedek was not a priest.

You decide.

Alas! KFC is at it again...she's deleted 2 of my comments on her blog "The End of the Age" and accused me of hi-jacking it.