Kudos, Qu-innocence! You've definitely given me reason to question my belief regarding Melchizedek.I definitely agree that Mel was flesh & blood... The only way one can get actual flesh & blood is through human lineage... even God's Son had to be born of a woman in order to link in and identify completely with our humanity, as a flesh & blood individual.
Brother Lee Love wrote:
<quoted text> But, I find it extremely difficult to reconcile what's written of him.
Again, "Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life."
The author of the letter of Hebrews was simply trying to show his Jewish brothers how superior the Melchizedek priesthood was to the Levitical priesthood. To escape persecution, some Jews who had converted to believing in Jesus considered going back to the Law and adhere to it's precepts.. which includes all of the sacrifices, annual atonements and such. The persecution against Christians were pretty grievous. So anyways, the Melchizdekian priesthood wasn't limited to geneology of who can or cannot be a priest... and all the demanding qualifications like the levites were. The author is trying to show the Jews that, that foreshadowinig prophecy had come to pass through Jesus and that the Law would just put them in bondage again. Notice that Abraham gave tithes freely... under the law you had to give tithes or you were cursed with a curse. Outside the law, we freely give... we're not compelled to. I know that tithes is a small example, but if one was guilty of one point in the law they were guilty of the whole thing. So the whole point to them is, Jesus is our High Priest and knows exactly what we are going through and He is our one-time, one-size-fit-all atonement.
Now I'm typing really fast so please forgive my grammar and such.
So anyways, I believe Melchizedek, the one who met Abram was just a man who by providence was a King and Priest... and God used that example to foreshadow the real thing, which is Christ Jesus, the true High Priest for all.
Upon further investigation, based primarily on your post (above), I noticed that verse 6 says, "But he whose descent is not counted from them received tithes of Abraham, and blessed him that had the promises." Just the fact that in this verse, it uses the term "descent," we've no reason to believe that the use of the phrase "without descent" in verse 3 means that Melchizedek didn't descend from Adam. It's more than possible the author was speaking expressly about Melchizedek's office, which Melchizedek didn't inherit (so to speak). The author was, obviously, expressing the greater authority of Melchizedek compared to that of the Levites, which descended from the same cherished forefather that paid tithes to Melchizedek. And then, through Abraham, "payed tithes in Abraham. For he was yet in the loins of his father, when Melchizedek met him."
This is definitely food for thought. I'll get back to you on this soon. I've got a lot of studying to do.
Thank you so much for your time, consideration, and patience.
Until next time...may the shalowm of our 'Elohiym remain with you and yours.