Can God be the High Priest? by Terry Anderson

Can God be the High Priest? by Terry Anderson 

In Genesis 14:18 we are introduced to the concept of High Priest. We learn that the enigmatic Melchizedek is the priest of the Most High God. He blesses Abram and the Most High God. His exact functions are unclear, but this we do know: He was king of Salem and he acted as God’s agent on earth in those early days of mankind. This was long before the existence of Israel and the Levitical priesthood.

It should be evident from the statement that he “blessed the Most High God” that this Melchizedek was not God. Unless we imagine that God is blessing Himself, we can reasonably understand that the Priest is someone other than God! I mention this because there are those who believe that Melchizedek was Christ, and if the Christ of orthodoxy, then God the Son.

In fact Melchizedek was “like the Son of God” (Heb. 7:3), which means he could not have been the Son of God. Melchizedek had no recorded genealogy (“no father and mother,” Heb. 7:3, just as Jews said of Sarah whose lineage is not known). His parenthood, we know, was not traced from Levi (v.6).

Was Melchizedek just a priest or can we deduce that he was the High Priest? The text says that he was the priest of the Most High God. Were other priests involved or was Melchizedek the only priest at the time, thus making him the de facto High Priest? The indication is that Melchizedek was alone, acting on behalf of God for that man (Abram) who would become the recipient of a very special “covenant.”

It is puzzling that Melchizedek didn’t appear, in the Bible, until the meeting with Abram. We can assume he was alive and functional prior to this event, but we just don’t know what he was doing. There is no indication that Abram was surprised to see Melchizedek appearing, just in time to receive the tithe of his war spoils. It seemed quite natural, no questions asked; so Abram turned over a tenth of his spoils. Since a normal person wouldn’t turn over his possessions to a complete stranger, wouldn’t it follow that Abram had knowledge of or possibly a close relationship with Melchizedek?

It is interesting that this Melchizedek is mentioned three times in the Bible — once in Genesis with Abram (in connection with a covenant), once with David in Psalm 110 (David received the royal covenant of kingship, foreshadowing Messiah) and finally in Hebrews 6 and 7 (the New Covenant). In fact, the whole covenant arrangement is tied together through Melchizedek to Abram, to David and to Jesus the Messiah. So God’s promises to make Jesus king and lord (adoni, Ps. 110:1) are inextricably woven together with the promise of Jesus also becoming a priest (High Priest) forever according to the order of Melchizedek. This is an everlasting priesthood, as is Christ’s kingship over all the nations.

In contrast to this priesthood, the priesthood of Aaron and his descendants would come to an end. The High Priest under the Aaronic, Levitical priesthood served God and ministered to the people as God’s agent in religious matters. This has been the function and purpose of all biblical priesthood since Melchizedek. Why? Because God has ordained that He would not deal with man on a direct basis.

1 Timothy 2:5 states that there is now “one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Messiah Jesus.” Jesus’ mediation is accomplished through his role as High Priest after the order of Melchizedek. God does not mediate between Himself and man. He chooses men or angels to do this and under the Christian economy it is a man, the glorified Jesus Christ. (Jesus also appeared on earth as high priest, Heb. 9:11.) Any inference that Jesus is both God and High Priest makes no sense whatever, for if God has ordained that there be a “go between” then by what logic can anyone claim that this mediator is God? If God is doing the mediating then why not simply say, “I will be mediator between me and man?”

There are many reasons to challenge orthodoxy in regard to Jesus Christ’s so-called Deity.
God cannot die, God cannot be tempted, God is incorruptible, God is omniscient, and now we see one more: God cannot be the High Priest.
Jesus is High Priest and therefore cannot be God. This is a basic syllogism in logic.

There is a great deal to be said about the subject of the priesthood in Hebrews chapters 6-9. I’ll summarize some of the most salient points. The Levitical priesthood was a temporary priesthood ordained to provide mediators between God and Israel. This function ceased when Christ died and rose to fulfill his role as High Priest for all mankind for all time. He is established in the heavens at the right hand of God and will remain so until the time of the restoration of the Kingdom on earth when Jesus comes back.

The Torah of the priesthood was changed, the High Priest was changed and the Torah administered by the priesthood was changed (Heb. 7:11-12). It is declared that Jesus arose from the tribe of Judah, of which tribe nothing was spoken concerning the priesthood. Yet Jesus became the High Priest in spite of the requirements delineated in the Torah. How? By God’s will, and by Christ’s eternal offering on the altar of the Holy of Holies he became a priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek.

Think again about the opportunity God the Father had to set the record straight and clarify the relationship between Himself and His Son, the ultimate High Priest. The Scripture says, “It is evident that our Lord arose from Judah” — not from heaven, not from eternity! And again, Hebrews 7:15 states that “it is yet far more evident if, in the likeness of Melchizedek [a man, v. 4], there arises another priest.” In verse 24 Jesus receives the unchangeable priesthood. Why? Not because he is God and always possessed it, but because after being raised, he continues in office forever. He won this position through sacrifice.

In Hebrews 8 we read that Jesus had to offer himself in sacrifice in order to enter into the Most Holy Place, as did the Levitical High Priest under the Old Covenant on the Day of Atonement. In Hebrews 8:3 we see that “this one [Jesus] had to have something to offer” and, of course, that was his life, his own blood on the altar. As a result of this offering “he has obtained a more excellent ministry, inasmuch as he is also mediator of a better covenant.”

The [Levitical] priesthood was temporary and destined to be replaced by a new system of mediation. This would be based on the eternal understanding of man’s nature and the need for a new empathetic, perfect and resurrected man to be the compassionate High Priest. This was God’s plan for Christ. If it was in the mind of God that the Messiah “was slain from the foundation of the world” (Rev. 13:8), then it stands to reason that God knew from the beginning that Melchizedek was the model of the everlasting priesthood and the Levitical system was temporary.

Hebrews 6-9 must not be forced into the later mold of orthodox beliefs about Christ’s Divinity. There is no indication here of anyone other than man Messiah Jesus fulfilling the most important role of priest and mediator, yet in a New Covenant format. When we allow the Scripture to flow forth from its Hebrew source we can indeed drink of fresh and living waters.

Jesus cannot be God and High Priest at the same time, and since it is clear that he is High Priest then he cannot be God.

The above was taken from
Focus On The Kingdom Vol. 7. No. 8

Talking About the Kingdom of God

Talking About the Kingdom of God 

There is a good reason why many churchgoers have a very vague idea of what the Bible says about the future of our world. (Surveys continue to show that a majority of churchgoers who think the Bible is “a good thing” have very little idea of its contents.) The truth is that Jesus’ teaching about a future Kingdom of God, a new divine world government, is very unpopular also in religious academic circles. Academic theologians train pastors who teach churches.

Christianity appears to be the only world religion which begins by discarding the teaching of its own founder! Do churches conscientiously begin with Jesus’ first command that we are to repent, change our minds and lives, and believe the Gospel about the Kingdom of God? (Mark 1:14-15). Was Kierkegaard so wrong when he said that Christians have abolished Christianity without being quite aware of it? Was Professor Hiers not pointing to a potentially eye-opening fact when he remarked that “Interpreters of Christian persuasion have ordinarily not been especially interested in what Jesus intended and did in his own lifetime”?!

Scholars would much prefer a Jesus who taught an ethic of timeless love and fellowship with God — a hazy spirituality. They are much less enthusiastic about a God who promises to send His Son to introduce, by cataclysm, a new political and social world order on a renewed earth. Yet Jesus promised his followers that they would inherit and manage just such a new society on earth, the Kingdom of God (Matt. 5:5; Dan. 7:27). (Jesus never promised anyone “heaven.” He did say that a Christian’s reward is presently stored with God in heaven. Jesus will reward his faithful followers with positions of rulership as royal family when he arrives back on earth.) The reward is to inherit the promised renewed earth of the future, the Kingdom of God (Matt. 5:5; Rev. 5:10). Belief in a brand new world coming is the essence of the Hebrew prophets’ message, and it is the heart of what Jesus taught under his banner: “The Gospel about the Kingdom of God” (Matt. 4:23; 9:35; Luke 4:43; Acts 8:12; 19:8; 28:23, 31). It is also the heart of the Gospel about land inheritance, prosperity and progeny announced to Abraham. “The Gospel was preached ahead of time to Abraham,” Paul says brilliantly (Gal. 3:8). But we hear very little about this in correspondence directed to correcting us!

If one reads scholarly analyses of the Kingdom of God in the teaching of Jesus it is easy to see that Jesus’ emphasis on the Kingdom to come at his return to the earth is bypassed and ignored. Some scholars, finding this information about a future apocalyptic (i.e. by spectacular intervention) Kingdom uncongenial, argue that the disciples, in their misunderstanding of Jesus, must have read the future Kingdom of God back into Jesus’ words and thus misrepresented him.

...

Jesus died a torturing death to guarantee us forgiveness for our sins and with his blood to ratify the Kingdom covenant described by him in Luke 22:28-30 (note the original Greek, “covenant” here).

...

Theology has some serious unfinished business. It must come to terms, courageously and candidly, with the fact that the Christian Gospel, as Jesus preached it, announces a coming catastrophic intervention by God to put an end to present injustice and human mismanagement of the planet. Jesus spoke always about the Kingdom of God, as did Paul. It is fascinating to observe how minutely Paul followed his lord in this matter. Jesus “welcomed [the people] and began speaking to them about the Kingdom of God” (Luke 9:11). Paul “welcomed all who came to him and preached the Gospel about the Kingdom of God” (Acts 28:30-31).

But do Christians today follow this example? When did you last hear an evangelist on radio or TV invite people to “repent and believe the Gospel about the Kingdom” (Mark 1:14-15)? I have seen scores of tracts claiming to offer the Gospel, which contain not a single reference to the Kingdom. When did you last share the precious information about the Kingdom and what we need to do to enter it when it comes?

May we invite you to view our new ten-minute video at Youtube, “Jesus Is Still a Jew!”
We challenge the viewing public, via this amazing internet tool — which reaches about a third of the world’s population — to take seriously the first and basic commands of Jesus. We note that Christianity has chosen not to follow the creed of its founder. It has chosen rather to substitute a so-called Nicene Creed, or Chalcedonian Creed. Was the creed of Jesus, which he labeled as the most important command of all (Mark 12:29-34), deemed inadequate? I pose this question to the Bible-reading public, hoping that they will take it as a challenge to the comfortable status quo, which apparently involves the rejection of Jesus in the name of Jesus! Would Jesus happily enter a church society which records its Triune or Trinitarian creed in terms which Jesus did not support? ... Can we really afford to found our churches on creeds so obviously at variance with the words of Jesus whom we claim to follow as lord and rabbi?

Paul obviously expected church members to play their part in the propagation of the Gospel Message about the Kingdom. He noted that when he was in prison “most of the brethren...have far more courage to speak the Word of God [the Gospel] without fear” (Phil. 1:14).

It is our Christian duty to be evangelists for Jesus and his Kingdom. Timothy was instructed to “proclaim the word” of the Kingdom (Matt. 13:19) at every opportunity (2 Tim. 4:1-2). The treasure of the Kingdom message given to us (Matt. 13:11, 44, 46) is not to be hoarded. It is to be passed on to others who have never perhaps even heard about it.

A fierce judgment awaits those who do nothing with the talent they have been given. They don’t just miss out on rewards in the Kingdom; they are excluded from the Kingdom itself (Matt. 25:28-30).

The New Testament is held together by a single concept which provides unity to all its parts. The church will become unified again when it adopts this New Testament pattern of teaching.

The unifying heart of the New Testament is the Gospel Message of salvation as it came from Jesus. This Gospel is called the Gospel about the Kingdom of God (Matt. 4:23; 9:35; 24:14; Mark 1:14-15; Luke 4:43; Acts 8:12; 19:8; 20:25; 28:23, 31). It is known as the “Word” or Message about the Kingdom (Matt. 13:19) or simply the Message (“Word”) or Message of God/Gospel of God (Luke 8:11; Mark 1:14-15). Throughout the New Testament it is abbreviated to “the Word/Message.” Sometimes it appears as “the Gospel,” “the Gospel of Jesus Christ” (i.e. the Gospel which he preached as well as the Gospel about him). The same saving Message is called “the Message of the Truth,” or simply “the Truth.” In John’s gospel it is called “the witness” or “my [Jesus’] word or words/teaching.” Sometimes in Paul’s letters it is called “the mystery,” reminding us of Jesus’ “mystery of the Kingdom” (Matt. 13:11). Daniel and all the prophets are the firm basis for this.

At present evangelicals strangely avoid the obvious content of the Gospel as the Gospel of the Kingdom. This is a departure from the teaching of the Lord Jesus whom they claim to serve. Revival will come when the Gospel of the Kingdom is made the center of all preaching. Ministries of all types can compare their own writing and preaching with that of Paul and Jesus. Could it be said of modern evangelicals that they “welcome the people and begin talking about the Kingdom of God”? (see Luke 9:11; cp. Acts 28:30-31).

Talking about the Kingdom of God is one of the most satisfying activities a Christian can enjoy. It is nothing less than his duty as a servant of the Lord Messiah. What else ultimately matters, other than gaining immortality in the coming Kingdom? That immortality is to be found revealed in the Gospel (2 Tim. 1:10).

Some editing has been done.
The above was taken from
Focus On The Kingdom Vol. 12. No. 9

The Promise to Abraham

The Promise to Abraham 

From The Coming Kingdom of Christ, John R. Rice, D.D., Litt. D., Baptist editor of The Sword of the Lord, Dec. 1944, pp. 28, 29:

“Actually, of course, if Heaven for Jews will be on the earth, then Heaven for everybody will be on earth as Scripture makes plain…

“Yet I was taught as a child in Sunday School that at the second coming of Christ there would be one general resurrection of all the dead, saved and unsaved. I was taught that this planet would be burned up and destroyed and disappear. I was taught that there would be at that time one general judgment and that saved and unsaved would alike stand before God to be judged according to their works. In some mysterious way it was supposed that Christ would intervene in behalf of the Christians. Then the unsaved would be sent to Hell and the redeemed spirits would float around and sing and twang their harps in a golden city hanging in space in the ‘Beautiful Isle of Somewhere.’ How far away from the plain Bible teaching that is!

“I was taught in the Sunday School (and the Theological Seminary only strengthened that teaching) that if the meek were ever to inherit the earth (Matt. 5:5), they would have to do it in this life. I was taught that all the promises to Israel really meant the Church, and that the promises to Jerusalem and Mount Zion really meant Heaven! I was taught that the golden age — when “they shall beat their swords into pruning hooks” (Isa. 2:4; Micah 4:3), and when “the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord as the waters cover the sea” (Isa. 11:9) — would be brought about by preaching the Gospel, aided by schools, hospitals, good laws, peace treaties, inventions, and the developments of modern science! I believed that, despite the evidence of my senses and the testimony of history and current events, until I began to study the prophetic teachings of the Bible.

“Then I learned that God had promised to bring the Israelites back to their land to possess it forever, that Heaven, then, must be on this earth.

“Let us suppose…that the Lord prepares to strike the match or say the word that will utterly destroy this whole planet. What a multitude is gathered, let us imagine, to behold the great event. But wait! I see an old man who walks like a king who comes forward to interrupt the ceremony. His face has the look of authority and his voice is bold as he cries out, ‘Wait, Lord; You cannot destroy my property!’

“I can imagine the Lord might say, ‘This man is a friend of mine; let us hear what he has to say. Speak on, friend, tell the people. What is your name? To what possession are you referring? What title do you hold to the property?’

“‘My name,’ says the venerable patriarch, ‘is Abraham! From Ur of the Chaldees I came at Your command. To Canaan I came and the land You gave to me, teaching me by faith to know that I should afterward inherit it. To Isaac and Jacob You made the same promises, and all our days, though rich in gold and silver, cattle and servants, we lived as sojourners and pilgrims in tents, patiently waiting until we should inherit and possess forever our own land. This scroll in my hand, O Lord God, is a written deed to the land of Canaan, called by name, and signed by Yourself. It is a warranty deed, guaranteeing to me and my faithful children after me [see Gal. 3:29] — the children of Promise — the possession of the land forever.

“‘You may burn up, if You wish, the weeds and thorns and thistles. Destroy, if You will, all disease germs and insect pests, which have increased the curse on the land because of man’s sin through the centuries. O Lord, You may shake down and burn the cities, for I look for another city which has foundations whose builder and maker is God. The elements may melt with fervent heat, but the land is mine. To me You gave it with the promise that I should inherit it with my seed. “Shall not the judge of all the earth do right?”’

“If God wanted to please the ignorant and the scoffers concerning His prophecies, how would He face Abraham? The deed which Abraham has is the Bible…”

The above was taken from
Focus On The Kingdom Vol. 4. No. 8

Plain Talk about Who God Is

Plain Talk about Who God Is 

Trying to read the Bible without understanding who the God of the Bible is is likely to be frustrating. Unfortunately so much pressure and dogmatism now surrounds the issue of who God is that Christians are unable to approach the text of Scripture with an open mind. A great measure of fear attends their studies, because they have been told what kind of a God they are to find in the Bible, or else… hellfire! This is a hopeless atmosphere for calm and reasoned investigation.

The matter of deciding who God is in the Bible is relatively simple, if we follow sound procedure.
And sound procedure demands that we start our investigation in the right place, the Hebrew Bible, the Bible which nurtured the Jews and Jesus and which Jesus categorically said he did not come to destroy (Matt. 5:17).

What God is presented in Jesus’ Bible? The creed of Israel, the cardinal tenet of all sound religion and the great hedge against idolatry and paganism, is of course the Shema — the “Hear O Israel” (Deut 6:4). This creed declares that the “Lord God is ONE LORD.” The oneness of God is here proposed in the simplest and clearest language.

To confirm this central truth the Hebrew Bible describes God with singular pronouns (I, Me, You, Him, My, Your, His) thousands upon thousands of times! Anyone with a rudimentary knowledge of language knows, or ought to know, that singular pronouns denote a single Person. God therefore in the Bible is One Person.

Jesus affirmed the unitary, non-trinitarian, faith of Israel when he replied to the question put to him by a theologian as to the greatest of all the commandments.
Jesus replied that the “Hear O Israel, the Lord our God is One Lord” is the pinnacle of divine revelation. Only that God is to be loved with all our hearts and minds and strength (Mark 12:28ff.).

Paul echoed the teaching of Jesus on this point, with complete simplicity and clarity. Discussing the multiple gods of paganism, Paul contrasted the Christian belief: “To us [Christians] there is ONE God, the Father… And no one besides Him” (I Cor. 8:4-6). That of course is unitary monotheism, belief that God is a single Person.

The One God is defined, we note, not as three eternal Persons, but as the Father.
At once we are aware of a great difference between what traditionally appears in faith statements and what Paul actually said: “There is one God, the Father.” That is simply the unitary monotheism of Paul’s and Jesus’ Jewish heritage. It is by definition also the Christian creed, because it is the biblical creed.
The stark simplicity of this creed may seem threatening to some, but it is the force of prejudice which makes it difficult to accept. There is no complexity about Paul’s creed. It is straightforward and beyond argument.
Many, however, find it unsatisfactory, and they rush to point out that Paul in I Corinthians 8:4-6 went on to say that Jesus was also “God.” But did he? In fact, not at all. Paul did indeed go on to say that “there is one Lord Jesus Messiah” (1 Cor. 8:6). But it would be a fatal and confusing move to think that Paul, by calling Jesus Lord, was really calling him God! There is a crucial difference.

You see, there is a simple and overpoweringly influential text behind Paul’s language. It is Psalm 110:1, the very text which Jesus himself had produced when describing the relationship of himself the Messiah to the one God (Mark 12:35-37).
Psalm 110:1 is quoted or alluded to no less than 23 times in the New Testament. It appears in every section of the New Testament, and it would be a major mistake to ignore its importance.
Psalm 110:1 recognizes in good Jewish fashion that God (Yahweh) is One Individual and that One God speaks in a prophetic oracle to another individual, not Himself, who is “my lord,” the lord of David. “My lord” is told to sit at Yahweh’s right hand until he is given future victory over his enemies.

Now the second lord of Psalm 110:1, the Messiah, is definitely NOT God, but a superior human being. How do we know this for certain? Because of the careful choice of words in the original. “My lord” in the Hebrew inspired text is ADONI. In every one of the 195 times the word ADONI appears in the Bible, it never means God, but always a human (or occasionally angelic) superior. ADONI is the word which tells us 195 times that the one named is not God, but man.

So when Paul said that next to the One God, the Father, there is “one Lord Jesus Messiah,” he meant the One (superior, human) lord as defined by Psalm 110:1. Paul has not confused Jesus with God.

Psalm 110:1 could well have used another word to describe the Messiah. There was a word ADONAI which meant God (in all of its 449 occurrences). But the spirit never confused God and the Son of God. God was Yahweh or Adonai and the Messiah was the human lord, ADONI.

There are two lords in the Bible, God and Jesus. But only the Father is the One God (“There is One God, the Father”). Jesus is the Lord Messiah, not the Lord God (Luke 2:11, etc.).

The creed of the Bible is the essence of simplicity:
“There is One God, the Father, and one Lord Messiah, Jesus” (I Cor 8:4-6).

The above was taken from
Focus On The Kingdom Vol. 1. No. 7

How Did Paul Define God?

How Did Paul Define God? 

Some of the most transparently simple propositions of the New Testament have become complex and confusing because of post-biblical traditions and creeds. Jesus and Paul were Jews who subscribed to the beautiful and simple creed of Israel: “Hear O Israel, the Lord our God is One Lord.” “To you it has been shown that you might know that the LORD, He is God; that there is no other beside him” (Deut. 6:4; 4:35). Jesus quoted and confirmed the creed of Israel when he declared “The first commandment is this: Hear, O Israel, the Lord your God is One Lord” (Mark 12:28ff.).

Paul, as the leading Christian apostle, confirmed his Jewish understanding of who God is with these words: “There is no God but One. For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as indeed there are many gods and many lords), yet for us [Christians] there is One God, the Father…” (I Cor. 8:4-6). Paul provides here the perfect definition of monotheism, belief in One God only. “There is One God, the Father….” “The Father,” as grammarians say, stands in apposition to the One God: “There is One God, the Father, and that One God is the Father…” Combining Paul’s words in I Corinthians 8:4 and 6 we have this vital information: “There is no God but One…There is One God, the Father.”

Paul then acknowledged Jesus Christ as the One Lord, closely associated with the One God, the Father, but distinguished from Him. Readers should pay close attention to what Paul meant by “Lord” as the title for Jesus, the Messiah. The answer ... the all-important Psalm 110:1. Psalm 110:1 is the key to the title “Lord” as applied constantly to Jesus. ....

The above was taken from 
Focus On The Kingdom Vol. 1. No. 3