Hebrews 7:1-10: Explanatory Notes

7:1 For this "Melchizedek, king of Salem, priest of the Most High God," who "met Abraham returning from the battle of the kings" and "blessed him," to whom also "Abraham" divided "a tenth of all"...
The author's purpose in this chapter is to unfold for the audience what a "priest after the order of Melchizedek" is. The early Christians understood Psalm 110:1 to be about the Messiah and, thus, about Christ: "The LORD said to my Lord, 'Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet.'" So it was only fitting that the author of Hebrews would also apply verse four to Christ as Messiah as well: "The LORD has sworn and will not repent, 'You are a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek.'"

But what is such a priest? To answer this question the author turns to the only other Old Testament Scripture that mentions Melchizedek: Genesis 14. In this chapter the author looks for (allegorical) clues from Genesis 14 to show what such a priest is.

7:2 ... first being interpreted "king of righteousness" and then also "king of Salem," which is "king of peace"...
The author begins by taking the names of the Genesis text allegorically. The name Melchizedek, has the words "king" and "righteous" in it, so the author concludes that a priest after the order of Melchizedek is a "king of righteousness." The translation "my king is righteous" might be more precise. In any case we have no reason to think that the author of Hebrews actually knew Hebrew or Aramaic.

"Salem" is of course the word shalom, "peace." Thus the author concludes that a priest after the order of Melchizedek is a king of peace. The idea that the Messiah is righteous is not a major theme of Hebrews, but we do find it in the author's use of Psalm 45 in Hebrews 1:9--"You loved righteousness and hated lawlessness." Similarly, peace surfaces a couple times in Hebrews as a theme (Heb. 12:14; 13:20).

7:3 ... without father, without mother, without genealogy, neither having beginning of days or end of life, but having been likened to the Son of God, he remains a priest forever.
This verse more than any other has given rise throughout Christian history to the idea that Melchizedek was actually a Christophany, a cameo appearance of Christ in the Old Testament. If this description fit Melchizedek, then why didn't he die for sins? He sounds far from human!

In fact, we do find references to Melchizedek in Jewish literature that seem to see him as some sort of exalted angelic figure (e.g., the Dead Sea Scrolls). A number of recent interpreters have thus argued that Hebrews sees Melchizedek as such a heavenly figure.

However, the key to understanding this description is the word "likened." The author is still interpreting Genesis 14 allegorically. In that text, we do not hear of Melchizedek's parents (and of course we do know Jesus' mother and heavenly Father). More specifically, Genesis says nothing about Melchizedek's priestly genealogy. He is clearly not a priest like the descendants of Aaron, that are required to come from a certain blood line.

Genesis similarly does not record when Melchizedek began or ended his office as priest. It does not tell of his death. For allegorical purposes, we might thus say that a priest after the order of Melchizedek neither starts as a priest at a particular time nor ends with death, like other priests do.

The interpretive technique the author is using here is called "non in thora non in mundo"--if it is not mentioned in the text, then we can interpret the text as if it does not exist. Since the Genesis text does not mention any of these aspects of Melchizedek's identity, then we can allegorically consider them not to exist.

We can thus say that a priest after the order of Melchizedek does not have a priestly genealogy or fixed days of priestly office. Most importantly, such a priest remains a priest forever. Allegorically speaking, Genesis 14 "likens" such a priest to the Son of God.

Once again, it is important to recognize that the author is not strictly talking here about the "historical" figure of Melchizedek. He is rather using allegorical interpretation to determine what the order of Melchizedek is like. The ironic conclusion is thus that the "historical" Melchizedek himself was not actually such a priest!

7:4-6 Now consider how great this man was, to whom Abraham the patriarch even gave a tenth from his spoils. And those who receive the priesthood from the sons of Levi have a commandment to receive tithes from from the people, that is, their brothers, according to the Law, even though they went out from the loins of Abraham.

But the one who does not share their genealogy took tithes from Abraham and blessed the one who has the promises.
The author is about to argue that the order of Melchizedek is superior to the Levitical order of priesthood. His argument is nothing sort of ingenious (even inspired). He is about to compare two "scenes" from the biblical story.

The first is when Melchizedek meets Abraham returning from battle. Abraham gives tithes to Melchizedek, and Melchizedek blesses Abraham. The second is a day in the life of Israel. An Israelite gives tithes to a Levitical priest. He hints at the connection between these two scenes in one of his side comments--Abraham is Levi's great grandfather. He will contrast the two priesthoods by equating Levi with Abraham in the scene with Melchizedek.

The mention that Melchizedek "does not share their genealogy," that is, that of the Levitical priests, confirms our understanding of 7:3. To say that Melchizedek is "without father, without mother, without genealogy" is to say that he is without a Levitical geneaology. He is not a hereditary priest.

7:7 Now without any dispute, the lesser is blessed by the greater.
That is to say Melchizedek is greater than Abraham, for Melchizedek blesses Abraham and not the other way around.

7:8 And here, on the one hand, men who die receive tithes. But there it is witnessed that he lives.
The author is comparing texts, parts of the biblical story. One biblical text "witnesses" one thing about the Levitical priests. The other text witnesses something different about Melchizedek. Levitical priests cannot continue in office because they eventually die. But Psalm 110:4 says that a priest after the order of Melchizedek is a priest forever. As we will see throughout the rest of Hebrews 7, the key characteristic of a priest after the order of Melchizedek is an indestructible life.

7:9-10 And, so to speak, even Levi--the one who receives tithes--has given tithes through Abraham. For he was still in the loins of his father when Melchizedek met him.
The argument is now complete. Melchizedek is greater than Abraham both because Abraham gave his tithes to him and because Melchizedek was the one who blessed Abraham. Since Levi was, in a sense, within Abraham, this implies that Melchizedek is also greater than Levi. Thus by implication, a priest after the order of Melchizedek is a greater priest than a priest after the order of Levi.

This argument may seem a little peculiar from a modern standpoint. It is an argument that swims in ancient Jewish methods of exegesis. Such methods are not oriented around reading passages in context--except when such context contributes to the author's argument. Nevertheless, they were perfectly appropriate types of argument for an educated interpreter of Scripture to make in the first century.