Chapter 7

The superiority of royalty

1. There are many types of royalty and nobility in human history. In ancient times, for example, there was a very wonderful system of royalty called the Spartiates. They had a code that has never been equalled in military, in courage, and in strength. They were royalty by deeds of military courage. They had a discipline that has never been rivalled in all of human history. We also have another system of royalty based upon great mental ability, leadership by brains: the Eutatridai of Athens, some of the most brilliant men who ever lived in the field of handling administration. The Patricians of Rome represented some of the greatest systems of self-discipline and nobility the world has ever seen. Even the Brahman cast of India which lasted for many centuries made up originally a very brilliant, unusual people. If ever we could say in history that there was a Gentile super race, as Hitler kept shouting, it would have to be that Brahman cast. They are the only Arians in history who have ruled for over a thousand years.

2. Going from groups who succeeded and became nobility in history we get a family. Probably the family that impresses in the history of Europe is the Hollenzollen family, a family of great royalty and great success. The Hapsburg family lasted longer than any other of the ruling families of Europe, ruling out of Vienna, ruling what was known as the holy Roman Empire (which was neither holy nor an empire). Then there were the Romanovs which did very well in Russia for a while. France had some famous ruling families.

4. There are famous families in the history of Rome, families of great nobility — the Cornelius family which contributed all of the Skipios. There is another famous Patrician family called the Julius family. One of that family was one of the greatest men of all history, his name was Gaius.

5. There is also another type of royalty and the man who created it was a man of great genius. Napoleon created battlefield royalty. Many of Napoleon’s marshals were given titles of nobility on the basis of their tactical success or in making some great contribution to a campaign.

6. The original nobility of our Anglo-Saxon heritage. Many people are born into royalty but royalty is always developed through ability. This is the key. At one time or another in English history the dukes, the marques, the earl, the viscount, the baron, all represented people who did great things. People have a tendency in our society to demonstrate their stupidity by failing to recognise the historical impact of royalty. Some of the greatest men in history from the standpoint of genius and impact are people who have come from royalty — like Gaius Julius Caesar.

We will study in this chapter the peerage of Melchizedek. We will come to understand one of the oldest and most important categories of nobility in all of history. You are a part of that royalty, not on the basis of your ability, but on the basis of who and what Christ is. As we study this chapter we will come to understand the royal priesthood of the Church Age. Nobility of the royal priesthood will last forever. The moment you were born again you walked into the greatest system of royalty the world has ever known, and somewhere along the line you have to come to appreciate it. Two chapters are designed to make you appreciate your nobility: chapter 7, the royal priesthood; Ephesians 4, the system of royalty in supergrace. Believers of the Church Age, having the most enduring type of nobility, need to understand that this nobility is designed so that God can pick you up and give you millions of dollars, promote you, give you material prosperity, social prosperity, sexual prosperity, provide His very own happiness for you. All of these things are related to royalty. Royalty must have royalties, that is the supergrace life. Royalty must have function, that is the function of the priesthood. The royalties come from supergrace, the function of nobility comes from the priesthood.

The question arises: Will believers enjoy the privileges and blessings of being royalty while being still on the earth? The answer is: That depends on you! It depends on your volition, your attitude toward Bible doctrine. The answer to these questions are all found in the book of Hebrews. To enjoy the privileges and blessings of royalty the believer must be consistently positive toward Bible doctrine. The question now is where Hebrews 7 fits into the picture. Hebrews 7 has nothing whatever to do with Hebrews 6. Hebrews 5:11 through 6:20 is a parenthesis to pull believers — to whom this was originally addressed — out of reversionism, for you neither look, nor think, nor act like the royalty you are when you are in reversionism. You are one of the skeletons in the closet of the palace!

Hebrews 5:10 says literally from the Greek, “Having been designated by God high priest according to the battalion of Melchizedek.”

Principles between Hebrews 5:10 and 6:19,20

1. Those to whom Hebrews was originally addressed were believers living in Jerusalem in 67 AD, three years from the greatest crisis in all of Jewish history.

2. This was on the eve of the greatest disaster in Jewish history, the second administration of the fifth cycle of discipline to the southern kingdom of Judah. It would occur in 70 AD.

3. At the time of the writing of Hebrews believers in Jerusalem and Judah were generally reversionistic, as per Hebrews 6. Hence, they were not ready for the message which we will be studying.

4. The royal priesthood and the supergrace life were not a challenge to them.

5. They did not comprehend the strategic victory of Christ and its relationship to the tactical victory of the royal priesthood.

6. Spiritual growth and progress was hindered by reversionism.

7. The believers who are recipients of this epistle must be challenged to repent, to recover from reversionism. The challenge was presented to them in Hebrews 5:11-6:20. They were assigned to the battalion of Melchizedek, not assigned to the family of Aaron and the tribe of Levi.

There are in the field of priesthoods three battalions. All bona fide priesthoods appointed by the Word of God fall into three categories or battalions. We are in the royal priesthood, the only other person in this battalion is Melchizedek who was both a king and a priest — a royal priest. Jesus Christ is also a royal high priest. We are in union with Christ and here is where we get out royalty forever. The second category is the tribe of Levi, family of Aaron, and it is now defunct. The third category is family priesthood. That is where Abraham was, and it was also deactivated. There is no Levitical priesthood and no family priesthood functioning in the world today. There is only one priesthood and the believer is in it, and he is royalty in it, he is nobility. It is one thing to be born into royalty, it is something else to live and to function like royalty.

Abraham believed in the Lord Jesus Christ and it was credited to his account for righteousness — which means: God the Father gave him +R, then justified him. At the same time God the Holy Spirit regenerated him. And that is true for all of the Old Testament saints from Adam right down to the interruption of the Jewish Age. The Jewish Age was interrupted by the Church Age and that was one of the most dramatic and traumatic moments of history — a dispensation is stopped before it is completed — and when it occurred the Levitical priesthood was defunct, deactivated completely, immediately, and in its place a royal priesthood. Now God the Holy Spirit takes every believer and enters him into union with Christ, the baptism of the Spirit which never occurred before. Moses didn’t have the baptism of the Spirit, David didn’t, Isaiah and Jeremiah didn’t. The baptism of the Spirit enters the believer into union with the King priest, the King high priest. Jesus Christ in His person as deity is sovereign forever; Jesus Christ in His humanity was born of the tribe of Judah, the royal tribe; the family of David, the royal family; and therefore in His humanity He is a King. But more than that, He is a King high priest and therefore He is King of kings, He is Lord of lords.

In Hebrews chapter seven we are studying the superiority of royalty; in Ephesians chapter four which will follow we study the royal family.

The outline of Hebrews chapter 7 is threefold:

a) The superiority of the Melchizedek battalion — verses 1-10.

b) The inferiority of the Levitical battalion — verse 11-19.

c) The superiority of the royal priesthood in the Church Age — verses 20-28.

The doctrine of the priesthood

1. A priest is a member of the human race representing the human race before God. The priest is taken from the male population of the human race, he must partake of the nature of the person or persons for whom he acts, officiates, represents. In other words, he must be a bona fide member of the human race — Hebrews 5:1; 7:4,5,14,25. It is also part of the subject of Hebrews 10:5, 10-14.

2. The sphere of priestly function. The priest and the high priest must function in the sphere of spiritual phenomena. Therefore he is appointed for man’s benefit in spiritual things. This means the royal priesthood of the Church Age is inevitably and totally related to Bible doctrine.

3. The categories of the priesthood. The first battalion is the royal priesthood. a) The royal priesthood in which Melchizedek is the pattern — Hebrews 7:1-3. b) Melchizedek was both a king and a priest, but without any emphasis but without any emphasis on his parents, his genealogy, his birth certificate or death certificate. c) Melchizedek appeared once to Abraham ministering to him bread and wine, the symbols of Christ’s ministry on the cross.

4. By way of contrast, the Levitical priesthood symbolised the cross through animal sacrifices which were discontinued when the Jewish Age was interrupted.

5. The symbols of the royal priesthood remain — bread and wine. We have the symbols of the royal priesthood every time we assemble for the communion service.

6. The office of the royal priesthood in not hereditary but perpetual. In other words you and I are a royal priest but it does not follow that our children are, of course. No one enters into the royal priesthood through heredity. We enter on a spiritual basis — being born again — and it is perpetual, we are royal priests forever.

7. The appointment is not related to physical birth but to the new birth.

8. The second battalion is the Levitical priesthood. a) The Levitical priesthood began with Aaron, the older brother of Moses. b) The concept of this priestly ministry of spiritual things is found in Numbers 16:5. c) This priesthood was perpetuated through heredity. Aaron had two surviving sons through whom the entire Levitical priesthood was descended. d) However, physical defects caused the elimination of a priest in the priestly line. He couldn’t function at the altar if he had physical defects — Leviticus 21:17-21. e) The Levitical priesthood was supported by thirteen Levitical cities — Joshua 21:13-19. f) In addition there was a special annual tithe paid to the Levites for their support — a tax — Leviticus 23:10. g) Other support came from redemption money of the first-born — Numbers 18:16. h) The spiritual phenomena of the Levitical priesthood was grace, but limited to shadows. The cross is the reality. The Levitical priesthood dealt with shadows, we in the Church Age deal with reality.

9. The third battalion is the family priesthood in which the patriarch of the family functioned as the priest. Adam, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, were family priests.

10. The royal high priest of the Church Age: the Lord Jesus Christ. a) Jesus Christ is the royal high priest of the Church Age. b) As such He has fulfilled the first function of the priesthood — offerings at the altar. He offered Himself on the real altar which was the cross. He offered Himself for the sins of the world; our sins were poured out upon Him and judged. c) From this function comes the first strategic victory of the angelic conflict: resurrection, ascension, and session — Hebrews 10:5-14. d) Our royal high priest, Jesus Christ, was appointed forever in the divine decrees — Hebrews 5:6. e) He was assigned to the first battalion, the battalion of Melchizedek, the royal battalion — Hebrews 5:10. f) He was assigned specifically in the pattern of Melchizedek to prove that the priesthood of which we are a part is infinitely superior to the Levitical priesthood. g) He was appointed with two immutable things — Hebrews 7:21.

11. The royal priesthood of the Church Age includes every believer. You and I are a kingdom of royal priests, now and forever. Our royalty depends upon God’s perfect plan, upon the work of Jesus Christ on the cross, and the baptising ministry of God the Holy Spirit which puts us in the royal palace forever — 1 Peter 2:5,9; Revelation 1:6; 5:10; 20:6.

12. The purpose of the royal priesthood in time is to reach supergrace, the tactical victory of the angelic conflict — Hebrews 6:17-20.

13. The function of the royal priesthood is delineated in Hebrews 13.

We begin by seeing the superiority of our priesthood from the standpoint of royalty. There are three references to Melchizedek in the Bible. The historical reference is found in Genesis chapter fourteen, the prophetical reference in Psalm 110:4, and the doctrinal reference in Hebrews chapter seven. Our passage in Hebrews chapter seven deals with the doctrinal implications of the life of Melchizedek.

Verse 1 — the conjunction “For”, which is gar, is used to explain the fact that there have been many priesthoods in human history. Three of them were bona fide and authorised by God. But out of all of the priesthoods which have been functional in human history only one of them is meaningful today and forever at the same time.

“this Melchizedek” — the word “this” is a demonstrative pronoun o(utoj, it is used to indicate that he will be the subject, along with others, in the next few verses. O(utoj also places a very special emphasis on Melchizedek as being unique in the day in which he lived. The uniqueness in the day in which he lived overflows into the uniqueness of the person of Christ both being in the same battalion. “Melchizedek” in the Greek is Melxisedek. In the Hebrew the compound words are “king” and “righteousness.”

“king of Salem” — the Greek words here, basileuj and Salhm, indicates a bona fide historical person. Basileuj, incidentally, refers always to a human being, it is a king from the standpoint of being a member of the human race. In other words, Melchizedek is an actual historical character, not a theophany. Salem is an actual place.

Why isn’t Melchizedek a theophany?

Theophanies refer to the appearances of the Lord Jesus Christ in the Old Testament. In addition to theophanies we also have Christophanies which are appearances of the Lord Jesus Christ after His resurrection. There are six reasons why Melchizedek is not a theophany.

1. First of all, theophanies are never given formal names. Melchizedek is very definitely a formal name.

2. Theophanies are never mentioned with specific geographical locations, like Salem.

3. Theophanies always disclose God as the messenger. In the case of Melchizedek he is not so indicated in the historical, doctrinal, or any other passage connected with him.

4. The content of Psalm 110:4 indicates that Melchizedek is a genuine historical person. Christ is addressed by God the Father, He does not say to Christ, “You are Melchizedek”, He says “You are a priest after the classification” [or the battalion] of Melchizedek.” Christ is not addressed as Melchizedek because Christ is not Melchizedek and because Melchizedek is not Jesus Christ.

5. A priest by very Biblical definition must be true humanity to represent the human race before God. Melchizedek was functioning as a priest when he met Abraham therefore he had to be a member of the human race. The fact that Melchizedek was a king without genealogy forms the pattern for the royal priesthood in the Church Age. Every believer in the Church Age is spiritual royalty based upon spiritual birth. It is true that in the Old Testament people were saved in exactly the same way, by believing in Christ as He was revealed. And at the time of salvation God the Father gave to each believer +R and justified him. So one of the ministries in salvation in the Old Testament was justification from God the Father. God the Holy Spirit regenerated the person simultaneously. So we can say that at least five things occurred when any person believed in Christ in the Old Testament times.

By way of contrast, the Church Age dramatically and suddenly interrupted the Jewish Age. In this interruption God the Holy Spirit does something that He has never done before. The baptism of the Holy Spirit enters every believer into union with Christ. Christ is seated at the right hand of the Father. This makes Him a member of the royal family of God instead of simply a member of the family of God. The Holy Spirit indwells: the sign of royalty. The Holy Spirit seals: security for royalty. The Holy Spirit provides a spiritual gift which is the function of royalty. All of these things add up to the fact that for the first time, and the only time in history, we have a spiritual royalty that is exists forever. None of that was true, even of people who were kings, in the Old Testament. For example, we have David who was born again. His function in life was king, he was a ruler. Yet he is not a member of the royal family of God. He is a member of the family of God but he is not in the palace. Cyrus, king of Persia, a Gentile believer in the Lord Jesus Christ. He was born a king and was one of the greatest kings of the ancient world. Yet he is not a member of the royal family.

6. Melchizedek was a true historical person rather than a theophany. As an historical person he was a royal priest, therefore a pattern and an illustration of the present priesthood of the Church Age. With the royal priest it makes no difference who your father is, who your mother is, your birth certificate, your death certificate, or an other factor; ours is not royalty by heritage, ours is royalty by regeneration. So we have an eternal royalty, an eternal nobility. The pattern and the illustration which is used is Melchizedek. But more important than that, Melchizedek as a member of the royal priesthood had an encounter with Abraham who is not only a family high priest as a patriarch but was also the source of the Levitical priesthood. Therefore, in their historical meeting whatever occurred is significant as far as the superiority of royalty is concerned.

Notice that he is called “king of Salem.” Salem is the ancient city of Jerusalem. The name means “city of peace.” It was always a warlike city and therefore had a good name. If you want to have peace the best way to have it is through a strong military. The people who occupied this city had the best military in the world and therefore had peace most of the time. It was not until David’s day that Jerusalem was even captured, and that was nearly five hundred years after the Jews entered the land. The is called the city of peace not to cater to the bleeding hearts but because it is always the strong military that keeps the freedom of such a city protected.

Melchizedek was a royal priest and therefore the battalion derives its name from him. It is known as the Melchizedek battalion. He is called a “priest of the most high God”, which indicates a number of things. First of all, he was born again, he was a believer. He was appointed by God. He was a Gentile. There were no Jews in the world at this time and the only thing that represents the Levitical priesthood is also a Gentile by the name of Abraham who at 99, the point of his circumcision, would become the first Jew. Melchizedek was a king and had political power; he was a believer and had great spiritual power.

“met Abraham” — “met” is an aorist active participle of sunantaw, a constative aorist that gathers up into one historical meeting all that occurred between Melchizedek and Abraham. This took a little time, at least a few hours, and therefore the constative aorist gathers up into one entirety everything that occurred in that historical meeting. The active voice: Melchizedek produced the action of the verb. He was the aggressor, the one who went to meet Abraham. Abraham had just won some great spiritual victories as well as military victories, and he was still very vulnerable. We are very vulnerable to defeat after great victories. Abraham had just won the greatest spiritual victory of his life to that point and was now very vulnerable to defeat. Therefore Melchizedek aggressively came to his rescue. The participle has antecedent action to the main verb which is found in verse two — “Abraham gave”.

At this point we have another participle, “returning” — the present active participle of u(postrefw, and aoristic present which expresses the idea of a present fact without reference to progress. It is called punctiliar action in present time. The active voice: Abraham produced the action of the verb, he is coming back from a military victory. The participle is circumstantial, and the circumstantial participle is followed by words which describe his success. Notice how it is emphasised. Although tactically Abraham was very successful, even though he won a battle, in winning a battle, in winning peace, in delivering people from the aggrandisement of a great dictator, notice what is mentioned. You must slaughter the enemy! That is exactly what is mentioned — “from the slaughter”, the preposition a)po plus the ablative of koph, and koph is a very strong word. It means that so many of the enemy were slaughtered that never again will they return to disturb the peace of that area.

“of the kings” refers here to a confederation of kings. The kings themselves were not slaughtered but their armies were.

“and blessed him” — “bless” is the aorist active participle of e)ulogew. In other words, here is a man who has come back from winning a great victory, and in winning this great victory he is now vulnerable. The aorist tense is a culminative aorist which views the event in its entirety but regards it from the viewpoint of existing results. The active voice: Melchizedek, a royal high priest, produced the action of the verb indicating his superiority over Abraham at a time of Abraham’s great spiritual victory. That is the implication of the active voice. Melchizedek was superior to Abraham as a believer, he was a great king and also a great military leader. Abraham has just emerged a military leader but Melchizedek was spiritually and every other way superior to Abraham, and was and always will be. It is the superior who ministers spiritual things to the inferior.

Translation of verse 1 — “For this Melchizedek, king of Salem, priest of the most high God, the one having met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings, the one having blessed him.”

All of this is amplified in detail in the fourteenth chapter of Genesis. It gives us the historical incident. Some things are not clear unless we are first of all familiar with Genesis 14 where we have Abraham’s four great victories. In verse 1 all of the men were those who had great kingdoms at the time and they form a combination. The warfare of this chapter is no small time operation, it was a large scale military expedition under the command of Chedorlaomer and when Abraham entered Canaan Chedorlaomer had already conquered the Jordan valley and had subjected it to tribute. When these cities of the valley revolted a military expedition went into Palestine under the command of Chedorlaomer, king of Elam. It would seem from the structure of the language that the king of Shinar occupied first place as far as bringing troops was concerned. The “kingdom of nations” is simply Galilee with larger boundaries, the country north of Jerusalem.

Verse 2 — “these made war.” The word “made” is the qal perfect of asah which means they manufactured war, and this is a very important concept. It means to manufacture something out of something, and these kings manufactured war out of their mental attitude sin, out of their old sin nature. And this gives us a great commentary on the source of war. War will always exist until the second advent of Christ. Jesus said “there will be wars and rumours of wars until I come”. People are always going to manufacture an excuse for war, and in verse 2 it says they manufactured war —

“with Bera, king of Sodom, and with Birsha, king of Gomorah, Shinab, king of Admah, and Shemeber, king of Zeboiim, and the king of Bela, which is Zoar.”

Verse 3 — “All these were joined to gather in the vale of Siddim.” When it says they “were joined together” it is the qal perfect of chabar and it means they have formed their battle in that area. Chabar is actually the Hebrew word for tactical disposition in the face of the enemy. So we now have forming up a tactical situation, a group of kings under Chedorlaomer about to attack in the vale of Siddim those who have come out to defend the Jordan valley which is now covered mostly by the Dead Sea.

What had happened to bring on this battle? Verse four begins retrospective disposition. “Twelve years they served Chedorlaomer.” The word abadh means to be the slaves, but not in the sense that we understand slavery. It means slavery in the sense that they paid tribute, they paid for protection. Then it says that in the thirteenth year they started a revolution — maradh.

Verse 5 — “and smote”. First of all, they didn’t go and attack the Jordan valley. All around the Jordan valley are some beautiful and high mountains, and in these mountains lived the giants. They attacked these giants, “the Rephaim … and the Zuzim … the Emim”, all races of giants that lived at that time. And notice it says he “smote” them, the hiphil imperfect of nacha means that he drove them back into the mountains. The hiphil stem means that he caused them to be slaughtered. Even though they were giants, even though they were strong, they could not hold up against a good military organisation. Chedorlaomer leads a well-trained, well-disciplined military organisation and well-trained military types can handle the strong man every time. This was a warn-up for the battle of the vale of Siddim.

Verse 6 — the Horites were also giants and they, too, were defeated.

Verse 7 — “And they returned”, the qal imperfect of shu which means gradually they pulled the various segments of this army together. The army had been broken up into many organisations, had gone out and conquered the various giants, and so on. Now they secured all of the flanks in the valley they were about to attack. This shows that Chedorlaomer and his military organisation were very wise when it came to tactical situations.

Verse 8 — the five kings of the five cities made their tactical disposition in the vale of Siddim. This is one of the first gigantic military enterprises recorded in history. This occurred between 2100 and 2000 BC. The spiritual as well as the military implications of this battle are absolutely fantastic. There are some other implications, too, that might be mentioned. In verse 10 “the vale of Siddim” was full of slime pits. The words “slime pits” means pits of asphalt. In other words, oil was practically on top of the ground in this portion of the middle east.

The Vale of Siddim

1. The vale of Siddim was a very beautiful green valley which later became the Salt Sea and the Dead Sea. The destruction of Sodom, Gomorah, and these five cities by God actually led to the removal of this valley.

2. Chedorlaomer used great military wisdom in first of all securing all of his flanks.

3. The Horites were cave dwellers who were later exterminated by the Edomites.

4. Notice that after extensive conquests in the area of Abraham, while all of the flanks were secured one was not. Abraham was actually on the flank rear of Chedorlaomer’s army as it reassembled. This tells us something. God is protecting Abraham. His territory was completely surrounded by this great invading army but it was not invaded. We have the principle of the wall of fire. Another principle: Jesus Christ controls history.

5. The line of march was from the north, around the east to Edom, and then to the vale of Siddim. They did not march directly through Abraham’s country.

6. After plundering all the tribes east and west of the Aribah the gave battle to the kings of the five cities in the vale of Siddim. The king of Sodom is the ruler of that group.

7. The valley is filled with asphalt pits. Manoeuvrability is very difficult and the asphalt pits will make retreat impossible. So the king of Sodom is typical of the degradation of Sodom, typical of any society that permits any type of homosexuality. This society destroys itself, and he didn’t have any more sense than to pick a battlefield filled with asphalt pits where he could neither manoeuvre nor retreat.

8. The battle was won by Chedorlaomer. We read in verses 11 and 12 — “And they took all the goods of Sodom and Gomorah, and all their food, and went their way. And they took Lot, Abram’s brother’s son, who dwelt in Sodom, with all of his goods and departed.” Note that Lot is a reversionistic believer who has chosen to live in this area, and has chosen on the basis of human viewpoint. So we have the plundering of Sodom, the first consequence of Lot’s human viewpoint choice in reversionism.

9. Abraham’s choice of faith protected him completely from the invasion of Chedorlaomer. He was completely by-passed. Principle: Jesus Christ controls history. Principle: There is a wall of fire around Abraham. Lot’s choice of sight rather than faith cost him every materialistic possession at this particular point.

This is the background for Genesis 14:13-24 where Abraham demonstrates four great victories. The first victory is found in verses 13 and 14. It is the victory of mental attitude, the victory of Bible doctrine in the soul to the extent that Abraham was not one of those I-told-you-so types. He was not a gloater. Lot had made his own trouble and produced his own misery but we do not find Abraham as a gloater at this time.

Verse 13 — “And there came one who had escaped.” In the Hebrew we have the qal imperfect of bo plus hapalit. Hapalit means someone who is a fugitive who has escaped with his life but is not even secure in his health. He is a desperate man, one who manage to evade all of the asphalt pits and get completely away, and apparently he was someone related to Lot — a servant of some kind — and someone who also knew Abraham and chose to go with Lot rather than Abraham. So we have “the fugitive”, as he is called. At one time in his life he could have stayed with Abraham or he could go with Lot. He had free will, he had volition, and he went off with Lot into the beautiful green valley, into the place of Funsville, into the place which represent the concept of a frantic search for happiness. He went off into reversionism with Lot and he, too, laughed at Abraham and ridiculed Abraham for living where he lived. But when disaster hit he remembers Abraham, the man who was positive toward doctrine, someone who was on the right track. Therefore, where does he go when he has nothing left, when his life is in danger, when he is fleeing for his life? The fugitive goes to Abraham.

“and told Abram” — the word “told” is the hiphil of nagadh. It means he was forced to tell all. In the hiphil stem, the causative active voice, means that there was no place else to go. He was forced — it was almost like compulsion — to run and tell Abraham what had happened. Remember that from the human viewpoint Abraham can do nothing. This is a large army and Abraham does not have any such army. The fugitive knows that but he is desperate, he has escaped, he knows there is nowhere else to go. When the chips are down and the pressure is on people always come to the believer who has demonstrated stability and divine power for the crisis. Men often laugh at the strong believer, until the emergency. In times of distress people always come to the one who is in doctrine, who has stability, who is moving toward supergrace or is in the supergrace life.

Notice the testimony of Abraham — “Abram the Hebrew”. Hebrew simply means to cross over the river, it is not the word for the Jew. The Jew comes at age 99. This is Abraham, the one who crossed over the river. He crossed the Euphrates to live in this land.

“for he dwelt in the plain of Mamre the Amorite.” He was actually living in a valley which belonged to Mamre the Amorite, “the brother of Eschol, the brother of Aner: and these were confederate with Abram” — they had a treaty with him. They were also coverts of Abram and at this particular point they are his very good friends. He has rejected Sodom. Lot wanted to go to Sodom and have a good social life. Abram stayed back in the hills and God brought to him a wonderful social life. These three people, under the tutelage of Abram, are wonderful people. They are Amorites which is a synonym today for decadence, but at this time they were wonderful friends. Abram stayed where he was, God provided him some wonderful friends.

Verse 14 — “Abram heard” — the qal imperfect of shama. In this chapter Abraham is a great man. He hasn’t reached supergrace but he is positive and he is on his way. He doesn’t ridicule, he doesn’t even stop for one minute to criticise lot — no judging, no gloating, no callousness, no indifference. He is not doing anything that is negative. This is the attitude of grace found in Galatians 6:1,9-10. Abraham under doctrine is only concerned about Lot. So the first victory of Abraham is the victory of Bible doctrine in his soul, a mental attitude free from mental attitude sin. He is not bitter or vindictive or implacable, jealous or gloating, or any of the things that characterise the petty person.

The second victory is a victory in battle. The first was a spiritual victory of mental attitude, the second is the battle victory of Abraham in verses 15 and 16.

In verse 14 — “And when Abram heard that his brother was taken captive” — he has heard what had happened. This is not quite a correct translation — “had been captured” is the niphal perfect of shabah, and it indicates that there will be dire results.

“he armed his trained servants” — wrong, he did not arm his trained servants. The hiphil of ruq means he led out his trained servants. Ruq doesn’t mean to arm them, it means they are already armed, they are already trained. They are under arms and he merely leads them out. The invasion of Chedorlaomer has put Abraham on alert. Abraham believed in universal military training and he had trained everyone in his household — 318, not the entire army but all the people who worked for Abraham; and everyone had some military training, everyone was prepared, everyone knew his equipment, and they were pulled together for battle. He led them out.

“and pursued them all the way to Dan” — the word “pursued” tells us a great deal, especially in the imperfect tense. It means first of all they had to locate the enemy. This means that they had some people to go out on reconnaissance. Once they located the enemy then they had to determine the direction the enemy was going, find out the exact force of the enemy, how they were operating as far as moving from point A to point B. All of these things they learned very rapidly so that Abraham in verse 15 makes a decision. And this is a tremendous bit of moral courage. With possibly only as many as 1500 men he is about to launch an attack on anywhere from 50-100,000 men. He is greatly outnumbered.

Verse 15 — “He divided himself against them.” This is a reflexive niphal of chalaq and it doesn’t mean that he divided himself, it really means that he separated his force into groups to attack from various points. He is going to make a night attack. It is interesting that here after a great battle we have a column moving toward Damascus. This is a long column, they are carrying a lot of booty, a lot of prisoners, so they are stretched out. Abraham makes a reconnaissance up and down the column. he is not dividing himself against a concentrated force, he is dividing himself against a column in order the recover a segment of the column, e.g. where Lot is. They are strung out; Abraham has darkness and concentration, so he has everything going for him tactically — surprise, cover of darkness, and concentration. These things make a great deal of difference because now he is going to have his second victory, he is going to win the battle.

“and smote them” — the word “smote” is the hiphil imperfect of nakah which means he slaughtered them. It doesn’t do any good to talk over a table, you talk over the dead bodies of the enemy. Notice that he not only “smote” them but he pursued them. A victory must be followed by pursuit. Why pursuit? Because those you don’t kill you must scare to death.

Verse 16 — “he brought back”, the hiphil perfect of shub, literally, “he caused to return”. He caused through military action, military training. Notice the principles. God protected Abraham because Jesus Christ controls history, but when the crisis came Abraham became aggressive. And when Jesus Christ controls history and Bible doctrine controls a man in history that man becomes aggressive. He went after the enemy and he used his head. He “caused to return all of the goods”, the materialistic things. Great wealth is implied in the word “goods”; “he also caused to return again” — we have shub again, in the hiphil perfect — “his brother Lot, and his goods, and the women also, and the people.” This is success; this is victory. Abraham has just had two great victories.

Now Abraham is stimulated and he is in great danger for he has just seen more wealth than he has ever seen. The Jordan valley and the five city states were very concentrated in wealth, so we have in verses 17-23, Abraham’s third victory. In the first victory Abraham was the aggressor in that he refused to enter into mental attitude sins. He refused to criticise, he refused to gloat, he refused to run down Lot for his very own decision. That is grace. But the second victory was one of his own military training. Like all good Chaldeans Abraham somewhere had a good military background, and he had been faithful in training his men. But now he is very vulnerable to losing the power, the dynamics of the first two victories, and this is where Melchizedek is coming into the picture, at the time when Abraham needed him the most.

Notice that Abraham has three great friends, all Amorites — Aner, Mamri, Eschol. Now they cannot help Abraham any more because while they are born-again believers they are baby believers, they do not have enough doctrine. Now someone greater than Abraham, a human being, must come into his life. And someone greater than Abraham must minister to him in spiritual things.

Verse 17 — the attack of the king of Sodom. “And the king of Sodom went out to meet him.” Notice that the king of Sodom did not get caught. He was a fugitive too. The king of Sodom went one way, another fugitive came to Abraham. “Went out” is the qal imperfect of jatsa, which means aggressive action. Notice that when the king of Sodom sees all of this wealth coming back sees a chance to recoup. He is going to go out to make a deal with Abraham. The king of Sodom has nothing but he is going to try to get his people back and give Abraham the wealth, and he is going to immediately by his own ability make himself greater than Abraham. His plot is to make himself greater than Abraham to rob Abraham of the victory by coming out with a deal. He will give Abraham all of the wealth which will make Abraham the greatest man in the world, but he will keep them people. He will tell the people, “I made Abraham wealthy.” In this way he will make himself superior to Abraham and eventually recoup that wealth as well. So it is a Satanic device. Here is a man who is going to try to make himself greater than Abraham. But here comes a man also a king, the equivalent of the king of Sodom in that he is a king but he is greater than Abraham. So a person truly greater than Abraham is going to come at this point and save his neck spiritually.

Verse 18 — Melchizedek to the rescue. “Melchizedek, king of Salem, brought.” He, too, jatsa’d but in the hiphil. In other words, when the king of Sodom — qal stem for jatsa — advanced aggressively to attack, Melchizedek also was caused to advance aggressively to protect Abraham. Why? Because Melchizedek was a spiritual giant, he was a supergrace high priest.

“with bread and wine because [not “and”] he was the priest of the most high God” — the most high God is Jesus Christ. He represents the Lord Jesus Christ.

Principles in this victory

1. This battle is a second battle — the battle of the two kings. Abraham is out of it. This is the king of Sodom versus Melchizedek.

2. The king of Sodom — Satan’s representative — came to rob Abraham of the victory of grace.

3. If the king of Sodom can make the motive of Abraham appear to be desire for the spoils of battle then Satan can still win by obscuring the grace issue.

4. Furthermore, everyone will give the king of Sodom credit for enriching Abraham, and with the people under his command he will regain the wealth. Beware of the intriguer.

5. God’s matchless grace is manifest at this point. Abraham receives reinforcement in the form of a royal priest.

6. We are most vulnerable to defeat after great victory. Abraham is no exception.

7. Melchizedek arrives at the scene to help Abraham resist the devil’s counter attack. The timing is perfect.

8. Melchizedek did not arrive while Abraham was talking with the escapee or while Abraham was attacking or pursuing. He arrived after the victory was secure.

9. Melchizedek came on the scene while the more deadly enemy, the king of Sodom, pursued Abraham. In other words, God sent Melchizedek when he was needed most. Neither the 318 trained men nor his confederates can protect Abraham. He needs someone greater than himself.

Principle: There will be a time in your life when you face a spiritual crisis or a spiritual attack, and into your life will come someone greater than you are spiritually, and that person will save your neck just as Melchizedek saved Abraham’s.

Verse 18 — Melchizedek comes to the rescue; verse 19 — the spiritual administration of blessing. Notice that he did not tell Abraham, “Don’t”. He gave Abraham certain things representative of certain doctrines, he brought Abraham’s focus away from wealth and frantic search for happiness and brought it back to the thing that really counts, occupation with the person of Jesus Christ.

Verse 19 — “He blessed him”, the piel imperfect of barak. This goes with the aorist participle e)ulogew. The piel stem in the Hebrew is very intensive and it indicates the fact that he taught him some doctrine as well as administering bread and wine, and in this whole factor — the teaching plus the administration of the elements — took Abraham’s eyes off of the wealth and back on to the Lord. Abraham needed to be taught and Melchizedek became his teacher on this occasion. This is a case of where he taught him once and this saved everything for Abraham.

“of the most high God” is literally, “From the most high God,” who is Jesus Christ, “possessor of heaven and earth.”

Verse 20 — “And blessed be the most high God, who hath delivered thine enemy into thine hand.” When he says “delivered” he is using the piel of magak, and by using this particular word he indicates that so far he has been delivered in contact with the enemy. By using magak he indicates that there is a greater enemy, a more subtle enemy, an enemy related to the angelic conflict, an unseen enemy. You see the king of Sodom but you don’t see the motivation behind the king of Sodom. You don’t know that the king of Sodom is demon possessed, that he is controlled by Satan himself, and that what he proposes is Satanic activity in order to neutralise the victory. In other words, the angelic conflict follows the military conflict.

Therefore, we read “he brought forth bread and wine.” He was the priest of the most high God. He says in verse 20, “God has blessed you by delivering you from your enemies.” And then we read, “And Abraham gave him tithes of all.” The giving of tithes here means the giving of tithes from the top of each pile. He took and gave Melchizedek a portion of each pile of wealth, the top tenth of every pile.

We have three things here: bread, wine, and blessing. The bread is analogous to the humanity of Jesus Christ who is being represented. And long before Jesus said, “I am the bread of life; he that cometh unto me shall never hunger,” Melchizedek knew Jesus Christ not only as his saviour, but as a supergrace believer he had great appreciation for Christ the bread of life, the basis for his own eternal salvation. The wine is analogous to the priestly function at the altar and refers to the Lord Jesus Christ on the altar of the cross. It speaks of the blood of Christ which cleanses from all sin or the work of Jesus Christ bearing our sins in His own body on the tree. The bread and the wine would never be used again until the royal priesthood functioned. Bread and wine are always the royal priesthood and when the Church Age interrupts the Age of Israel there are no longer animal sacrifices of the Levitical priesthood so we go back to bread and wine. Bread and wine speak of the work of the Lord Jesus Christ and they are the signs of the royal priesthood only. The Levitical priesthood deals with that which is inferior and animals sacrifices. The third factor is the blessing. It is the blessing that has the least amount of emphasis for blessing has to do with the communication of Bible doctrine. The blessing brings into focus certain things. We do not have all that Melchizedek but we have a summary. The most high God is Jesus Christ; He has delivered Abraham in battle. He is the possessor of heaven and earth, therefore Abraham does not have to depend upon this money, this wealth that has been recovered, for the Lord Jesus Christ possesses everything. He has for Abraham some wealth of his own which will come along with supergrace. Melchizedek reminds him of God’s faithfulness when he says that He has delivered him. And when he had finished his doctrinal dissertation it was Abraham who gave to him a tenth off of the top of each pile. Therefore Abraham does something else. First of all, he tithes to Melchizedek. He also now says no to the king of Sodom because he has been given by Melchizedek bread, wine, and blessing [doctrine]. It is the doctrine that causes him to make up his own mind. Melchizedek did not tell him what to do. Melchizedek gave him pertinent doctrine and he took it from there. So Melchizedek, in communication Bible doctrine, did not communicate which course to take because he recognised the freedom of Abraham. Melchizedek gave the doctrine, now it is up to Abraham to use it or not to use it. Abraham uses it, for he says in verse 22 to the king of Sodom, “I have lifted up my hand unto the Lord” — the hiphil perfect of rum. “I have been caused”, in other words. He was caused or motivated by Bible doctrine. Translation: “I have been motivated to lift up my hand to the Lord, the most high God [Jesus Christ], the possessor of heaven and earth [He owns everything].”

Verse 23 — “Therefore I will not take from a thread, even a shoelatchet, and that I will not take anything that is thine, lest thou shouldst say, I have made Abraham rich.” That isn’t what it says. Abraham said, “Even from a thread, even to a thong [of a sandal]” — he started out by naming the smallest thing of all that was recovered — “Even if I take all which is yours, then you will say, I have caused Abraham to become rich.” He absolutely refused to take anything for himself and therefore Abraham won the third great victory.

But there is another victory. People who win victories like this always have a tendency to get self-righteous, and the greatest victory is the last victory. Abraham now has the doctrine to realise, he doesn’t need to take anything from anyone. It would neutralise his motivation, it would destroy him. But the fourth victory in verse 24 is fantastic.

Verse 24 — “Save” means except — “only that which the young men have eaten, and the portion of the men which went with me, Aner, Eschol, and Mamre; let them take their portion.”

Summary of the fourth victory

1. Abraham in self-righteousness and pride could have imposed his own standards of spiritual maturity on his troops, on his new converts, but they are not as advanced as he is in the spiritual life. So therefore, he has higher standards than they have. He will not superimpose his higher standards on them, that is self-righteousness.

2. If Abraham had demanded that they not take any spoils he would have been guilty of pride and self-righteousness. Notice the great wisdom of a man when he gets squared away doctrinally. He was about to lose his doctrinal perspective when Melchizedek came along. And notice the results of Melchizedek’s teaching. Abraham sheds his self-righteousness. When you are occupied with the person of Christ you have the highest possible standards without superimposing them in legalism on someone else who does not have the doctrinal moxie to cope. That is the greatest victory of all. He won a great spiritual victory in the field of motivation. You would think this is the peak, but it isn’t. It is lack of self-righteousness, the refusal to force his leadership upon these men who do not have the moxie to cope with it.

3. It is a temptation to impose his high standards and spiritual maturity on those who were not ready or could not understand.

4. Abraham recognised the principle, the reimbursement of his 318 servants, and he recognised that he could not impose high spiritual standards on believers who had not had the same doctrinal benefits and who had not reached the same spiritual peak. Therefore he absolutely refused to make any imposition of self-righteousness on these people.

Verse 2 — “To whom” is a dative masculine singular from the relative pronoun o(j. O(j refers to Melchizedek. It is the dative of indirect object indicating the one in whose interest the action of the verb is performed. Then we have the adjunctive use of kai — “also.” “To whom [Melchizedek] also Abraham” — Abraham the patriarch, Abraham the founder of the Jewish race, Abraham the one who eventually reached supergrace under dramatic conditions.

“gave” — the aorist active indicative of merizw does not mean to give, it means to apportion, and it in keeping with the historical sequence where he took one tenth off of the top of every pile of recovered booty and gave it to Melchizedek. The aorist tense is a culminative aorist used to view the event in its entirety but to regard it from the viewpoint of existing results. The existing results are very important here because by giving ten per cent of all of the materialistic things recovered, first of all Melchizedek was recognised as the superior one and the one who provided the spiritual blessing and benefit for Abraham. Secondly, Abraham became a citizen of the city state of Salem, which means that Abraham was the original citizen of Jerusalem and on that very spot where he became a citizen — the citizenship of Abraham under the king of Salem. Abraham had no citizenship, he was a man without a country, he had left Ur of the Chaldees, but by paying his taxes to Melchizedek he becomes a citizen of the kingdom of Salem — by paying his taxes Abraham will some day inherit a city from God: the great Salem of all, the Jerusalem coming down out of heaven. Just very near that spot Abraham offered his son Isaac, so the citizenship of Abraham is also involved — every spiritual blessing as well as Abraham’s citizenship. “To whom also Abraham apportioned.” The active voice indicates that Abraham produced the action of the verb. The declarative indicative represents the verbal idea from the viewpoint of reality. This is a statement of dogmatic and unqualified assertion. This is a statement whereby Abraham declares two things: a) Melchizedek is superior to him and is a blessing to him spiritually; b) He not only recognises the priesthood of Melchizedek and the spiritual benefit but he recognises the kingship of Melchizedek, and he becomes a citizen of the nation of which Melchizedek is the ruler. Remember that Melchizedek is a king high priest and the tithes go to the king; Abraham becomes a citizen of his country. Also, the tithes go to the priest — spiritual benefits. So there are two great principles and they are tied in together — the citizenship of the kingdom of Salem plus the recognition of spiritual benefit from Melchizedek.

Then we have the phrase “A tenth part of all”, from which we get the English word ‘tithe’, for the English word ‘tithing’ means tenth. The Greek here is dekathn a)po pantwn. These are genitives of description as well as the objective genitive. The genitive case is used with nouns of action to become the object rather than the accusative — “tithes from all”. “All” is in the genitive plural to indicate every pile of booty and Abraham went to every pile, took ten per cent off of the top of it, and that went to Melchizedek.

Summary

1. From the top of every pile of spoils Abraham distributed a tenth to Melchizedek, but he distributed this (under Genesis 14:20) not just to the high priest but to the king priest. Abraham, in this way, is no longer a man without a country. From this point on he is a man with a country. He is a citizen under the rulership of Melchizedek. In that way he recognises his temporal authority. At the same time he recognises his spiritual authority because Melchizedek administered to him bread, wine, doctrine.

2. Abraham was peculiar in that he was actually a family priest from the first battalion plus a representative of the second battalion because Levi was in his line. So Abraham himself is in a rather strange situation, he is a third battalion man because he is a family high priest as a patriarch. In his loins, the Levitical priesthood, the second battalion. Therefore, he is a representative of two battalions of the priesthood and he is recognising the superiority of the first battalion which is the royal priesthood. Remember that Abraham did two things. He first of all became a citizen of Jerusalem, and therefore he is the first alien to do so. He is also the last citizen of Jerusalem in that all of his life as long as he lives, and forever, he is going to live in a tent in time because of his citizenship in Salem. And God will bring down at the beginning of the Millennium the Jerusalem from above which will be suspended over the earth and will be the portion of Abraham forever.

3. In this historical encounter Abraham represents the Levitical priesthood which is part of the new race progeny.

4. Therefore, tithing to Melchizedek not only means the superiority of the royal priesthood over the family priesthood, but more important, it represents the superiority of the royal priesthood over the Levitical priesthood.

5. Remember that this was a historical meeting between two human beings representing two priesthoods. But that isn’t all. Abraham was a patriarch but he had to have a country, he had to recognise temporal authority. Abraham had no temporal authority to recognise until he met Melchizedek. When he met Melchizedek he said this man is my right ruler and I recognise his authority. And by giving him taxes he recognised his authority. Tithing is taxation.

6. The rest of this verse indicates the superiority of even the name of the royal priest over Abraham and the Levitical priesthood. First of all, the name is represented in the Hebrew because the rest this verse comments on the Hebrew name, deriving certain prophetic implications. The Hebrew name is Malki tsedek, which means “king of righteousness”, but it is literally called Melchizedek. Secondly, he is also a temporal ruler, Melek Shalem.

“first” is an adverb prwton, meaning sequence of enumeration. In other words, the name of the royal priest will be translated and interpreted —

1. “being by interpretation” is first of all a present passive participle of e)rmhneuw which means to translate, to explain, or to interpret. Here it means to interpret.

2. The translation does not occur in the passive voice. It only means to interpret in the passive voice, so it is translated “first [Melchizedek] when being interpreted.” This is the correct translation. Now we get the interpretation of his name from the Hebrew.

3. The present tense is a customary present, it denotes what habitually occurs or may be reasonably expected to occur. It is called the present tense of repeated action to denote the consistency of interpretation when Melchizedek was being examined.

4. The passive voice indicates that the name of Melchizedek is being both translated into Greek and at the same time interpreted.

5. The interpretation is obvious. The Greek noun dikaiosunh refers to God’s righteousness or +R. The last part of Melchizedek’s name is tsedek, and translated into the Greek that is dikaiosunh — “righteousness”, so that his name is king of righteousness.

6. There is a definite precedent involved in this passage. Also, the participle is a temporal participle and therefore translated “when being interpreted.”

7. While Abraham is born again — Genesis 15:6 — the line of the Levitical priesthood does not depend upon regeneration but depends upon physical birth, human heredity.

8. However, the interpretation of the name Melchizedek indicates the line of the royal priesthood depends upon the new birth and not physical birth or heredity.

9. Levitical priests were sometimes born again and sometimes they were not. The first one, Aaron, was born again. However, all royal priests have to be born again and justified. This, then, is a superiority. This is the superiority brought out by the name Melchizedek.

“king of righteousness, and after that also” — now we have the second superiority in enumeration. The adverb is e)peita which denotes a succession. This is the second point brought out in his title. First his name is a point; now his title is a point. His name is a point in that the royal priesthood must have a spiritual heritage rather than a physical heritage, and there is no physical birth that can put you into the royal priesthood. A second point is brought out by the adverb e)peita. And this point, along with de, used as a connective particle, kai used as the adjunctive kai, should be translated “and secondly” or “then also.”

“king of Salem” — basileuj Salhm which is the equivalent of melek Shalem — “which is”, the relative pronoun o(j in the nominative neuter, the neuter indicates a point or a principle is brought out, and the present active indicative of e)imi — “and then also King of Salem, which keeps on being King of Peace” — e)irhnh.

What does e)irhnh mean? It means security and tranquillity here. And we have already seen the principle: Why after winning a great victory did Abraham become a citizen of Salem? Because Salem was basing its tranquillity and peace — temporal concept — on strong military. Therefore Abraham with his small military recognised how God had graced him out, but he recognised that he needed to come under the protection of a great military organisation. And came under the greatest; a military organisation that lasted all of the way until David’s time — 1000 years. And even though the land of Palestine was invaded many, many times Jerusalem remained intact as the kingdom of Salem and it was not conquered until David’s day by a stronger military. Therefore there was security and tranquillity.

“which being interpreted King of righteousness, and after that also King of Salem” King of righteousness is the spiritual superiority of Melchizedek, king of Salem is the temporal superiority. Abraham paid taxes to the king of Salem because the king of Salem had a strong military and security, and he wanted to become a citizen of a country which followed the principle of the law of divine establishment. Now look at the principle. On the basis of his name [Melchizedek] he recognised that the doctrine he gave him was the basis of victory. On the basis of the fact that he had just fought and won a victory and he saw that Palestine and the middle east was a hot spot, he also became a citizen. He became a citizen of the city state of Salem. So these two are put in at the end of this verse to indicate the principles of superiority and the concepts by which men live under freedom.

Notice how the verse is translated: “To whom also Abraham apportioned a tenth from all the spoils; first [superiority] when Melchizedek being interpreted King of righteousness, and second, [superiority] also King of Salem, which is being interpreted, King of tranquillity and security.”

Verse 3 — the advantages of being Melchizedek. “Without father” — a)patwr, means independent of paternal descent. Melchizedek had a father but his father wasn’t a king. This goes with the previous verse. He is a king independent of paternal descent. He isn’t a king because his father is a king, he is a king because he conquered a kingdom and became a king by his military ability. There is no paternal genealogy recorded for Melchizedek. The royal priesthood battalion does not depend upon physical birth. This is in contrast to the Levitical battalion which is dependent upon recorded genealogy, being able to place one’s line and one’s descent from Aaron through Eliazar or Ithimar. The only way to qualify for the royal priesthood is through the new birth — regeneration, and the baptism of the Holy Spirit — which only occurs during the Church Age. Therefore, “without father” means without recorded father, not recorded in a genealogy.

“without mother” — a)mhtwr, which means independent of maternal descent. The mother of Melchizedek was not a queen, therefore he did not become a king by inheriting from his mother. He is without recorded pedigree, without genealogical papers, without any genealogy to prove royalty through his mother’s side.

“without descent” — a)genaealoghtoj, without any genealogical papers. So literally, “without recorded father, without recorded mother.” He had a mother and father but they are not recorded in royalty tables of genealogy — without genealogical record is the meaning of the Greek word.

“having” — present active participle of e)xw plus a negative, mhth a)xh h(merwn refers to a birth certificate, a knowledge of his birthday. The historical record is silent regarding the time of his birth. His priesthood does not depend upon the possession of a birth certificate.

“nor end of life” — we do not have a death certificate so that we can see the perpetuation of his royal line. So literally, “having neither birth certificate not death certificate.”

“but made like unto” — perfect passive participle a)fwmoiw. This means to produce a copy, to cause to resemble. Here it should be translated “having caused to resemble.” The perfect tense is an intensive perfect, indicating completion of the action with results that continue. Melchizedek will always be a pattern of Jesus Christ. He is not Jesus Christ, he is a pattern of Jesus Christ. By obscuring his parents, his genealogy, his birth, his death, the royal priesthood cannot be related to any human factor related to physical birth. Here is royalty based on spiritual factors alone and not on physical birth.

“having been caused to resemble the Son of God” — causal participle here. He is not the Son of God. This verb is never used for exact likenesses or for anything except resemblance. The Son of God is used for the deity of Christ in hypostatic union with His humanity. Jesus Christ is in the same royal priesthood battalion as Melchizedek.

Now follows bad punctuation in the KJV. It is Jesus Christ who abides perpetually, not Melchizedek — “but having been cause to resemble the Son of God who remains” — the present active indicative of menw. In the English Bibles we have “abides” but it should be translated “remains.” This is a static present tense used to denote a condition or status as perpetually existing. The active voice: Jesus Christ produces the action of the verb. The indicative mood is declarative, it represents the verbal idea from the viewpoint of unqualified assertion. This is a dogmatic principle that not Melchizedek but Jesus Christ is perpetuated as a priest. The Greek noun i(ereuj refers to the humanity of Christ. This is only used of humanity. Son of God is His deity and here is His humanity. So the combination of Son of God and i(ereuj gives us the uniqueness of our high priest, the Lord Jesus Christ.

“continually” is a prepositional phrase, e)ij to dianekej; dianekej means perpetually.

Translation: “Without recorded father, without recorded mother, without genealogical record, having neither birth certificate nor death certificate; having been caused to resemble the Son of God who remains a priest perpetually.”

The Lord Jesus Christ remains a priest perpetually, and the Lord Jesus Christ as a priest was a sign to the Melchizedek battalion and there are four areas of His assignment:

1. Christ is appointed forever in the divine decrees — Hebrews 5:6; 7:17; Psalm 110:4.

2. Christ is appointed to the royal priesthood — Hebrews 5:10.

3. Christ is assigned specifically to the Melchizedek battalion — Hebrews 6:20.

4. The appointment of Christ was made with an immutable divine oath — Hebrews 7:21.

The doctrine of the priesthood (Review)

1. A priest is a member of the human race representing the human race. The priest is taken from the male population of the human race, never from angels. He must partake of the nature of the person or persons for whom he acts or officiates or represents. He is a bona fide member of the human race, and this is true of the Lord Jesus Christ — Hebrews 5:1; 7:4,5,14,28; 10:5,10,14.

2. The sphere of priestly function. The priest and the high priest must function in the sphere of spiritual phenomena. Therefore he is appointed for man’s benefit in spiritual things. This means the royal priesthood of the Church Age is related to Bible doctrine.

3. The categories of priesthood are three.

The first battalion: the royal priesthood of which Melchizedek is the stated pattern — Hebrews 7:1-3. Melchizedek was both a king and a priest but without any emphasis on parents, genealogy, birth or death certificates. Melchizedek appeared to Abraham, ministering to him bread and wine, the symbols of Christ’s ministry on the cross as well as doctrine, of course. Under the Levitical priesthood the cross was symbolised by animal sacrifices which have been discontinued. But the symbols of the royal priesthood remain — the bread and the wine continue. The office of the royal priesthood is not hereditary but perpetual. The appointment is not related to physical birth but the new birth. The appointment is related to the ministries of God the Holy Spirit at the point of salvation. The appointment is based upon understanding the interruption of the Jewish Age, the doctrine of the mystery, the doctrine of intercalation.

The second battalion: the Levitical priesthood which began with Aaron, the older brother of Moses. The concept of this priestly ministry of spiritual things is found in Numbers 16:5. They were commissioned, holy, and allowed to “come near,” i.e. to approach, the altar. The priesthood was perpetuated through the natural line of Aaron. His older sons Nadab and Abihu lost out as revolutionists. The surviving sons, Eleazar and Ithamar, formed the basis of the Levitical priesthood. Physical defects caused elimination of a priest in this particular line — Leviticus 21:17-21. The Levitical priesthood was supported by 13 Levitical cities — Joshua 21:13-19. They were supported by part of the taxation of the nation, an annual tithe — Leviticus 23:10. Other support came from redemption money of the firstborn — Numbers 18:16. The spiritual phenomena of the Levitical priesthood was limited to shadows — Hebrews 10:1-4.

The third battalion is the family priesthood in which the patriarch of the family functioned as the priest. Illustrations: Adam, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob.

4. The royal high priest of the Church Age.

a) Jesus Christ is the royal high priest of the Church Age.

b) As such He has fulfilled the first function of the priesthood by offering Himself on the altar of the cross for the sins of the world.

c) From this function comes the strategic victory of the angelic conflict: resurrection, ascension, session — Hebrews 19:5-14.

d) He was appointed forever under divine decrees — Hebrews 5:6.

e) He was appointed to the royal priesthood — Hebrews 5:10.

f) he was assigned to the Melchizedek battalion — Hebrews 6:20.

g) His appointment was accompanied by the immutable oath, therefore His appointment is under two immutable things — Hebrews 7:21.

5. The royal priesthood of the Church Age follows the royal high priest. You cannot have a high priest without some priests. The high priest is not alone, every believer in the Church Age is a part of the royal priesthood, appointed by the baptism of the Spirit; again, the badge of royalty, the indwelling of the Holy Spirit; the security of royalty, the sealing ministry of God the Holy Spirit; and the apportioning of spiritual gifts is the recognition and guarantee that supergrace is available for all believers — 1 Peter 2:5,9; Revelation 1:6; 5:10; 20:6.

6. The purpose of the royal priesthood of the Church Age is to reach the supergrace life — Hebrews 6:17-20; Ephesians 3:17-21; 4:11-16.

7. The function of the royal priesthood is delineated in Hebrews 13.

Verse 4 — the superiority of the royal priesthood. “Now” — the transitional use of the particle de. No contrast is intended, we merely go on now from using the name of Melchizedek and his title and seeing their significance as related to tithing or taxation. “Now consider” — the present active imperative of qeorew, from which we get out English word in geometry, “theorem.” It means to observe. The present tense is retroactive progressive present denoting something begun in the past, continued into the present. Again, it is the present tense of duration. For many centuries believers have observed the superiority of the royal priesthood of the Church Age. The active voice: this is a command to all believers of the Church Age to orient to their dispensation, to orient to the supergrace objective, to orient to the angelic conflict; all of these things we orient to by the doctrines of the mystery. The imperative mood: this is a command.

“how great” — this is a correlative pronoun, phlikoj which denotes a geometrical magnitude. it is distinguished from other words which are arithmetical. And this is a geometrical magnitude, so it is an extremely strong word. Used with it is posoj which indicates the celebrityship of Jesus Christ from the standpoint of His high priesthood.

“Now consider how distinguished this man” — not correct. We have a demonstrative pronoun used as a substantive, o(utoj. The use of the demonstrative pronoun here is to indicate not only the celebrityship of Jesus Christ but it is used in reference to someone in the context. The best translation is: “how distinguished this one (this celebrity).”

“unto whom” — now we go back to Melchizedek; “the patriarch Abraham” — “gave,” we are coming back to taxation again, ten per cent: aorist active indicative of didomi. The aorist tense is a culminative aorist in which the event is viewed in its entirety but regarded from the viewpoint of its existing results. The existing results: Abraham paid taxes to Melchizedek, Melchizedek was superior to him in temporal power, in spiritual attainment. The active voice: Abraham produced the action of the verb. We have a declarative indicative for unqualified assertion. It is a fact: Abraham paid taxes to Melchizedek king of Salem. Note that he paid to Melchizedek King of Salem. The name and the title are both involved. The name has to do with the spiritual superiority and the title has to do with temporal superiority, and both are involved.

“the tenth” is the accusative singular with no definite article — dekatoj is the noun, it means a tenth and it is used for a definite taxation. The absence of the definite article, by the way, calls attention to the qualitative aspects of this word. The tithe was given from the best spoils, the top of the pile — recognition of Melchizedek in two areas of life: spiritual and temporal. By tithing Abraham actually became a citizen of Salem, and at the same time he recognised the spiritual benefits of being ministered to by Melchizedek.

“of the spoils” is e)k plus a)kroqiniwn which has to do with the top of the heap, the best of the spoil, the finest things there.

Translation: “Now observe how distinguished this one to whom Abraham the patriarch had give a tenth from the best part of the booty.”

This is a significant act on the part of Abraham recognising superiority of Melchizedek king of Salem, priest of the most high God. This was Abraham’s positive response to the one who ministered to him in spiritual things — the bread, the wine, the blessing. Notice that Abraham had positive volition, he listened to the teaching of doctrine. He received the bread and wine as administration of the occupation of Christ, the only case we have of anything resembling communion. And it was a bona fide communion because Melchizedek is in the royal priest battalion. Only in the royal priest battalion is communion possible. Positive volition toward doctrine was Abraham’s third victory which resulted in his fourth victory over self-righteousness. This was also response to the kingship of Melchizedek, the tithing came afterward and was a sign of entering into the citizenship of Melchizedek’s kingdom.

Verse 5 — the significance of Abraham’s tithing. “And verily” — the continuative use of the conjunction kai plus the nominative plural definite article, plus the affirmative particle men. We have a very interesting thing here. This is something that anyone who has ever studied classical Greek will remember — “On the one had or the other.” Whoever wrote Hebrews was a man with a classical Greek education. Whoever this man was he was someone who graduated from the university of Alexandria which was the only classical Greek university in the Roman world. So we have instead of “And verily”, “And those indeed” or “On the one hand”.

“that are” is not found in the original — “of the sons of Levi” — e)k plus the ablative plural of u(ioj plus Leui for “Levi.”

“receive” — present active participle of lambanw, and the present tense should be translated “receiving.” The present tense is the static present used to represent a condition assumed as perpetually existing. The active voice: the Levitical line of descent from Aaron receives the action of the verb, except for the physical disqualifications listed in Leviticus 21:17-21. The active voice indicates that they receive it and do it. The participle is a circumstantial participle dealing with the office of priesthood. The “office of priesthood” is one word: i(erateia, which refers to the actual office of priesthood in contrast to the priest himself.

“have” — present active indicative of e)xw, “have and keep having”. The customary present denotes that which habitually occurs. The active voice: the Levitical priesthood is under the command to collect the taxes (tithes). The indicative mood is declarative indicating it was the job of the Levitical priesthood in Israel to collect the taxes.

“a commandment” — the accusative singular e)ntolh means this is a part of the Mosaic law. The same law that authorised the Levitical priesthood also authorised its function to collect taxes. The Levitical priesthood not only ministered in the tabernacle, ministered at the altar with the Levitical sacrifices, ministered on the holy days, but they were also the tax collectors.

“to takes tithes” is the present active infinitive of the verb a)podektow which has to do with collecting a tenth as income tax. The customary present denotes that which always occurs. The active voice: the Levitical priesthood collected taxes. The infinitive: the purpose in which the infinitive is used is to express the action denoted by the finite verb, and therefore we should translate it “have a commandment a tenth.”

“of the people” — incorrect. It should be “from the people”.

“according to the law” — kata, the authorising agent plus nomoj, a reference to the Mosaic law.

The doctrine of tithing

1. Dealing with the pre-Mosaic occurrences. Twice before the Mosaic law tithing is mentioned in the Bible as a system of taxation, related also to spiritual life. The first is where Abraham gave a tenth of the best part of the spoils to Melchizedek — Genesis 14:20; Hebrews 7:2,6. The second was where Jacob, after his vision at Bethel, consecrated ten per cent of his property to God if he returned home safely. Why did he do that? Because Jacob was far from home, and home was the place where he paid his taxes. So he said, “All right God, I’m going to bribe you to get me home. I’ll pay my taxes now, instead of when I get home.”

2. Definition. A tithe was ten per cent of Jewish income tax where both the unbeliever and the believer paid. Abraham as a believer became a citizen of Melchizedek’s kingdom and that’s why he paid ten per cent.

3. The categories of tithing in Israel. a) To the Levites went ten per cent for the maintenance and sustenance of the Levitical priesthood — Numbers 18:20-21, 24; Hebrews 7:5,9. This may seem to authorise a national church. It does not. You must remember that in the previous dispensation it was the Levitical priesthood who handled all of the national holidays. They offered all the sacrifices at every one of the special feasts as well as the feast of the trumpets, on the first day of each month. b) A tenth was to be used for the sacred feasts and sacrifices — Deuteronomy 12:17-19; 14:22-27. Every third year there was a third ten per cent taxation. This was for a charity tax for the poor of the land (This was not welfare, it was charity) — Deuteronomy 14:28,29.

4. Gospel references — Matthew 23:23; Luke 11:42, are illustrative of references to tithing in the Gospels. Whenever you find a reference to tithing in the Gospels it illustrates the distortion of the law through legalism. The references there all have to do with the condemnation of legalism. The Talmud extension of the Mosaic law distorted the entire concept of tithing. The Pharisees at the time of our Lord extended it to the minutest details of life not required by the Mosaic law.

5. Tithing is also mentioned in connection with an income tax evasion — Leviticus 27:30-34. This passage forbids the substituting of one animal for another in the payment of tax. The penalty was one fifth more of your income.

6. The perpetuation of the income tax principle is also mentioned in Matthew 22:17-21; Mark 12:13-17, the concept that income tax is a bona fide function.

7. Tithing is not a part of New Testament giving, it has nothing to do with the Church Age. In 1 Corinthians 16:1,2 tithing has never been spiritual giving at all in the Church Age. The amount that you give to the local church is strictly between you and the Lord, it does not have to be ten per cent, more or less. Giving is the expression of worship of the royal priesthood and therefore is not related with tithing, and never can be. Why? Because while the priesthood can receive ten per cent it can never give ten per cent to anyone. The royal priesthood is the highest of all priesthoods and as such it never deals in ten per cent. 2 Corinthians chapters 8 & 9 has a detailed dissertation on giving for the royal priesthood. Tithing is never mentioned as related to giving in this dispensation.

“that is” — tout e)stin, which is literally, “that is.” Tout e)stin, however, is an explanatory idiom. It is translated literally in the KJV but it is an idiom. E)stin is the present active indicative from e)imi; tout is from the demonstrative pronoun o(utoj, and tout e)stin means to imply something “which implies” literally, instead of “that is.”

“from their brethren” — not “of” but “from.” This refers to their fellow countrymen, their fellow citizens.

“though” is the conjunction kaiper and it means “although, even though.”

“they come out”, or literally, “having come out”, the perfect active participle from e)cerxomai. The perfect tense is intensive, indicating that even though the Jews of the nation of Israel had the same kind of descent as the Levitical priesthood they still pay their taxes to their own fellow countrymen, they pay their taxes to the Levitical priesthood. The active voice: The Jewish people, regardless of their tribe, must pay taxes to the Levitical priesthood. Which means that the Levitical priesthood is regarded superior to the other Jews in the nation. Which means there is no such thing as equality in any nation. The participle is a concessive participle conceding the fact that the people who pay tithes to Levi have the same common origin as Abraham; they are of the same race — Jews; the are of the same nation — Israel, but they are inferior in that they pay taxes to the Levitical priesthood. That is why throughout the history of Israel the Mosaic law set up a system to pay taxes to the Levitical priesthood, because the Levitical priesthood was regarded as superior to the rest and the inferior pays the tithes to the superior.

“of the loins” — the preposition e)k plus the ablative of o)sfuoj, which refers to seed — the reproductive organs, not the loins.

Literally in verse 5 — And those indeed from the sons of Levi, receiving their priestly office, have a commandment to collect a tenth from the people according to the law, that is, from their fellow countrymen, even though having come out of the genitals of Abraham.”

Summary

The implications of this verse are endless.

1. This verse settles a very important concept of our society or country, i.e. there never was and never will be equality among people of the same race in the same nation.

2. Those who minister spiritual things provide maximum benefit to their recipients, and even though the recipients are the same race and have a common ancestry the spiritual is superior to the temporal — 2 Corinthians 4:16-18.

3. Those who minister spiritual things to the people should be supported by those to whom they minister. Principle: the inferior supports the superior — Hebrews 7:7. The application to this in the passage is quite obvious. The Levitical priesthood was superior to the rest of the people by divine appointment in the Mosaic law.

4. The conclusion: All people of the same race, same background, same heritage, same nation, are not born equal.

5. Those who have the same parents, grandparents, and are related in common ancestry, are not born equal. The only exception to this rule is found in the royal priesthood of the Church Age, and in the royal priesthood when you believed you entered into the priesthood of equality, the royal priesthood. You are equal to all royal priests and superior to everything else in the devil’s world — by divine appointment, not by action.

6. All believers regenerated in the Church Age have received simultaneously with regeneration the baptism of the Holy Spirit by which they are entered into the palace, the indwelling of the Holy Spirit which is the sign of royalty, the sealing of the Spirit which is the security and perpetuation of royalty, and the spiritual gift for the function of royalty.

7. The Lord Jesus Christ is eternal royalty. The body of Christ is His right woman and His royal family.

8. Here again there is a some grace in equality. Some male believers at the point of salvation receive the gift of pastor-teacher, a sovereign and grace gift from the Holy Spirit. The function of this gift possesses supreme authority over the local church and becomes the basis for all believers reaching supergrace.

9. Returning to the context, this verse prepares the way for the next one where the royal priesthood is declared to be superior to the Levitical priesthood, still in the genitals of Abraham, but represented by Abraham on this historic occasion. Even though the Levitical priesthood is superior to the rest of Israel, everyone who is born again today is a member of a priesthood which is infinitely superior, perpetually superior to the Levitical priesthood of the previous dispensation. Death terminated the function of that priesthood. Death does not stop us, we go right on in our priesthood.

10. Melchizedek whose genealogy is not traceable received tithes from Abraham whose genealogy is traceable. Melchizedek is superior to Abraham as demonstrated by the historic occasion. The royal priesthood of the Church Age is superior to the Levitical priesthood of Israel. Abraham was a citizen of Salem as a result of the action in this particular verse. Chapter 7:6-9

Verse 6 — “But” is the conjunctive particle de used to set up a contrast; “he whose descent is not counted” is a present passive participle from genealogew. The word means to have his genealogy traced, and with the negative here we have a static present tense representing a condition which never exists and never will exist. The passive voice: Melchizedek receives the action of the verb by not having his genealogy traced from Israel. The participle is circumstantial expressing an attendant set of circumstances or an additional fact that there is no relationship between Melchizedek and the Levitical priesthood; that in effect the Levitical priesthood was always subordinated to the Melchizedek type.

“from them” — the preposition e)k plus the ablative of a)utoj. This refers to the Levitical priesthood; “received tithes” — the perfect active indicative of dekatow, indicating that Abraham tithed to Melchizedek. This is how he became a member of his kingdom. The perfect tense is a dramatic perfect. A dramatic perfect is a very rare type of Greek idiom, it actually has a rhetorical application to the perfect tense. It means that since the perfect tense represents an existing state it may be used for the purpose of describing the fact of that state in a very dramatic or vivid way. It is the same concept as the historical present or the dramatic aorist, only it is stronger. It is like the intensive perfect in that it emphasises the results of the action but it is actually a rhetorical use of the intensive perfect. Therefore this is very, very strong. In other words, it sets a precedent; it stands forever, it will never be changed. Once Abraham became a citizen of Salem, from that moment on always, invariably, the Levitical priesthood was subordinate to the royal priesthood. Abraham entered into the citizenship because he was benefited. This is the first time that he had ever been benefited by another country, and the ruler of that country Melchizedek, a royal priest forever, was beneficial to him spiritually. Abraham finally joined something because of the spiritual benefit and because here was the first time he had ever seen a country which actually had establishment. When Abraham left Ur of the Chaldees he was a man without a country, and he continued to be a man without a country until he became a citizen of Salem. As a citizen of Salem he lived in a tent all of his life because God promised this citizen of Salem that he would have a city forever, and that city will be given to him at the end of the Millennium. It is the new Jerusalem that will come down out of heaven. That is the personal property of Abraham and that will be the payoff of his citizenship. What happens in time has eternal repercussions, that is what this dramatic perfect is saying. The most obvious illustration is the fact that you believed in the Lord Jesus Christ.

This meeting was one of the most dramatic meetings in history because of the results in heaven. Always, the Levitical priesthood is subordinate to the royal priesthood. While the royal priest approached Abraham with symbols, the bread and the wine, these symbols represent a tremendous reality and they are never considered to be shadows. When we gather around the communion table we partake of the bread and the cup. These are not shadows to us, we are looking back to the reality of the cross. The bread and the wine were never said to be shadows but all of the five majors categories of Levitical offerings, plus seven or eight other categories of Levitical offering, plus the feasts and the holy days, plus every function of the Levitical priesthood, was a shadow function. So that always superiority belongs to the reality, and we have the reality.

This meeting between Abraham and Melchizedek is extremely important, not only in the immediate life of Abraham but as far as the eternal repercussions are concerned. The phrase “received tithes” means to collect tithes. Melchizedek collected taxes from Abraham — the one whose genealogy is not traced. In verse 3, his father was not on any genealogical table of royalty, his mother was not only any genealogical table of royalty. Melchizedek’s birth certificate has nothing to do with royalty, nor his death certificate. He is not related to royalty by physical birth, he is royalty by conquest. He conquered Salem and held it, and made a great state out of it, one in which Abraham became a citizen. Therefore, it says “the one whose genealogy is not traced from them collected taxes” — the active voice. The indicative mood is the declarative indicative, it represents the verbal idea from the viewpoint of reality. Here is a statement of unqualified assertion, this is the statement of dogma on which Bible doctrine is constructed.

“of Abraham” should be “from [the source of] Abraham”, it is an ablative. So the one who is first in the genealogy of the Levitical priesthood is subordinated forever on the basis of this historical meeting. He recognised a principle: the name is Melchizedek — spiritual blessing; the title is King of Salem — temporal. He is a temporal and spiritual ruler and Abraham listened to the teaching of Melchizedek [positive volition] and joined the country of Melchizedek so that Melchizedek’s authority over Abraham was two fold. It was the temporal authority of the King of Salem — he became a citizen of Salem by paying taxes. And Melchizedek became his spiritual leader as well. So he recognised both the temporal and the spiritual authority of Melchizedek. When he did so, in his seed is Levi and specifically the family of Aaron, and therefore they are subordinated to him forever. It is most interesting, in fact almost a paradox, that also in Abraham from Judah and the family of David we have the Davidic line from which the Lord Jesus Christ came. But the Lord Jesus Christ is not subordinate to Melchizedek because it has been specifically stated that Melchizedek is the pattern of the Lord Jesus Christ who is the son of David. And because the Lord Jesus Christ as the son of David is put into the Melchizedek battalion, and Melchizedek is the pattern, this means that Jesus Christ is superior to Melchizedek and fulfils in the pattern the same concept. The Lord Jesus Christ is a temporal ruler forever. He is also the spiritual leader forever. So Melchizedek is superior to everything in Abraham’s line but the Lord Jesus Christ.

We are in union with Christ and therefore we are superior to Melchizedek, and in the same pattern. Jesus Christ has a right woman, the body of Christ. The body of Christ belongs to Jesus Christ forever. You and I are in the body of Christ. In fact, “body” is simply a way of designating positional truth in the relationship with the Lord Jesus. When Jesus Christ was on the cross He was making the sacrifice for the Priesthood. He bore our sins in His own body on the tree. He was very much alone on that cross. As a King, the perfect King, the impeccable King, the son of David, and the sovereign God of the universe, He is a King on His deity side and on His humanity side. This is why He has the title, King of kings and Lord of lords. But He was bearing our sins and was very much alone in bearing our sins — “My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken me?” He was totally alone, and yet, God the Father said for the last Adam what God the Son said for the first Adam, “Not good that He should be alone.” Therefore, when He was glorified by being seated at the right hand of the Father, ten days later the Jewish Age which had seven years still to run was interrupted. With that interruption a body is prepared on earth — every believer. The moment you believe you are entered into union with the Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore you are a part of the royal family, not by physical birth, not by inheritance, not by genealogy, not by any human ability, but strictly on the basis of a relationship with the Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore, when God the Holy Spirit enters us into union with Christ we enter not only into the palace but we enter into a priesthood at the same time. There are two functions here. We enter into the palace, that is the temporal function represented by the name King of Salem. And we enter into a spiritual function represented by Melchizedek. The temporal function: we share the reign of Christ forever, therefore we are going to be temporal rulers forever. We are going to rule in heaven, in the eternal state, in the Millennium, because Jesus Christ is a temporal ruler. At the same time we have a spiritual function, the fact that we are a kingdom of priests. We are a royal household, a kingdom of priests, says 1 Peter 2:9.

It is important to understand that Melchizedek is superior to Abraham, because they met. But Christ is superior to Melchizedek. Christ is not Melchizedek, He is infinitely superior. And when Christ is raised above Melchizedek in this battalion so is the body of Christ raised above Melchizedek. So we are talking about things to which we are totally superior because of our union with Christ. And if we are totally superior then we only have a very simple responsibility in this life and that is to move to the status of superiority which is supergrace — superiority without self-righteousness.

Melchizedek is historically superior to Abraham, and that tells us something else. The Church Age is an age that is never interrupted. The only dispensation which has never been interrupted is the Church Age. The Age of the Gentiles was interrupted. Why? The “united nations” had to be destroyed. The Age of Israel was interrupted. Why? “Not good that the last Adam should be alone.” The Millennium is interrupted. Why? The releasing of Satan causes the Gog revolution. There is only one dispensation that God would not dare to interrupt. Why? Because the body must be completed.

And we are superior to Abraham and to Melchizedek, but we learn the story of precedence from this. God the Holy Spirit has seen fit to give it a lot of verses. We are royalty, we are a nobility that cannot be changed. We are protected by a nobility. We are protected by the fact that the royal priesthood has bailed us out. A maximum number of believers in some generations reaching the ECS and the supergrace life has bailed us out time and time again. But it isn’t based upon genealogy. The thing that bails this country out is the royal priesthood.

When Melchizedek collected taxes from Abraham the thing that is really great is the fact that Abraham subordinated himself temporally as well as spiritually to Melchizedek. It is that temporal subordination that is so important. Why? Because in the battalion of Melchizedek everything is temporal.

“and blessed him” — this has to do with the teaching of doctrine. The perfect active indicative of e)ulogew indicates more than saying, “Bless you brother”! You misunderstand this unless you see another dramatic perfect, for we have the perfect active indicative. The dramatic perfect means he began to teach him. And apparently he taught him not for an hour and fifteen minutes but perhaps all day. It was toward evening when Abraham went around and took ten per cent off the top. When Melchizedek departed he departed with some heavy taxes. But the thing that God the Holy Spirit emphasises is the temporal authority, the spiritual authority, the surrender to Melchizedek. We have the rhetorical use of the intensive perfect and it emphasises the long Bible conference and its dramatic results. The active voice: Melchizedek produced the action of the verb by Bible teaching, communication of doctrine. Remember that communication of doctrine is spiritual blessing. The indicative mood is the declarative of unqualified and dogmatic assertion. He didn’t say “Bless you”, he taught him doctrine.

Notice that he taught doctrine to someone who possessed promises and had a great heritage: “him that had,” the present active participle of e)xw. The present tense is an historical present, it gives dramatic emphasis to a past event viewed with the vividness of a present occurrence. The active voice: Abraham who possessed promises, who had a great deal of blessing under supergrace, who had the beginning of the covenants of Israel, received blessing. You can have everything going for you but you have to have doctrine on a constant basis. You have to be taught Bible doctrine. The circumstantial participle brings up a principle, and even though he kept on having the promises, and even though he was promised many wonderful things, and even though he will be a key person in history, Abraham like everyone else needs one thing: Bible doctrine, Bible doctrine, and more Bible doctrine.

“the promises” is the accusative plural of e)paggelia which means promises of great blessing. They were promises he couldn’t really avoid. But even though you may have guarantees which you can’t avoid you still need doctrine. Doctrine provides the dynamics. Every blessing in life has to be related to doctrine as soul capacity.

Translation: “The one [Melchizedek] whose genealogy is not traced from them [the Levitical priests] collected tithes from Abraham, and blessed him [through doctrinal teaching], the one possessing the promises.”

Verse 7 — the axiom of blessing. “And without” — the connective use of kai, adding the whole to the part. In adding the principle to the historical citation you have to have an adverb in the Greek. So kai, adding the whole to the part or the principle to the historical citation, also takes in an adverb, xwrij. And xwrij has with it a genitive singular from paj. Xwrij becomes an improper preposition, and kai is used to add a principle to the historical situation, or the whole to the part — the part is the historical situation, the whole is the principle that comes out of it. Then you take an adverb and turn it into a preposition calling it an improper preposition. Then with it you have the genitive case — the genitive of paj, the genitive of a)ntilogia. When you put all of this together it comes out to mean, “And without any dispute [or contradiction].” This becomes an idiom for a dogmatic statement. And why do we need, speaking through the Holy Spirit, and extra dogmatic idiom? For this reason. We are not talking about equality, about brotherly love, etc. We are talking about superiority and inferiority, true superiority and inferiority.

“the less” — the nominative neuter singular e)latton [also e)lasson]. It means “inferior”, “inferior in quality.” It is used here for Abraham in comparison to Melchizedek. He was inferior in quality. This also sets up a principle of authority. The teacher is superior to the student. The inferior in quality is “blessed” — present passive indicative of e)ulogew. The present tense is a static present, it represents a condition assumed as perpetually existing. The passive voice: the subject, Abraham, receives the action of the verb — Bible teaching or blessing from Melchizedek. The indicative mood is a declarative indicative which goes with the improper prepositional phrase of dogmatism — a Greek idiom — and represents the verbal idea, therefore, from the viewpoint of dogmatic reality.

“of” — the preposition u(po plus the ablative of kreitton. Kreitton is the comparative of a)gaqoj which is inherent intrinsic good. U(po plus the accusative represents authority; u(po plus the ablative, as here, represents agency. There is no need to establish authority because the authority is established by the use of our inferior/superior words, the comparatives. So we have literally, “by the agency of the better in quality.”

“And without any dispute the inferior [Abraham] received blessing [the teaching of doctrine] from the superior one [Melchizedek].”

Here is where the authority of the pastor-teacher in the royal priesthood comes. The pastor-teacher communicates the doctrine and the inferior receives from the superior. That is what we call strict academic discipline.

Principles: The superiority of the royal priesthood is established over the Levitical priesthood. When the Levitical priesthood meets the royal priesthood the Levitical priesthood takes a back seat. (The Levitical priesthood will function again in the Millennium and will be ruled by the royal priesthood) The royal priesthood belongs to the royal family of Christ while the Levitical priesthood belongs to Israel. The royal priesthood of the Church Age is also the bride of Christ while the Levitical priesthood is represented as friends of the groom. The royal priesthood is superior to the Levitical priesthood on two counts from this historical meeting of Melchizedek and Abraham. First, Melchizedek blessed Abraham — taught him doctrine, a spiritual superiority. Secondly, Abraham paid taxes to Melchizedek as a sign of citizenship in the kingdom of Salem. So there is both a temporal and a spiritual superiority.

Verse 8 — we have a longevity which is superior to the Levitical priesthood. The subject of Hebrews 7 is the superiority of royalty, so verse 8 tells us longevity is the superiority of the royal priesthood also; not just the historical meeting between Melchizedek and Abraham, but we have a longevity.

“And here” — a connective use of the conjunction kai which introduces a result from what has just preceded. Therefore it should be translated “And so.” And we have another adverb with kai, the adverb of place, w(de, referring back to verse 5 — “And so under these circumstances”, the circumstances of verse 5.

“men” — nominative plural from a)nqrwpoj used for the Levitical priesthood; “that die” — present active participle from a)poqnhskw which refers to the fact that the Levitical priesthood loses its function by physical death. Physical death terminated Aaron’s priesthood, it terminated the priesthood of Eleazar, of Phinehas. And every Levitical priest when he dies is finished as a priest. So a)poqnhskw here is a customary present to denote what habitually occurs or may be reasonably expected to occur. The active voice: the Levitical priest produces the action of the verb. That is, he dies and terminates his ministry. The participle is ascriptive, it is used as an adjective. The adjectival participle ascribes a characteristic or quality to the Levitical priesthood. The quality is quite simple. We call it in our English “mortality”, subject to death. So we could translate this, “And under these circumstances mortal men receive.”

“receive” — present active indicative from lambanw. The present tense is an iterative present, it describes what recurs at successive intervals — the present tense of repeated action. The active voice: the Levitical priesthood produces the action of the verb by collecting taxes. The declarative indicative is an unqualified statement of assertion that taxes were collected by the Levitical priesthood, giving them temporal power in Israel which went with their spiritual power. The word “tithes”, again, means tenths or taxes — ten per cent taxation.

“but” — adversative conjunction from the particle de to set up a contrast between two clauses. “there” — the adverb e)kei referring to an historical situation, to Melchizedek as a representative of the royal priesthood. This adverb refers back to verse 3 where Jesus Christ the royal high priest is called a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek. Also Hebrews 5:6; 6:20.

“he of whom” is not found in the original. It should be “there, he being the subject of the testimony.”

“it is witnessed” is a present passive participle nominative masculine singular from the verb marturew, which means to testify or to witness. The nominative masculine singular refers to Jesus Christ as the royal high priest. The present tense of the participle is the historical present employed when a past event is viewed with the vividness of a present occurrence. The passive voice: Christ receives attestation or testimony. He becomes the subject of the testimony of Psalm 110:4; Hebrews 5:6; 6:20. The participle is circumstantial.

“that he liveth” — in other words, there is no death sitting off the priesthood. “That” is used for the conjunction o(ti after verbs of testimony to reveal content. O(ti is simply a conjunction used after a verb of testimony to show the content. The content is that He is alive, the present active indicative of zaw. Christ died spiritually and physically on the cross; He is alive. This is the static present, used for a condition which perpetually exists. The royal priesthood is not terminated by physical death. We have the pattern: Jesus Christ was resurrected. The first part of His priesthood was performed on the cross. The He died physically. Then He rose again. Now He is at the right hand of the Father making intercession for us, as we will see at the end of this chapter. So death does not terminate the royal priesthood but it is perpetuated beyond that. The active voice: the subject is Jesus Christ, the royal high priest whose priesthood is perpetuated through resurrection. The indicative mood is declarative, and unqualified dogmatic assertion.

Translation: “And under these circumstances [of verse 5] mortal men [Levitical priesthood] received tithes; but in that place [verse 3 plus Psalm 110:4] he [Jesus Christ] received attestation [or testimony] that he lived.”

Summary

1. Here is the inevitable superiority of the royal priesthood. It is perpetuated beyond death.

2. The Levitical priest functions until he dies. The royal priest functions forever as illustrated by our high priest who has functioned beyond physical death even as we will.

3. The royal priesthood is the only one that passes the boundaries of time, through death, to function forever. Again, the sealing ministry of God the Holy Spirit is security that you will always be a royal priest.

Verses 9 and 10 give us the application of the axiom.

Verse 9 — “And as I may so say.” This is a Greek idiom: Kai w(j e)poj e(ipein. Kai is a connective conjunction; w(j is a relative adverb used as a comparative particle. E)poj is a noun for a word or that which is expressed in words. E)ipein is the aorist active infinitive of legw. These are all combined in an idiom to limit a startling or shocking statement. “And so to speak” is the best translation. In the aorist active infinitive of legw the aorist tense is a culminative aorist, it views the event in its entirety but emphasises the existing result. The active voice: the writer draws a shocking conclusion. The infinitive expresses a conceived result and/or a shocking conclusion.

Next comes a prepositional phrase, dia plus the indeclinable proper noun A)braam — “And so to speak through Abraham.” Then we have another kai but this is the adjunctive use of kai, correctly translated “also”.

“Levi” — here is the shocker. The Levitical priesthood has just been clobbered by this one. Levi is the founder of the Tribe of the Levitical priesthood.

“who receiveth” — this puts them high in Israel, it gives them temporal authority. That is how they finally had a Sanhedrin in Israel, because they collected the taxes. They has temporal as well as spiritual authority. “Who receiveth” is the present active participle of lambanw. That means that they were high in Israel. The present tense is a customary present, it denotes that which habitually occurs in Israel; they collected the taxes. The active voice: the Levitical priesthood customarily received taxes from Israel. This was a part of their superiority in Israel and their authority. This is a circumstantial participle.

“payed tithes” — this is the shocking statement. Levi “paid tithes in Abraham.” This is the perfect passive indicative of dekatow. Abraham set up something for the entire human race. The Levitical priesthood had temporal and spiritual authority, and they never lost it even with the monarchy. They only lost it through spiritual decadence. That is, some of them were not even saved and some were reversionistic from time to time. This is a dramatic perfect for a shocking statement — they paid tithes. This describes the historical situation and it is a shocking situation to the Jew. The passive voice with the intermediate agent: When the agent is the medium through which the original cause has effected the action expressed by the passive verb for regular construction is dia plus the genitive plus the passive, and that is what we have here, the passive voice of intermediate agent. The indicative mood is declarative for an unqualified and dogmatic assertion.

Translation: “And so to speak, Levi also, the one receiving tithes, had paid tithes through Abraham.”

1. Once again the startling conclusion indicates the superiority of the royal priesthood over the Levitical.

2. The historical meeting of Abraham and Melchizedek forces a shocking conclusion. Abraham subordinated himself spiritually by listening to doctrine. He received bread and wine. Then he recognised the temporal superiority of Melchizedek. By paying taxes he became a citizen. So the meeting between the two forces the conclusion regarding the Levitical priesthood serving in Israel with the highest authority.

3. The royal priesthood serving under Christ is infinitely superior to the Levitical priesthood serving in Israel until the time of their death. The royal priesthood will serve forever. For just as Christ was raised as the firstfruits of them that slept so you and I, either through Rapture, or through physical death will continue our priesthood in a resurrection body. Our priesthood is perpetuated forever.

Verse 10 — “For” is an inferential conjunction, gar, explaining the reason for the foregoing conclusion.

“he was” — the imperfect active indicative of e)imi. E)imi is the absolute status quo verb. The imperfect tense represents linear aktionsart in past time. This is what is called a progressive imperfect which denotes action in progress in past time. This is a progressive imperfect of description which vividly represents the process going on at the time. The active voice: Levi was in the genitals of Abraham the patriarch when he met Melchizedek and paid tithes to him. The indicative mood is a declarative indicative representing the verbal idea from the viewpoint of reality, unqualified and dogmatic assertion.

“yet” — the adverb e)ti, an adverb of time and denotes a past situation. In fact it goes with the imperfect tense which is linear aktionsart in past time.

“in the loins” — the preposition e)n plus the locative of o)sfuj, which really means “in the reproductive organs of” — “his father,” the possessive genitive singular of pathr denotes the ancestor. Abraham is the ancestor of Levi.

“when” — the conjunction o(te indicates the historical meeting; “met” — the aorist active indicative of sunantaw which means to encounter. The aorist tense is a constative aorist, it contemplates the action of the verb in its entirety. It gathers the historical meeting between Abraham and Melchizedek into one single whole. Regardless of length or duration it is all pulled together. The active voice: Melchizedek produces the action of the verb. It was the initiative of Melchizedek that ministered spiritually to Abraham at a time of Abraham’s great vulnerability, the attack from the king of Sodom. The indicative mood is declarative emphasising the reality of the historical meeting.

Translation: “For he was still in the reproductive organs of his ancestor [Abraham], when Melchizedek encountered him.”

Principle: The superiority of the royal priesthood demands permanent changes. Any permanent and lasting changes can only be made by the Lord Jesus Christ.

We now move into another section as to why we are not only members of the royal family but why each one of us is a royal priest. We must begin at this point with the six propositions regarding the change of priesthood. We have seen the change of the royal family. They were simply the family of God. The family of God was made up of Adam and Eve and Moses, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, all kinds of great people; but when there was a break, an interruption of the Jewish Age, there is no longer the family of God, it is now royal family. To get into the family of God you must be born again — regeneration. The agent of regeneration is God the Holy Spirit, and God the Holy Spirit does that for believers in the Church Age. But He does something else. After that, the baptism of the Spirit which never occurred before. The baptism of the Spirit enters the family of God into the royal family. Only in the Church Age do we have royal family. There was no royal family before the Church Age began, there is no royal family after the Church Age is concluded with the Rapture. The only royal family is now.

The royal family also has a royal function. We have already seen that every priesthood that has functioned in this passage has functioned under conditions of rulership. The Melchizedek priesthood: he was a king, a temporal ruler as well as a spiritual leader. In the Levitical priesthood they were temporal rulers, they were tax collectors, they collected the tithes. Levi not only had great spiritual leadership and authority but Levi had great temporal leadership and authority. Until the time of king Saul and the rule of the monarchy, Levi had all of the rulership. The tribe of Levi had its first ruler in Moses. After the death of Moses the temporal rulership went to the high priest, and it stayed there right through Samuel who was descended from Aaron through Ithamar. Samuel himself appointed the first king; he appointed the second king. He appointed Saul; He appointed David. He was the high priest of Israel, he had the temporal authority and responsibility for appointing the king. So there was always temporal authority and leadership as well.

This is true in every priesthood. This is true with the Lord Jesus Christ. He is not only a priest with spiritual authority but He is a King with temporal authority. He is the King of kings as well as out high priest forever.

This brings us to the six propositions regarding the change of priesthood. This anticipates the next paragraph. In verses 11 -19 we are going to see something of this change. Beginning in verse 11 we are going to have an entire new tack. We are going to see the inferiority of the Levitical priesthood, the inferiority of the Levitical battalion.

The six propositions regarding the change in priesthood

1. Verse 11 has a very important word: teleiwsij. It is mistranslated “perfection.” It means the process of completion. Completion cannot be produced by the Levitical priesthood.

2. Since completion, or the process of completion, cannot be produced by the Levitical priesthood it cannot be produced by the Mosaic law. (The Mosaic law is the authorising agent for the Levitical priesthood)

3. Since neither the Levitical priesthood nor the Mosaic law can produce completeness there must be some change to coincide with the change of dispensation. This is brought out by verse 12.

4. Therefore the priesthood begun with Aaron is replaced by the priesthood begun with Christ. The Levitical priesthood is replaced by the royal priesthood. The authorising agent of the Levitical priesthood, the Mosaic law, is replaced by the authorising agent for the royal priesthood which is the eternal decrees of God — Psalm 110:4. This anticipates verses 18,19.

5. The Levitical priesthood is earthly, terminated by death, and belonging to an interrupted dispensation. The only dispensation which is not interrupted is the Church Age. Teleiwsij is so important that God would never think of interrupting it because teleiwsij is how the royal family is acquired. The royal priesthood is heavenly, perpetuated beyond death by resurrection, and functions under the interrupting and completed dispensation, the Church. The Levitical priesthood is limited to one family. The royal priesthood belongs to one family. The family of Aaron limits the Levitical priesthood but the royal priesthood belongs to one family, the family of God, the body of Christ. The Levitical priesthood is obtained by physical birth; the royal priesthood is obtained by the new birth.

6. Since the purpose of God is the process of completion of the body of Christ to become the bride of Christ through the royal priesthood, the Levitical priesthood must be set aside, deactivated.

Verses 11-19, the inferiority of the Levitical battalion.

Verse 11 — the inadequacy of the Levitical priesthood. The first word is “If”, a conditional particle e)i plus the imperfect, aorist or a pluperfect. Any one of these makes it a second class condition. A second class condition is sometimes known as a contrary to fact clause. The particle o)n is sometimes used with it and sometimes not — e)i plus o)n which is found in the apodosis; the protasis e)i plus the apodosis o)n. Because the protasis is considered contrary to fact only past tenses of the indicative are used. Therefore the protasis states what is untrue and unreal. So this is what is called the contrary to fact condition, a second class condition: if and it is not true.

“therefore” — the inferential particle o)un. In historical narratives o)un resumes the subject once more after its interruption. Therefore, o)un reaches back to Hebrews 5:4 where Aaron was mentioned as the representative of the Levitical priesthood.

“perfect” — teleiwsij. Teleiwsij is sometimes translated “perfect”, sometimes “completion.” With the suffix (sij = process or action) it means the act or process of completion.

So literally, “If indeed therefore a process of completion.”

Process of completion

1. What is a process of completion?

2. Whatever it is, note the absence of the definite article in from of teleiwsij. The absence of the definite article calls attention to its quality rather than its identity. Identity is emphasised by the use of the definite article in the Greek, while quality is stressed through the absence of it. (The antithesis of English syntax)

3. Even commentators are inclined to relate this phrase to eternal salvation, and this is where everyone has gone off base.

R.B. Thieme, comment: “I’ve never seen anyone who had the ability to think clearly in exegetical form and avoid the error of someone in the past. A.T. Robertson (page 383) says: ‘The Levitical priesthood failed to give men a perfectly adequate relationship with God.’ Now this is a brilliant Greek scholar, there’s nothing wrong with A.T. Robertson. You can always tell the ‘fundies’ who criticise him, it means they don’t know anything about Greek. A.T. Robertson was a brilliant scholar but he was a victim of being pushed into a little mould. This has to do with salvation, he said. This is what all ‘fundies’ have all said. ‘The Levitical priesthood failed to give men a perfectly adequate relationship with God’ — failed to give them salvation. That is not true. The Levitical priesthood was the means of saving millions of people. So he missed it altogether there. Kenneth Wuest, in his book on Hebrews, page 132, says: ‘The purpose of the priesthood was to remove the obstacle of sin” — that was never true — “which kept men from God. The Levitical priesthood could do that in a typical but not in an actual way.’ A.R. Fausett, page 547, said: ‘Perfection is the bringing of man to his high estate — salvation and sanctification.’ When you throw those two words in you can mean so many things by sanctification it is almost unbelievable. Now I have selected men that I think are good commentators and sound men, and yet, on this particular thing they all run away from the issue. They all think “perfection” must mean salvation.”

All right, you’re saved, you’re not perfect. That breaks down immediately. And it doesn’t even mean perfection here, it means the process of completion. Salvation is not a process, salvation is instantaneous. The moment you believe in Jesus Christ you’re saved, you receive 36 things immediately. So there is no process there.

4. Let us begin with the suffix, sij. It indicates an active process rather than something as instantaneous. Salvation is instantaneous so because of the suffix alone it couldn’t be salvation. Salvation is not a process, it takes place in less than a second.

5. Furthermore, under the ministry of the Levitical priesthood millions of people were saved, so obviously it is not talking about salvation. And one of the strong parts of the Levitical priesthood is that they were good on the Gospel and they were clear on the Gospel.

6. So the Levitical priesthood not only brought people to salvation and justification but through the teaching of the written canon of scripture they also led many of these believers to supergrace. People in the past dispensation of Israel actually reached supergrace through the faithful teaching of the Levitical priesthood. Illustration: David.

7. Therefore the process of completion must have another significance in keeping with the context, another significance apart from salvation. And it does.

8. Teleiwsij means process of completion, and it refers to the completion of Jesus Christ over a period of elapsed time. The period of elapsed time is the course of the Church Age.

9. The issue between the Levitical priesthood or the royal priesthood completing Christ is found in Colossians 2:16,17 — “Consequently, stop allowing anyone to judge you in eating, or drinking, or in matters of a feast, or the new moon, or the Sabbath [all Levitical priesthood functions], which keep on being a shadow of those things about to come; but the body is from the source of the Christ.” Which came first? The cross came first. Christ on the cross is alone. Then resurrection, ascension and session. Now comes the body. The Levitical priesthood could not provide a body for Christ. The Levitical priesthood could not marry Jesus Christ, to use the analogy. The body which belongs to Christ is the royal priesthood, every believer of the Church Age.

10. Christ was alone on the cross: “My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken me?” He was alone because He was bearing our sins. He was being judged by God the Father in our place. Christ was alone, He was forsaken. And the Father said, Not good that the last Adam should be alone.

11. Christ, the last Adam, is just as completed as the first Adam. The first Adam was completed by the manufacture of a right woman. The last Adam is completed by the manufacture of a body, a mystical, spiritual body called the Church.

12. For this reason, and in this sense, the Church is called the body of Christ.

13. The Levitical priesthood is not the body of Christ. The Levitical priesthood could not complete Christ. The Levitical priesthood is in another dispensation dealing with shadows — Colossians 2:17; Hebrews 8:4,5; 10:1.

14. Therefore, there was a need for a dramatic and, of course, traumatic interruption of the dispensation of Israel. After Christ was brought down from the cross it was still the Age of Israel. The Levitical priesthood could do nothing for Jesus Christ. Three days later Jesus rose from the dead and the Levitical priesthood could still do nothing for Him. For forty days He was on the earth in His resurrection body and then He ascended. The Levitical priesthood could still do nothing for Him. The Levitical priesthood did one thing for Him: at His trial they slapped Him for what they called talking back to the high priest. The high priest is Jesus Christ, and they slapped the true high priest for talking back to the pseudo high priest. That is all the Levitical priesthood can do. They cannot complete Jesus Christ. The Rapture occurs at the completion of the body, but right now it is in the process.

15. The Church Age interrupts to fulfil the process of completion, to fulfil teleiwsij of Christ.

16. The Church Age was designed by God the Father to complete Christ. Therefore, the Church on earth is called the body of Christ, the process of completion and fulfilment of Christ. The body is teleiwsij.

17. The Church in heaven after the Rapture is called the bride of Christ. The process has been completed when the bride emerges. First of all the bride must have a body. The body is completed when the Church Age is completed and then it becomes a bride.

Conclusion: Therefore a new priesthood is necessary for teleiwsij. Christ is royalty on both sides of the hypostatic union. He is royalty in His deity, He is royalty in His humanity; He could not possibly be completed by those “peasants”, the Levitical priesthood. Peasants can’t do it. It takes royalty to complete royalty. And you and I are the royalty to complete Jesus Christ.

Verse 11 — “If therefore the process of completion were by the Levitical priesthood [but it isn’t: second class condition].”

The doctrine of the body of Christ

1. The Trinity is related to the body of Christ. God the Father placed Christ at the head of the body — Ephesians 1:22 — so the Father is related to the body of Christ. Christ is the head of the body — Ephesians 1:22,23; 5:23,24; Colossians 1:18. Also, the Holy Spirit forms the body of Christ — 1 Corinthians 12:12,13. He forms it by His baptising ministry at salvation. It is the baptism of the Holy Spirit which is so significant because we enter into union with Christ. Christ is royalty in His deity; Christ is royalty in His humanity; Christ is super royalty in hypostatic union, and we are in union with super royalty, we share His royalty. We become royalty spiritually. We are the only ones in all of human history who will be in this status quo. We are royalty because of spiritual appointment by God the Holy Spirit. Furthermore, it is a permanent spiritual appointment because of the sealing ministry of the Spirit. We even wear a badge of royalty, the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.

2. Christ is the saviour of the body — Ephesians 5:23,25,30. This indicates that every member of the body of Christ will live with Him forever because of His priestly sacrifice on the cross.

3. Christ is the sanctifier of the body — Hebrews 2:11; 13:12. Because Jesus Christ is royalty we have been set apart as royalty forever. We are the only royalty perpetuated forever, the only royalty based upon a strict spiritual principle. There is nothing comparable to the royalty of the family of God in the Church Age.

4. The body is also related to the strategic victory of the angelic conflict — Ephesians 1:22,23: “And he subordinated all demons under his feet, and he has given him [Christ] absolute sovereignty above all [believers of the Church Age] with reference to the Church, which is such a royal quality as to be his body, the fullness of the one being filled with reference to all [the royal priesthood of the Church Age].”

5. The body includes Gentile believers of the Church Age only — Ephesians 3:6.

6. The body is the recipient of multifarious spiritual gifts — Romans 12:4,5; 1 Corinthians 12:27,28.

7. The communication of doctrine is a gift for the purpose of edification and leading the royal priesthood to supergrace — Ephesians 3:6-8; 4:11,12.

8. Therefore the objective of the body of Christ in phase two is to reach the supergrace life — Ephesians 4:15.16. The objective of the body of Christ at the Rapture is the fulfilment of the Lord Jesus Christ.

“were” — teleiwsij is followed by the imperfect active indicative of e)imi. The imperfect tense is progressive. The progressive imperfect is used for continuous action in past time. However, the progressive imperfect denotes action in progress at the time. This is the progressive imperfect of duration which indicates there never was a time when the Levitical priesthood functioned as the completer of the Lord Jesus Christ. In other words, following out the analogy of fulfilment and completion, the Levitical priesthood is not the Lord’s right woman. The active voice must be linked with the second class condition of the Levitical priesthood. The second class condition: the Levitical priesthood produces an action of never completing Jesus Christ, an action which cannot be fulfilled. The indicative mood is the declarative indicative representing the verbal idea from the viewpoint of reality, which is in this case, the Levitical priesthood was never related to teleiwsij. The Levitical priesthood belongs to the Age of Israel which was an interrupted dispensation. The body of Christ is taken from the believers of this dispensation, it is related to Christ forever. Christ is royalty, the body of Christ is royalty. We have in this chapter the superiority of royalty and here is one superiority from the second class condition of the protasis of verse 11.

“by the Levitical priesthood” is dia plus the genitive of the adjective Leuitikoj. Then we have the noun for the office i(erwsunhj.

Summary

1. The priesthood must relate to its own dispensation. Generally speaking, the family priesthood is related to the dispensation of the Gentiles, the Levitical priesthood to the dispensation of Israel, the royal priesthood to the dispensation of the Church.

2. The dispensation of Israel was characterised by a specialised priesthood based on heredity through physical birth.

3. The dispensation of the Church is characterised by the universal priesthood of the believer based on regeneration; at the point of salvation the baptism of the Spirit entering every believer into the royal family; the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, the badge of royalty; the sealing of the Spirit, security and perpetuation of the royal family forever; spiritual gifts: the function, the action of the royal family as the body of Christ.

4. Therefore, the interruption of the Jewish Age demands a new priesthood. The new priesthood must be compatible with the new dispensation — “but you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood” — 1 Peter 2:9.

5. Now comes a parenthesis of great importance. This parenthesis relates to the second proposition regarding the change in priesthood. A change in priesthood demands a change in authorising agency.

6. Since the process of completion cannot be produced by the Levitical priesthood it cannot be produced by the authorising agent of the Levitical priesthood. The authorising agent is, of course, the Mosaic law.

7. Therefore the parenthesis which now begins relates the Mosaic law to the Levitical priesthood. The parenthesis divides the protasis from the apodosis. The protasis is the “if” clause, the second class condition. The apodosis relates to the protasis in conditional clauses. And there is no apodosis until we get to “what further need.”

The parenthesis is often properly introduced with the explanatory use of the conjunctive particle gar — “for under it,” the preposition e)pi plus the genitive singular feminine of the intensive pronoun a)utoj. It should be literally translated: “For on the basis of it [the Levitical priesthood].”

“the people” — o( laoj. This refers to the Jews of the Age of Israel; “received the law” — perfect passive indicative of the compound verb nomoqetew. Nomoj means law; qetew comes from the verb tiqemi, to appoint. We can translate this, “For on the basis of it [the Levitical priesthood] the people [of Israel] received the enactment of the law.” The perfect tense is a dramatic perfect. The dramatic perfect is a rhetorical application of the intensive perfect tense. Since the perfect tense always represents existing state it is used for the purpose of describing a fact in a very unusual, vivid and dramatic manner. The historical present, the dramatic aorist do the same thing to some extent but the dramatic perfect is much more forcible, and like the intensive perfect it always emphasises the results of the action, namely the nullification of the Mosaic law, along with the Levitical priesthood. We are not under the Levitical priesthood, we are not under the Mosaic law. They both hang together, they both stand together. At this point the parenthesis ends. It is a very short explanatory parenthesis.

On the other side of the parenthesis we get back to the apodosis. “what further need” — tij e)ti xreia. It should be translated, “What further need would there be”, a technical, rhetorical phrase. “that another priest” — the accusative of the direct object masculine singular of e(teroj means another of a different kind, a different category; then we have the word for “priest”, i(ereuj. it is used here by the way as the accusative of general reference which isn’t really properly the subject, it goes with the infinitive to describe the one involved in the action of the infinitive. Literally, “for another of a different category of priest”.

“to arise” — present middle infinitive of a)nisthmi. The word means to make the scene, to come on to the scene of history, to be raised into existence, and so on. The present tense is an historical present used for a past event viewed with the vividness and the drama of a present occurrence, although it isn’t a present occurrence. The middle voice is used to emphasise the intransitive use of the verb — to make the scene, to come into existence. So it is translated like an active voice. The infinitive is used to indicate God’s purpose and God’s plan.

“after the order of Melchizedek” — kata plus the accusative of tacij. Tacij means category or battalion.

“and not be called” — present passive infinitive of legw plus the very strong negative o)uk which closes the door. Legw here means to designate — “and not be designated according to the battalion of Aaron.”

Translation: “Now if therefore a process of completion [of Christ] was through the Levitical priesthood [2nd class condition: but it was not], (for on the basis of it [the Levitical priesthood] the people had received the law,) what further need would there be for a different category or a different battalion of priests to be activated according to the battalion of Melchizedek, and not be assigned according to the battalion of Aaron.”

Why not use Aaron’s battalion, a priesthood is there? Instead we have the interruption of a dispensation, we have the deactivation of the second battalion, we have the deactivation of the Mosaic law as an authorising agent. Neither the Mosaic law nor the Levitical priesthood have anything to do with the Christian life today, with the royal family. So the interruption of the Jewish Age deactivates the Levitical priesthood while at the same time reactivating the royal priesthood which began with Melchizedek and terminated with his death.

Verse 12 — a change of priesthood means a change in the authorising agent. We have the explanatory use of the conjunctive particle gar to carry on the thoughts started by the second class condition. The Levitical priesthood is out.

The next word is actually not found in the English but it should be there. “For when the priesthood is changed”. The word “when” is used to indicate a temporal participle. “For when the priesthood is changed” is the correct translation. The word “priesthood” is the genitive singular of the noun i(erwsunh. This noun refers to the priestly office, the entire Levitical battalion authorised by the Mosaic law.

“being changed” — present passive participle, genitive case of metatiqemi. The word means to change over, to transfer, to alter, or to replace. The present tense is the aoristic present used to express the idea of a present fact without reference to its progress. The passive voice: the Levitical priesthood receives the action of the verb.

The dramatic interruption of the Jewish dispensation terminated the Levitical priesthood. It also terminated its authorising agent. Remember that the Levitical priesthood and the Mosaic law stand together and fall together.

“there is made of necessity” — “there is made” does not occur in the Greek text. The next phrase is actually “from necessity”, not “of necessity.” It is the preposition e)k plus the ablative of a)nagkh. This actually comes next. This is a little difficult because for some reason it is all right to lift phrases out of the Greek, following their proper syntactical concept, and rearrange the sentence to make smooth English, provided you do not violate the syntax. But this thing not only violates the syntax — and often translators get into this kind of a bind — in order to make sense in bringing from another language some sense into the situation you have to start juggling things and adding words like “there is made”, which doesn’t occur at this point at all. All we have at this point is actually “from necessity” — “For when the priesthood is changed from necessity”.

Next we have a word not even found, kai. It means “also” — “from necessity also”.

“a change” — now we have the cognate metaqesij.

About metaqesij

1. It refers to a change in the authorising agent. It indicates that the authorising agent for the royal priesthood is changed. You cannot use the Mosaic law as an authorising agent for the royal family any more than you can take Sabbath observance in the Mosaic law and impose it on the royal family. Sabbath observance was for the peons of the family of God, those who were born again in the Age of Israel. We are in the palace, we never observe the Sabbath.

2. The strategical victory of Christ interrupts the Jewish Age.

3. Therefore, Christ is the end of the law for believers of the Church Age — Romans 10:4.

4. A new authorising agency replaces the Mosaic law.

5. The authorising agent is related to the entire ministry of God the Holy Spirit to the royal family of the Church Age. The eternal decrees of God authorised a royal priesthood after the strategical victory of Christ being seated at the right hand of the Father. The authorising agent for the Levitical priesthood did not survive the Levitical priesthood. The royal priesthood is based upon an eternal document, not a temporal document, and this eternal document which authorises our priesthood is a forever document. So is our priesthood.

6. While God the Holy Spirit regenerated every person who believed in Christ during the course of human history, only in this dispensation does God the Holy Spirit baptise every believer into union with Christ, making him a member of the royal family forever.

7. Members of the royal family — Church Age believers — operate under a much higher authorisation — Romans 8:2-4 illustrates that.

8. The indwelling of the Holy Spirit is a sign of royalty.

9. Every believer by virtue of positional truth lives in the palace. Therefore every believer of the Church Age is and always will be royalty — royalty through the baptism of the Holy Spirit.

10. Hence, we have a royal priesthood. We have the universal indwelling of the Holy Spirit. We have the command to all members of the royal family to be filled with the Spirit, to walk in the Spirit. Spirituality in the Church Age is a very definite change. So the authorising agent, the doctrine of divine decrees, is related to the various ministries of God the Holy Spirit to the believer of the Church Age at the point he believes.

“from necessity also a change of the law” — the genitive singular of nomoj indicates the law as the authorising agency for the Levitical priesthood.

“is made” — present active indicative from ginomai, and it should be translated “occurs.” The present tense is an historical present in which the past of the deactivation of the law and the Levitical priesthood is replaced by the royal priesthood. And this is so dramatic and so important that the present tense is used to dramatise it. The active voice: the action is produced by the subject which is metaqesij, a change. A change occurs. The indicative mood is a declarative indicative representing the verbal idea of a change occurring from the viewpoint of reality.

Translation: “For when the priesthood is changed [replaced], from necessity also a change of law must occur.”

Verse 13-15, a royal high priest demands a new authorising agent. In other words, royalty comes in and cleans house. This is a complete change of administration, and the royal high priest seated at the right hand of the Father means a complete and total house cleaning. So our royal high priest demands a new authorising agent, the new authorising agent becomes the basis for the house cleaning.

Verse 13 — again we have the explanatory use of the particle gar — “For”; “he of whom” — the preposition e)pi plus the accusative of the relative pronoun oj. It should be translated, “For the one toward whom.”

What does this mean?

1. It is a reference to the Lord Jesus Christ, the royal high priest.

2. Jesus Christ and Melchizedek were both royalty before they were priests.

3. Jesus Christ was born physically into the line of David, so He was born royalty; while Melchizedek acquired royalty through conquest.

4. Neither became royalty through the second birth or regeneration. Melchizedek was born again but at the time of being born again he was not baptised by the Holy Spirit. The baptism of the Spirit never occurred until the day of Pentecost, 30 AD Melchizedek, then, is royalty but not through the second birth. Jesus Christ is royalty but not through the second birth. It is blasphemous to assume that Christ had to be born again.

5. We as believers of the Church Age become royalty through the second birth. The moment we believed in Christ, the agent of regeneration, entered us into the family of God. “Ye are the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus”. But He did something else that made us royalty. Ours is unique royalty. We at the moment of salvation were entered into union with Jesus Christ, so we have royalty by virtue of union with Christ. Furthermore, we have permanent royalty and we are the only permanent royalty in history.

Now the high priests in this battalion do not have royalty on the same basis that we do. However, they have the same authorising agent — the doctrine of divine decrees, the two immutable things. Both the oath of the Father and the promise of the Father are in the decrees.

There are three categories in the royal priestly battalion. Historically: Melchizedek, high priest, became a king through conquest, became a priest by ruling Salem [Jerusalem]; Jesus Christ: born a King, appointed a priest by the eternal decrees; believers of the Church Age: became royal priests through the baptism of the Holy Spirit by which they were entered into union with Christ, and became members of the royal family forever.

All members of the battalion in all three categories all had their appointment from the divine decrees, whereas in the priesthood of Aaron, the Levitical order, all of them were appointed and authorised by the Mosaic law. The Mosaic law deals with temporal things, the divine decrees deal with eternal things.

Verse 13 — “For the one toward whom”, literally. This is a reference to the Lord Jesus Christ, the royal high priest. Jesus Christ, Melchizedek, and the believers in this dispensation of the Church are the only personnel in the first battalion. Jesus Christ and Melchizedek are the only two high priests. Then we have the royal family of the Church Age. These are the three categories. We differentiate in this way. Jesus Christ was born a King, He was born in the line of David. Melchizedek became a king by conquest, he was not born a king, he didn’t inherit a kingdom. Salem is also a city whose ruler is high priest, so Melchizedek was the king of Salem and the high priest of Salem. And when Abraham went out to meet him he conquered Abraham too, with doctrine. And Abraham became a citizen of Melchizedek’s kingdom. This is demonstrated by the fact that he paid taxes to him. Jesus Christ became a King by birth and was appointed a priest in eternity past in the doctrine of divine decrees. That leaves one other group, the believers of the Church Age, and we become members of the royal family at the point of salvation through the ministry of God the Holy Spirit.

The doctrine of the royal family

1. Definition: All believers of the Church Age belong to the world’s most unique system of royalty. This royalty is founded on strictly spiritual principles of doctrine. The royal family is every believer of the Church Age because in this dispensation very believer is entered into union with Christ, and this is royalty that will last forever. 2. The basis of royalty in the Church Age: The baptism of the Holy Spirit is the basis of royalty. No believer before the Church Age and no believer after the Church Age is qualified for royalty.

3. The precedent for royalty: The precedent for royalty is set up for us by the Greek word tacij which means category or battalion. The first battalion is the royal priesthood; second battalion: Levitical priesthood; third battalion: family priesthood. The family priesthood is deactivated. The Levitical priesthood is deactivated by the interruption of the Jewish Age. The precedent for setting up a royal priesthood was taken from the only other occurrence, the priesthood of Melchizedek. One time in history is all it took to set a precedent. So Melchizedek, a bona fide historical person is the precedent. The battalion of Melchizedek provides both the pattern and the precedent. it should be noted that Melchizedek acquired his royalty by becoming king of Salem, while Jesus Christ acquired His royalty by being born a King in the line of David. The royalty of the Church Age believer comes at the moment we believe in Christ, again, through the baptism of the Spirit.

4. The relationship to the King: a) When Jesus Christ was alone on the cross God the Father provided for Him a body and a bride. b) Through the baptism of the Spirit every believer is entered into union with Christ. c) Therefore, every believer in the Church Age is called body of Christ. d) Being body of Christ makes every believer of the Church Age personally related to the King of kings. e) Positional sanctification places every believer in the palace forever. f) Positional sanctification places every believer in the palace. g) When the body of Christ is completed the Church Age terminates with a resurrection. And what is the word for the process of completion? Teleiwsij. h) At the Rapture or the resurrection the body of Christ immediately becomes the bride. i) During the Tribulation the bride is prepared for operation footstool, which is the second phase of Christ’s strategic victory. 5. The sign of royalty: The sign of royalty is the unprecedented universal indwelling of God the Holy Spirit. The purpose of this indwelling is to glorify Jesus Christ — John 7:37-39.

6. The security of royalty: The sealing ministry of God the Holy Spirit is designed for the special double security of the royal family. Just being regenerated is security. The you have entered into union with Christ, and that is security. Then you have the sealing ministry of the Spirit to indicate that not only do you have eternal security but you have eternal security as an aristocrat.

7. The function of royalty: The function of royalty is twofold. First, moving toward the objective of the supergrace life. This is the attainment of the tactical goal of phase two. Secondly, the function of royalty is the modus operandi of the priesthood. Not only are you royal family but again, unprecedented, every believer is a priest. The normal function of the priesthood begins at the supergrace life but you are a priest from the moment of salvation.

8. The future of royalty: As members of the body of Christ and the royal priesthood all Church Age believers will return with Christ at the second advent. We will return to participate in the strategic victory at Armageddon. This strategic victory includes the Lord Jesus Christ breaking His record in slaughtering the enemy. His record: Jesus Christ in one second slaughtered 185,000 infantry. He will break this record at the second advent. The story is found in Isaiah 63 and many other passages. Ezekiel says it will take seven months to bury the dead. Revelation 14 says the blood will flow as high as the horse’s bridle for 275 miles. Jesus Christ will personally slaughter millions. Then all unbelievers will be removed from the world at that time — the baptism of fire. Then Jesus Christ will be crowned ruler of the world forever, the first 1000 years being a dispensation. After the Millennium the royal family will be with Christ forever.

Next we have a nominative neuter plural of the demonstrative pronoun o(utoj, translated “these things”. This demonstrative pronoun is used as a substantive. It is a reference to the doctrine of the royal family related to the priesthood. “These things” is best covered by two phrase from 1 Peter 2:9 — “We are an elect (chosen) race, a royal priesthood.”

“are spoken” — present passive indicative of legw. It refers to the context where Jesus Christ is described as a royal priest after the battalion of Melchizedek.

“pertaining” — perfect active indicative of metexw. It means to share, to partake, to participate, to belong. Here it means to belong. The perfect tense is a dramatic perfect. The dramatic perfect is a rhetorical application of the perfect tense and an intensification of the already intensive perfect. In fact, it is the most realistic way of describing something that is absolutely permanent and can’t be changed. The active voice: Jesus Christ, the royal high priest, produces the action of the verb. The indicative mood is declarative which states an unqualified assertion, a point of doctrine. “For the one toward whom these things are spoken belongs ...”

“to another tribe” — the word “tribe” is an objective genitive — fulhj. Then we have with that, e(teraj, which means another of a different kind — “a different kind of tribe.” The tribe of Levi is the tribe of the priesthood in Israel, family of Aaron. The tribe of Judah is the kingly tribe. Remember that the king and the priest are separated in Israel. It wasn’t always that way. Reuben was the firstborn. Reuben had as the eldest son all three of the advantages of birthright. He had the birthright double portion — the money would go to him. He had the rulership and the family priesthood. But he lost all three. He lost the rulership to Judah, the priesthood to Levi, and the double portion to Joseph who has two tribes in the double portion: Ephraim and Manasseh. The Levitical priesthood is all in the tribe of Levi but the Lord Jesus Christ belongs to another of a different kind of tribe — different from Levi is what it is saying here. Jesus Christ is descended from the royal line of David, through Solomon and through Nathan. The tribe of the Jewish priesthood is Levi, the family of Aaron. Obviously the priesthood of Christ, therefore, could never be related to the Lord Jesus Christ.

“of which” is not quite correct. We have the preposition a)po plus the ablative of the relative pronoun o(j. It should be translated “from which.”

“no man” — o)udeij, literally, “no one”; “gave attendance” — the perfect active indicative of prosexw means “has officiated.” The perfect tense is an intensive perfect. No one in the past has officiated with the result that no one has officiated. The active voice: No one from Judah could ever produce the action of the verb because Judah is not the priestly tribe. The indicative mood is the declarative indicative of unqualified assertion.

“at the altar” is the locative of place. qusiasthriwn refers to the altar of burnt offerings and therefore the Levitical altar. Who approaches the altar of burnt offerings? Only Levi. You either belong to the tribe of Levi, the family of Aaron, or you just don’t officiate at the altar.

Translation: “For the one toward whom [Jesus Christ] these things are spoken belongs to another of a different kind of tribe, from which no one has officiated at the altar [of burn offerings].”

Verse 14 — “For”, the explanatory use of the conjunctive particle gar; “it is evident” — nominative singular neuter of prodhloj, meaning “known to all”.

“that” — we have o(ti after verbs of perception, meaning even dummies know this one!

“our Lord sprang out” — but that isn’t correct. It is the perfect active indicative of a)natellw which means to descend — “our Lord has descended from”. The perfect tense is an intensive perfect. In other words, He was born in the tribe of Judah and therefore no matter where He went He was always in the tribe of Judah. He never changed His tribe; He couldn’t change His tribe. The active voice: our Lord produces the action of the verb with the result that He is always descended from Judah, not Levi. The indicative mood: unqualified statement of fact, there is no way that our Lord can ever be brought into the tribe of Levi.

“of Judah” — the preposition e)k plus the ablative, meaning from the source of Judah, or simply “from Judah.” The genealogies of Matthew and Luke are conclusive.

“of which tribe” — the preposition e)ij plus accusative of o(j plus the accusative of fulh. it should be translated “with reference to which tribe”.

“Moses spake nothing” — the aorist active indicative of lalew means he communicated nothing. This is a constative aorist which contemplates the action of the verb in its entirety. It takes the entire writings of Moses, gathers them into one ball of wax, and you can’t find anywhere in what Moses wrote any authorisation for anyone but the tribe of Levi serving at the altar. The active voice: Moses is the human author of the Pentateuch, and he is producing the action. This is a dogmatic and unqualified assertion as indicated by the indicative mood.

“concerning the priesthood” is not found in the Greek manuscript.

Translation: “For known to all is the fact that our Lord has descended from Judah; with reference to which tribe Moses has communicated nothing.”

Verse 15 — we have the continuative use of the conjunction kai, correctly translated “and”; “it is” — present active indicative of e)imi, absolute status quo verb. Between the conjunction and the verb is an adverb, e)ti, which means “still” or “in addition.” “Itis” is a static present tense, “it is and always will be.”

“far more evident” — the word for “evident” is prodhloj — “And it is still much more evident.”

“for that” — the conjunction e)i which is used for an emotional build-up phrase; “after the similitude of Melchizedek” is the preposition kata plus the accusative of o(moiothj, which means likeness or similarity, plus an indeclinable proper noun translated like a descriptive genitive — “according the similarity of Melchizedek.”

Notice that Melchizedek is a king priest; Jesus Christ is a King priest. Melchizedek acquired rulership and priesthood by conquest; Jesus Christ received kingship by birth and He received the priesthood by the divine decrees in eternity past. So it is the king high priest where the similarity exists. Both of them were being regarded from the standpoint of their humanity.

“there ariseth” — present middle indicative of a)nisthmi. The word means to come upon the scene, to make the scene, to rise up, to stand up in history. We have the historical present tense in which a past event is used with vividness of a present occurrence, and therefore it becomes a very dramatic, very intensive statement. The middle voice describes the subject as participating in the results of the action, or the subject acting with a view toward participating in the outcome. This is what is called a direct middle voice which refers the results of the action directly to the agent with reflexive force; a very strong statement. The indicative mood is declarative for unqualified assertion. Notice with the word “another” the word is e(teroj, so while Melchizedek and Jesus Christ and Church Age believers are all in the same battalion they are not the same persons. Melchizedek is a pattern only. He became a king by conquest, he became a high priest by conquest, and all of this is accomplished as a pattern. But as a spiritual giant when he met Abraham historically he demonstrated his superiority by ministering to Abraham, Abraham recognised his superiority by becoming a citizen of his kingdom by paying taxes. This is very significant because it demonstrates the fact that the first battalion is infinitely superior to the second battalion, even on the one historical meeting. That historical meeting sets up the precedent which we studied in the first ten verses.

Now we have another of a different kind of priest. Jesus Christ was born a king; He was the high priest by decree. Melchizedek became a king by conquest, his genealogy had nothing to do with it. Jesus Christ is a King priest by birth and by the two immutable things from God the Father. We are royal family forever, not by physical birth, not by ability, not by any relation except one: baptism of the Holy Spirit.

Translation: “And it is still much more evident: that according to the similarity of Melchizedek another of a different type of priest arises.”

Note that this passage distinguishes between Melchizedek and Jesus Christ.

Summary

1. Two things are evident. First, this verse is conclusive that Melchizedek was not a theophany. He is a pattern for the royal priesthood in contrast to the Levitical priesthood.

2. E(teroj (another of a different kind) demands further that a distinction be made between the royal priesthood of Melchizedek and the royal priesthood of Jesus Christ.

3. The obvious distinction is that Christ was born into royalty while Melchizedek became royalty by conquest.

4. The king of Salem, Melchizedek, was not born the king of Salem, as per verse 3.

5. This verse now comes into focus and related to the context. Melchizedek was not born king of Salem.

6. Jesus Christ is portrayed in this verse as e(teroj — another of a different kind — in that He was born a king. We are born again royalty; Jesus Christ was born physically a king.

7. Nevertheless in the battalion everyone is royalty one way or another. Melchizedek was royalty by conquest, Jesus Christ was royalty by the first birth, and we are royalty by the second birth.

8. Note the application to us, the believers of the Church Age: We are not royalty by human achievement, we are not royalty by physical birth, we are not royalty because we are better than everyone else. We are royalty by regeneration plus the baptism of the Holy Spirit.

9. Consequently, three types of royalty exist in the first battalion. The first is Melchizedek, the second is Jesus Christ, the high priest, and then we have a kingdom of priests made up of believers of the Church Age.

In verses 16, 17 we have categorical superiority of the royal high priest.

Verse 16 — we begin with the relative pronoun o(j. The antecedent: another of a different kind — “who” [Jesus Christ]; “is made” — perfect active indicative of ginomai, and should be translated “has become.” The perfect tense is the intensive perfect, it emphasises the existing results of the completed action. So we could translate it in more detail” “Who has become in the past with the result that he will always be.” The active voice: Jesus Christ as the subject produces the action of the verb. He is the royal high priest producing the action here. The declarative indicative is for a dogmatic and unqualified assertion.

“not” — first we get the negative, and it is a shut door. It is the objective negative o)uk.

“after the law of a carnal commandment” — kata nomon e)ntolhj sarkinhj, “not according to the law of physical requirements. “Not according to the law” is the first part, nomon is in the accusative; e)ntolhj sarkinhj are genitives which describe.

Summary

1. We have the strong negative o)uk, a point blank negation, it is objective and final.

2. We have the preposition kata plus the accusative of nomoj which refers to the Mosaic law’s requirements for the Levitical priesthood — Leviticus 21:17-21.

3. We have the genitive of description e)ntolh, and it extrapolates the specific paragraphs in the Mosaic law which deal with the qualifications of the Levitical priesthood.

4. We have the adjective sarkikoj which simply refers to the fact that all qualifications for the Levitical priesthood were physical and not spiritual. There were no spiritual qualifications. You didn’t have to be saved, it was the physical birth that counted, minus the defects. They had to have good breeding. This is important because that means whatever came from selective breeding was lost at death. Furthermore, selective breeding carries a tremendous pride and they did practice selective breeding with the line of Aaron. It was very important to them to have the most beautiful physical male specimens.

Leviticus 21 — everything in the Levitical priesthood depended upon physical requirements from birth all of the way through.

Verse 17 — “Speak unto Aaron, saying, Whosoever he be of thy seed in their generations who hath any blemish, let him not approach to offer the bread of his God.” The bread of his God refers to officiating at the altar, to putting bread on the table of shewbread, entering. In other words, the function of the priesthood.

Verse 18 — “For whatsoever man he be that hath a blemish, he shall not approach: a blind man, or a lame, or he who hath a flat nose, or anything superfluous [Hebrew: “deformed”].”

Verse 19 — “Or a man that is broken-footed, or broken-handed.”

Verse 20 — “Or a crookbacked [hunchback], or a dwarf, or hath a blemish [defect] in his eye, or be scurvy [eczema], or scabs [or other skin diseases], or hath his stones broken [crushed testicles].”

All of this adds up to the fact that they were very particular about their priesthood on the basis of God’s Word. It wasn’t just a matter of pride with them. God ordered it; He ordained this. The reason is because they were dealing with spiritual things. When there is the administration of spiritual things there is not to be anything to break the concentration of the people. In other words, no distractions from physical handicaps. There must not be distraction when it comes to spiritual things.

In the Levitical priesthood it must be remembered that no matter how great they were in their spiritual lives their qualifications were still all physical. They had to be born in a certain family, they had to be physically without any handicap of any kind. The concept is a very important one: If the requirements are physical they are terminated by physical death. When Aaron died he never again served as a priest. Nor did any other Levitical priest.

“but” — the adversative conjunction a)lla. The contrast between the physical requirements for the Levitical priesthood and the spiritual norms for the royal priesthood as represented in the person of Jesus Christ.

“after the power” — kata plus the accusative singular of dunamij, inherent power, and it should be translated “according to the inherent power of an endless life” — zwh plus katalutoj. Zwh means “life”; katalutoj does not mean endless, it means “indestructible”; “according to the inherent power of indestructible life”.

Translation: “Who has become a priest, not according to the law of physical requirements, but according to the power of indestructible life.”

Summary

1. This indestructible life is described in the next verse as eternal life or forever life.

2. Therefore, a priesthood which only possesses physical requirements is terminated by physical death.

3. But a priesthood which is related to eternal life can only be entered by regeneration and never destroyed by death.

4. So not only is the royal priesthood of the Church Age a superior priesthood of nobility in the royal family but it lasts forever.

5. The documentation for the royal priesthood is given in the next verse. This documentation relates Christ our high priest to us and is not part of the Mosaic law.

6. Therefore it is not an extrapolation from Moses but an extrapolation from the eternal decrees that authorises our priesthood, our royalty — Psalm 110:4.

Verse 17 — the documentation is taken from an extrapolation of the divine decrees and is quoted in Psalm 110:4.

“For” is the explanatory use of the conjunctive particle gar; “he testifieth” is not found in the original.

“Thou” — the emphatic use of the personal pronoun su. Because it is proleptic it should be translated “you and only you”.

“a priest forever” — i(ereuj e)ij ton a)iwna, “priest with reference to the ages [idiomatic for ‘forever’].” This emphasises and documents the eternity of the royal priesthood. Christ as the God-Man lives forever. We as born again believers, members of the family of God by faith in Christ, live forever in union with Christ.

“after the order of Melchizedek”, or literally, “according to the battalion of...”

Translation, quoting from Psalm 110:4 — “For you and only you, a priest for ever according to the battalion of Melchizedek.”

This was first addressed to Jesus Christ in eternity past. Now, since you and I have been entered into union with Christ this applies to us as much as it applies to Him, except that we are a kingdom of priests and He is the high priest. He is not only the ruler of the Church but He is the high priest of the royal priesthood.

Verse 18 — we have a contrast of authorising agencies. Superiority has been demonstrated by an historical encounter. Superiority has been demonstrated by the birth of the Lord Jesus Christ as a king — His appointment from the divine decrees. Now this is emphasised in contrasting the divine decrees with the Mosaic law.

We have an explanatory use of the conjunction gar. It is a particle which has a great deal to do with the thought continuity of the Greek language as well as its interpretation. It is followed by the affirmative particle men, used with de in classical Greek. These two particles are used — on the one hand, on the other — to present the alternatives of a situation. So literally, “On the one hand there is.”

“there is” — present active indicative of ginomai — “there comes to pass.” The present tense is an historical present used for a past event viewed with the vividness of a present occurrence. The active voice: the subject produces the action of the verb; the subject is not found until a little later, it is the word “commandment.” This is a declarative indicative for unqualified assertion.

“a disannulling” — a)qethsij which means “annulled”; “a commandment going before” — the word “commandment” is a genitive singular, and with the present active participle, an ascriptive participle which qualifies the noun as an adjective, we get something that goes like this: “a former commandment.” “For on the one hand a former commandment becomes annulled.” “Disannulling”,a)qethsij, is a noun for “annulled”.

The former commandment refers to the Mosaic law. The Mosaic law in the authorising agent for the Levitical priesthood. The Levitical priesthood is appointed on the basis of what the Mosaic law says. The Mosaic law is annulled, therefore there is no basis for the continuation of the Levitical priesthood. Therefore people who are in the Levitical line today do not function as priests unless they believe in Jesus Christ, at which point they are no longer Israel but Church. They are members of the body of Christ and that is the only way anyone who has this name — Kohen — can actually become a priest today. Kohen means priest and it was a name given to those generally in the line of Aaron, either through Eleazar or Ithumar.

The dramatic interruption of the Age of Israel annulled two things: the Levitical priesthood and its authorising agent, the Mosaic law. The reason for the abrogation of the Mosaic law is now described in the prepositional phrase, “for the weakness”, the preposition dia plus the accusative of a)sqenej which means weakness or powerlessness. Dia plus the accusative should be “because of.” Soit should be translated “because of powerlessness.”

We also have an intensive pronoun a)utoj, it intensifies the demonstrative pronoun and further qualifies what is being discussed. The intensive pronoun here is used as a possessive pronoun and so we have a literal translation, “because of its powerlessness.” The powerlessness of the Mosaic law is the fact that it authorises an obsolete priesthood. The Mosaic law is still in the Bible, it will always be in the Bible, but it is not functioning today. The priesthood that it authorises is defunct. Therefore the Mosaic law is powerless. It is powerless to produce a Levitical priesthood functioning today, to get you to keep the Sabbath which is just as defunct as the Levitical priesthood and all of the rest of the Mosaic law. We do not live under the Mosaic law. The Mosaic law authorises Levitical sacrifices. We need to know about those sacrifices because they are beautiful illustrations and often they help to elucidate with regard to the work of Christ on the cross. But we do not offer those sacrifices because the Mosaic law is powerless. In their day they were meaningful and wonderful, but now they are powerless. The Mosaic law is annulled because of its powerlessness. The annulment of the Mosaic law as an authorising agent is just as absolute as the putting away of sin at the cross — Hebrews 9:26. The law was conditional, depending on the laws of divine establishment. The new authorising agent for the new royal priesthood is unconditional, depending on who and what God is. The law depends on human nobility; grace and our authorising agent depends upon divine nobility. The Mosaic law is an appeal to human nobility; our authorising agent is an appeal to grace and divine nobility. The law applies to physical birth; grace applies to the new birth. The law is temporal; grace is eternal.

“and unprofitableness” — again we have the accusative, this time from a)nwfelej which is a part of the same prepositional phrase and should be translated “uselessness.”

Because of the interruption of the Jewish dispensation the law is now useless. It was designed for an interrupted and non-functioning dispensation. The insertion of the Church Age makes the law useless.

Powerlessness

1. The powerlessness of the Mosaic law is based on the fact that it authorised an obsolete priesthood.

2. The annulment of the Mosaic law as an absolute and as an authorising agent is just as absolute as the putting away of sin.

3. The law was conditional, depending upon divine establishment.

4. The new authorising agent for the royal priesthood is unconditional, depending upon God, the divine persons of the Trinity rather than the divine establishment.

5. The law demands human nobility; the royal priesthood demands divine nobility.

6. The law applies to physical birth — starting with circumcision, but the royal priesthood applies to the new birth.

7. The law is temporal; the royal priesthood is eternal.

The doctrine of the Mosaic law

1. The Mosaic law is divided into three parts: the moral code — Codex #1 — which has the commandments related to the laws of establishment — like in Exodus chapter 20 and Deuteronomy chapter five. This part of the Mosaic law is pertinent today under the laws of divine establishment; Codex #2 is the spiritual code, known in the scripture [KJV] as the ordinances. It is a complete Christology designed to present the Lord Jesus Christ as the only saviour and the God of Israel. It includes everything from the structure of the tabernacle, the holy days, the Levitical offerings, and the modus operandi of the Levitical priesthood; Codex #3 is known in the KJV as the judgements. It presents divine laws of establishment designed to provide freedom and privacy for Israel. It was designed to protect their property, their rights, their privileges. It included the functions of the divine institutions, many practical and wonderful things such as diet, sanitation, quarantine, soil conservation, taxation, universal military training, and many other things.

2. It is very important to understand the recipients of the Mosaic law. They can be divided into three very simple points. a) It was given to Israel — Exodus 19:3; Leviticus 26:46; Romans 3:19; 9:4; b) It was not given to the Gentiles — Deuteronomy 4:8; Romans 2:12-14; c) Christians — Church Age believers — are not under the law. It was not given to the Church. It is not an authorising agent for any part of the royal priesthood — Acts 15:5, 24; Romans 6:14; Galatians 2:19.

3. The Lord Jesus Christ fulfilled the law — Matthew 5:17. He fulfilled specifically, Codex #2, by His ministry on the cross. In effect, He actually fulfilled Codex #1 by His impeccability. It can even be said that He fulfilled certain stages of Codex #3 in the field of patriotism and the laws of establishment — Matthew 22:21. But the principle concept is that the Lord Jesus Christ fulfilled the law by His sacrifice on the cross.

4. Therefore, Christ is the end of the law for the royal family, for Church Age believers, for the royal priesthood — Romans 10:4. And in effect there is a conflict between the royal priesthood of the believer and the former Levitical priesthood. The conflict is resolved by the annulment, the abrogation of the law. The law is not in function today.

5. Believers of the Church Age, members of the royal family, are under a higher law. The indwelling of the Holy Spirit is the badge of royalty. The filling of the Holy Spirit is the fulfilment of the higher law, the superseding law, the law which nullifies the Mosaic law — Romans 8:2-4; Galatians 5:18, 22, 23; 1 Corinthians chapter 13.

6. The limitations of the Mosaic law. a) It cannot justify. The law was never designed to be an agent of justification — Galatians 2:16; Romans 3:20, 28; Acts 13:39; Philippians 3:9. b) It cannot provide life, it cannot perpetuate anything. Everything related to the law died and disappeared — like the Levitical priesthood. The Mosaic law could not perpetuate the Levitical priesthood forever. So it cannot give life — Galatians 3:21. c) It cannot provide God the Holy Spirit — Galatians 3:2. God the Holy Spirit is provided — indwelling only — members of the royal family as the sign of royalty. d) It cannot solve the problem of the old sin nature — Romans 8:3.

7. The present purpose of the Mosaic law. Under Codex #1 we have a definition of freedom through the laws of divine establishment. Codex #1 is also designed to convince by divine standard that the unbeliever is a sinner and needs a saviour — Romans 3:20, 28; 1 Timothy 1:8-10. Codex #2 is designed to communicate the Gospel by illustration, by analogy. Codex #3 provides for the national function of freedom under the laws of divine establishment: freedom through military victory, prosperity through free enterprise. This is in contrast to our passage where the past purpose of the Mosaic law was for an authorising agent for the Levitical priesthood. We saw that in Hebrews 7:11,12. 8. The Mosaic law is known by other nomenclature. For example, it is called the book of the covenant — Exodus 24:7,8; 34:27,28; Deuteronomy 4:13-16, 23; 8:18; 9:9,11,15. There is an addendum to the Mosaic law in Deuteronomy 29. The prophecy of the breaking of the covenant is found in Deuteronomy 31, and also Jeremiah 22:9. The book of the covenant is the subject of Jeremiah chapter 11 but is not to be confused with the new covenant of Jeremiah 31.

9. Keeping the law was never a way of salvation, it was the way of human freedom and human prosperity under establishment. It was designed to provide the best possible conditions for the writing of the Old Testament canon, and it did that perfectly. There is constant reference throughout the Old Testament to the Mosaic law.

Translation of verse 18: “For on the one hand a former commandment [the Mosaic law] becomes annulled because of its powerlessness and uselessness.”

Verse 19 — “For”, a second explanatory gar to introduce a parenthesis. Now we have a parenthetical concept — “For the law”, o( nomoj which refers to the Mosaic law which is the authorising agent for the Levitical priesthood as well as animal sacrifices, holy days, and other shadows of the past dispensation.

“made nothing perfect” — teleiwsij means the process of completion. It means that Christ at the time of the cross, all the way through to His ascension, was alone. So ten days later God provided a bride, but the provision of the bride takes the entire course of the Church Age. The point is, this is teleiwsij — the process of completing the body. The process demands the permanent creation of a royal family, and you and I as believers in the Lord Jesus Christ are royalty forever — not by regeneration but by the baptism of the Holy Spirit which occurred at regeneration. Regeneration enters you into the family of God but the baptism of the Holy Spirit enters you into the palace of the family of God — royal family. We are in union with the person of Christ through the baptism of the Spirit. The phrase “made nothing perfect” is the aorist active indicative of teleiow, the verb. It means to complete, to bring to an end, or to finish a process. “For the law did not finish the process”. We have a very strong negative, o)udeij. The aorist tense is a constative aorist, it contemplates the action of the verb in its entirety. it takes the occurrence of the function of the law all the way from Moses to Christ and gathers it up into a single whole. The active voice: the law produces the action of the verb, which is accomplishing nothing as far as providing a bride for Christ. The indicative mood is declarative denoting the verbal idea as being actual. It is the mood of certainty and unqualified dogmatic assertion.

“but” — now we have de which goes with men. This is classical Greek. Now we have ‘on the other hand’: “but (close of parenthesis) on the other hand”

“the bringing in” — e)peisagwgh minus the definite article means “introduction, insertion”; “of a better hope [or confidence].” “Better hope” is the genitive singular from the comparative of a)gaqoj. It can be spelled two ways: kreisswn or kreittwn. Kreittwn is a comparative of a)gaqoj. We have here descriptive genitives and they are used as adjectives, they qualify what is introduced by the interruption of the Church Age. Hence, this is the descriptive genitive defined by attributing a quality to what is introduced. So we translate it simply, “by the introduction of a better confidence.”

“by the which” — dia plus the genitive of the relative pronoun o(j. It should be translated “through which”. The relative pronoun refers to the better confidence. The better confidence is your confidence. What is your confidence? The moment you believed in Christ you entered the royal family. You are nobility forever, you are a member of the royal family forever. There never was such a thing before in history even in the battalion of Melchizedek where you have a royal high priest. He is dead and it is all over. Melchizedek will be another illustration — a king in time but in heaven he is just another member of the family of God. Not that that is to be sneered at but we have a comparative here. This is better than good is what this comparative says, so we say better than good confidence.

“we draw nigh” — the present active indicative of e)ggizw. The present tense is a static present, it represents a condition which perpetually exists in the royal priesthood. We have a better confidence, better than anything that ever went before, better than the Mosaic law. We are more permanent. The Mosaic law is now in a state of annulment but you and I go on forever as royal family. “unto God” — this is dative of indirect object of qeoj plus the definite article. The definite article is merely used to show that God has been previously brought into the context. The dative of indirect object is used in a very idiomatic sense here. It is a dative of possession in which the personal interest in God is made very special to the point of ownership. We now, as members of the family of God, should have a very personal interest in God, an interest which can only be satisfied and assuaged by the study of Bible doctrine. The royal priesthood possesses God forever.

Summary

1. The better than good confidence is the superior authorising agent for the royal priesthood. The superior authorising agent is actually twofold: the decree of eternity past but the ministry of God the Holy Spirit at the point of salvation. So the authorising agent for the royal priesthood is God the third person of the Trinity, coequal with the Father, coequal with the Son. He is our authorising agent and He will be forever and ever.

2. God the Holy Spirit as the authorising agent accomplished His mission in a permanent manner. He took you and He took me at the moment of salvation — and it is known as the baptism of the Spirit — and He entered us into union with Jesus Christ. At the same time He indwelt us, at the same time He sealed us, at the same time He gave us at least one spiritual gift.

3. We as members of the royal priesthood approach God on the basis of union with Christ, which we call simply positional sanctification. We approach with confidence because we are sealed by the Spirit, we are indwelt by the Spirit.

4. We approach with confidence because the ministry of God the Holy Spirit is infinitely superior to the ministry of the Mosaic law. The Mosaic law is the authorising agent for the Levitical priesthood; God the Holy Spirit is the authorising agent for the royal priesthood.

5. As we have seen in this verse the law does not accomplish the completion of a process, the law accomplishes nothing. But God the Holy Spirit accomplishes everything.

6. We saw that noun e)peisagwgh, translated “introduction.” That noun emphasises the fact of doctrine that the Church Age is an interruption of the dispensation of Israel. It is an intercalation period, it is inserted toward the end of the Jewish Age.

7. This interruption of the Jewish dispensation is dramatic and traumatic. The Levitical priesthood could only approach the shadow of good things to come, but we have entered into the reality of good things to come.

8. The royal priesthood deals strictly in reality, the Levitical priesthood in shadows.

9. This means that we as believers in this dispensation approach God on the basis of a royal and eternal priesthood.

10. At the moment of salvation the Holy Spirit regenerated us. He did that for all believers since Adam.

11. But God the Holy Spirit simultaneously with regeneration baptises us into union with Christ. Therefore for the first time the baptism of the Spirit, and for the first time a permanent royal family exists. In other words, God the Son has finally selected His bride, the Church Age believer.

12. While we are family of God like the Old Testament saints, we are more than family of God. We are royal family, we live in the palace forever.

13. Furthermore, the sign of royalty is the indwelling presence of God the Holy Spirit.

14. The security of royalty is the sealing ministry of the Spirit.

15. Therefore the introduction of a better hope or confidence implies a dispensation without precedent, a priesthood without termination, a royalty through perfect and permanent relationship. We are not perfect but the manner in which we were entered into union with Christ is perfect. The work was accomplished by God the Holy Spirit who is perfect, so we do have a perfect relationship.

16. For this reason Jesus Christ is the only celebrity.

That brings us now to a new section: The superiority of the royal priesthood of the Church Age — verses 20-28. In verses 20-22, superiority is established on the basis of two immutable things. The two immutable things were first presented to us in chapter 6:16-18. The two immutable things are a divine promise — the Word, and a divine oath — a person. So the two immutable things always involve the person and His Word. The oath is always connected with a person, and the promise is connected with His Word. That is the key.

So far we have not seen two immutable things as they relate to our priesthood, we have only seen them as they relate to Abraham. Abraham received a promise on the basis of two immutable things: an oath and a promise, the person and the Word. Now they are going to be applied to the royal priesthood. In Hebrews 6 we had the illustration of two immutable things and the illustration was Abraham. There are two immutable things because God is immutable, and He is immutable in two ways. He is immutable as to His essence, His person, and He is immutable as to what He says. God cannot lie, God cannot welch on a promise. So the two immutable things are both related to who and what God is and what He says; His person and the content of His Word. The two immutable things are the basis for the royal priesthood, making it superior to anything in any previous dispensation. Furthermore, the two immutable things apply to the royal priesthood causing it to last forever without any possibility of annulment. The Mosaic law and the Levitical priesthood were annulled. That will never happen to us. This gives us a permanent royalty and a permanent priesthood. This also stimulates us to advance to supergrace in time so that we can discover what royalty is like. This can only be accomplished through the classroom of the local church, under the authority of the ministry of the pastor-teacher. (It can be accomplished by listening to tapes because you can’t get anything locally, and you can go all the way to supergrace)

Verse 20 — “And inasmuch as.” This is the transitional use of kai plus a preposition kata plus the object of the preposition kata, the accusative of o(soj. What is really means is “By how much, by so far as.” But we simply say in modern English, “Inasmuch as”.

“not without” — we have a very strong negative, o)uk. Then we have an adverb, xwrij. A few things about o)uk: First of all, o)uk is the particle of summary negation. It is a very proper negative particle for the statement of an absolute and downright negative fact. O)uk denies the reality of an alleged fact. It is therefore a clear cut, point blank, objective, final negative. It is also very objective. It says no objectively, not subjectively. In other words, it shuts the door tight. Whereas mh, the other negative particle, leaves a crack in the door, says no and means yes, that type of thing. The adverb xwrij is an improper preposition. So “apart from an oath” is actually a prepositional phrase, but xwrij is really an adverb and not a preposition though it is used as a preposition. And with the improper preposition we have a compound noun o)rkwmosia, which really means the act of taking an oath — “And inasmuch as not without the taking of an oath.”

What does this mean?

1. It is a reference to an oath made at the time of the eternal decrees. When God started to utter this phase of the eternal decrees that involved us, the royal family and the royal priesthood, He swore by an oath [by Himself because there was no greater]. When He came to the Church Age He took an oath on the basis of His own immutable, unchangeable, perfect character. Then, having taken the oath He promised the Church Age, a royal priesthood, a royal high priest, a saviour for the body, and all the rest of it. By union with Christ through the baptism of God the Holy Spirit we share in the oath that God the Father made to God the Son with regard to His royalty, He promised Him a royal family, a royal bride, a royal priesthood, and He promise this would be perpetuated forever. So at the time of the declaration of the divine decrees pertaining to the appointment of Jesus Christ as a royal high priest God the Father took an oath mentioned in this phrase. And that is why it isn’t a regular prepositional phrase. God the Father never took an oath with regard to the Levitical priesthood. The Mosaic law is not a part of the eternal decrees. 2. The extrapolation of the decrees in Psalm 110:4 authorises the royal priesthood through the appointment of the Lord Jesus Christ.

3. By union with Christ we share in that appointment just as we share in the priesthood.

4. At the time of the declaration of the divine decrees pertaining to the appointment of Jesus Christ as a royal priest God the Father took an oath mentioned in the prepositional phrase “and not apart from taking an oath.”

5. God the Father never took an oath regarding the Levitical priesthood.

6. Therefore the superiority of the royal priesthood over the Levitical priesthood.

Translation of verse 20 — “And inasmuch as not without the taking of an oath our royal priesthood was appointed.”

Verse 21 — a parenthesis. In order to understand this verse there are three things we need to know first. Firs of all, this verse is parenthetical It indicates the superiority of the royal priesthood over the Levitical in relationship to the divine oath. Secondly, the sentence was begun in verse 20 and is completed in verse 22. The sentence of verse 20 is not complete but it will be completed in verse 22. Thirdly, we word order is very different in the Greek text and therefore we will have to follow from time to time the word order of the Greek text in understanding verse 21.

We begin with the word “For” in the English. This is a conjunctive particle gar. It has a number of uses. In fact, all continuity in the Greek language is carried on by conjunctive particles rather than by verbs and the full structure of sentences. Gar is used to express the ground or the reason, the explanation, and to indicate a parenthesis. We also have with gar an affirmative particle, men, used with the nominative plural of the definite article. So we have another particle, o(i — the definite article is actually a particle. So we have gar men o(i, and all of these are used to explain how God giving a solemn oath relates to the Levitical priesthood. God, in eternity past, was carving out the divine decrees and He was declaring that there would be a royal priesthood, greater than the Levitical priesthood, superseding the Levitical priesthood, and being a priesthood forever — a priesthood which doesn’t run around and hustle, but a priesthood which operates in the soul. The whole function of the royal priesthood of the dispensation in which we live is to get doctrine into the soul, not to be running around and hustling and not to be trying to sell the Lord Jesus Christ like you would sell soap or some other product. This is our objective. Then, after getting doctrine into the soul, the next objective is to get to the place where God can bless us. We do this through the intake of Bible doctrine. So the big function of the priesthood in our day is exactly like the big function of the Levitical priesthood in this sense. Their job was to take in doctrine; our job is to take in doctrine. However, their job was to take in doctrine to communicate it; our job is to take in doctrine to get to the place of supergrace status where the Lord Jesus Christ can be glorified. He is glorified when you are made wealthy, when you are made successful, when you are promoted, when you are given materialist things. He is glorified when the supergrace blessings are poured out in your life.

“For in fact” is the way we are going to translate men. And then o(i, the definite article, is actually going to be used as a pronoun — “For in fact they [Levitical priests] without an oath.” Now we have an improper prepositional phrase. We do not have anything improper in the English language but we have many improper things in the Koine Greek of the New Testament. And the purpose of improper prepositional phrases is to give special emphasis to something. The word xwrij is actually an adverb. This is an adverb used as a preposition, therefore it becomes improper. With it we also have the genitive case of the noun o(rkwmosia. The word actually means to take an oath. God the Father actually said when He came to this part of the decree, “I promise to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help me, me.” He had to swear by Himself, there is no greater.

“For in fact they [the Levitical priests], without the taking of an oath” — which means that the Levitical priesthood was appointed without God saying, “I sware by myself.” God did not appoint the Levitical priesthood by taking a solemn divine oath. God did not make any oath of any kind. This is in contrast to our priesthood where God took a solemn oath that we would be priests forever after the order of or, as the Greek says, according to the battalion of Melchizedek. So our priesthood is based upon something which is absolutely, totally unusual. God not only appointed you a priest forever but He made it doubly sure by saying, “I sware in my own name.” Now that is your heritage. So on the one hand we have the swearing and on the other the content of the divine decrees. And God said certain things. He said that after the glorification of Jesus Christ at the right hand of the Father, at the termination of the first stage of the strategic victory of the angelic conflict, there would be a new priesthood, there would be a royal family and that this new priesthood and this new royal family would perform teleiwsij, the process of completion. And it would take at least 2000 years — we do not know how much longer — to finish up teleiwsij. When teleiwsij is completed then this particular body will be removed to heaven where it becomes the bride of Christ and where it continues forever. So we have two immutable things: the person of God the Father and the Word of God the Father. These two things establish your royalty forever. You cannot lose your royalty, you cannot lose what you have. When we come to the Levitical priesthood we are looking at something in contrast. The contrast is quite obvious. “For in fact they [the Levitical priesthood], without the taking of an oath, have become”. “Were made” is what you have in your English Bibles.” This is a perfect periphrastic composed of two things. First of all we have the perfect passive participle plus the present active indicative of e)imi. The participle is ginomai. We have both of the verbs to be indicating the long historical record of the Levitical priesthood. We have ginomai in the perfect participle, we also have e)imi in the present active indicative. This is called a perfect periphrastic in the Greek. And it indicates that even though they did not have an oath they existed for a long, long time and made a very definite impact in history.

Take, for example, the present active indicative of e)imi. The present tense is a customary present indicating that the Levitical priesthood habitually were appointed without divine oath. God never gave His word to perpetuated them. The active voice: the Levitical priesthood produces the action of the verb. They were appointed without any divine oath or sanction personally from God. No Levitical priest was appointed under the two immutable things. Take, for example, the perfect participle of ginomai. This perfect tense is called a consummative perfect in which not the existing state but the process in emphasised. In the historical process of the Levitical priesthood they were never appointed by divine oath. The authorising agent was the Mosaic law. Then they were born in the proper line, and they lived until they became mature and then they were actually ordained in a special ceremony, provided they passed all of the physical requirements. It was physical birth that put them in, it was the physical condition that made it possible for them to function. So all the way through it is physical requirements, physical requirements. There is nothing of the divine oath, there is nothing of the divine decree, it is strictly a matter of perpetuation by the usual manner of perpetuating the human race. That is the consummative perfect, it is the one type of perfect which is very rare. In the consummative perfect we have therefore a physical process by which a priesthood is perpetuated.

So literally we have, “For in fact they [the Levitical priesthood], without the taking of an oath have become...”

“priests” — referring to the Levitical priesthood; “but” — now we have the adversative use of a post positive conjunction de. We are going to set up a contrast here. This means to set up a contrast between the Levitical priesthood appointed without a divine oath, appointed on the basis of physical perpetuation, and the royal priesthood appointed with a divine oath, appointed under the authorising agent of the divine decrees.

The next word is “this.” However, the word “this” is a definite article in the nominative singular and if use with the particle de it means something else. So we have de plus o(. It is used as a personal pronoun. One of the purposes of the definite article is to call attention to the noun that it modifies. Here the noun that it modifies is understood, and when it is understood and preceded by the particle de it is a very special and a very emphatic personal pronoun. So we translate, “but he” — reference to the unique person of the universe, the Lord Jesus Christ who is directly related to our priesthood, to our status on this earth, to every blessing we will ever have. He is the God-Man, the King of kings, the Lord of lords, He is a high priest forever in the battalion of Melchizedek. So it is the Lord Jesus Christ who is brought into focus suddenly in a very dramatic way. The putting of these particles together gives great emphasis to who and what the Lord Jesus Christ is.

In the royal priesthood of the Church Age Jesus Christ is the only one directly appointed. Our appointment is related to Him, to the fact that the moment we believe in Christ something different happens in the Church Age — the baptism of the Holy Spirit.

“but this one [the Lord Jesus Christ] with an oath” — we have the preposition meta plus the genitive of o(rkwmosia. Now “with” is correct here; “accompanied by” is the concept — “with the taking of an oath.”

Summary

1. The oath mentioned here is one of two immutable things.

2. The other is the promise or the content of the decree extrapolated in Psalm 110:4.

3. Aaron’s line became priest through physical birth and physical qualifications. Their authorisation was the Mosaic law. No divine oath was involved in the ordination of a Levitical priest.

4. Therefore, the twofold authority of the physical priesthood was a) physical birth; b) the Mosaic law which not only authorised the line of Aaron and the tribe of Levi but, again, specified physical requirements for ordination.

5. Nothing permanent comes from the authority of the Levitical priesthood.

6. The physical death of the priest terminated his function while the interruption of the dispensation of Israel — interrupted by the Church Age — annulled the Mosaic law.

7. On the other hand we have a twofold authority for the royal priesthood. a) God’s oath based upon the immutability of His essence, based upon the perfection of His person; b) the divine decrees, which is what God said at this stage of the decrees, and we have a concept of what he said from the extrapolation in Psalm 110:4.

Literally, then, we have so far in this verse: “For in fact they [the Levitical priests], without the taking of an oath, have become priests; but he [Jesus Christ] by the taking of an oath...”

“by him that said” — not correct. It is dia plus the definite article in the genitive, and it should be translated “through him”, or “through the one saying”. We also have the present active participle of legw.

“unto him” — proj plus the accusative of the intensive pronoun a)utoj — “face to face with him [with the Father].” Jesus Christ as a member of the Trinity was present at the divine decrees in eternity past. So the prepositional phrase indicates that both the Father and the Son were present at the divine decrees. Not mentioned but also present was God the Holy Spirit.

“The Lord” — kurioj, a title for deity. Kurioj stands for the Hebrew Tetragrammaton which we simply call “Jehovah.” Kurioj is used here for God the Father, the author of the divine decrees.

“sware” — aorist active indicative of o)mnumi, equivalent to the Hebrew shaba which was used for a solemn oath. The aorist tense is a dramatic aorist, it states the present reality of a past event. It indicates that this event took place in the past but it is stated as a present event because it is so dramatic and so pertinent. In eternity past God the Father said these things but it is stated in the aorist in order to show that they are just as important now to us, in fact more so than ever before. It is used to state what has just been realised. The active voice: God the Father produced the action of the verb as a part of the divine decrees. The indicative mood is unqualified assertion of an eternal decree related to us. The Lord made a solemn oath. The first immutable thing is the person. The second immutable thing emphasises the promise.

“and will not repent” — you can emphasise that right now for this reason: You may have failed. You may be a failure right now in your spiritual life. God isn’t going to change His mind because you are a colossal failure. It just proves that you have rejected divine authority at some point but it doesn’t change God’s mind. Now here is the principle: The Lord made a solemn oath and will not change His mind. The word here is a future passive indicative of metamelomai. Metamelomai is used for regretting something that you have done. But when God is the subject, God has no emotion. When you get all full of emotion God is not full of emotion. Why? Emotion is something we need, it is a prop for expressing what is in the right lobe in terms of some form of happiness — that is when it is used right, of course — but God is not weak. Emotion is necessary for the frailty of mankind, but God isn’t weak, He doesn’t need emotion to prop up His love. The omniscience of God does not need emotion. Why didn’t the Holy Spirit put in metanoew here? The Lord has made a solemn oath and will not change His mind, but it is metamelomai. Why? To demonstrate something. We on the basis of emotion change our minds about many things. But why does God the Father metamelomai? The answer is very simple. Metamelomai means literally to regret, to change the mind in the sense of no regrets. God has no regrets even when we fail. The whole thing in focus here is the fact that we fail — all of us. We have old sin natures, we neglect doctrine, we go on the road to reversionism. But God has no regrets about taking a solemn oath, about appointing you in the divine decrees with Jesus Christ. He has no regrets. That is the issue in this verse.

We now move into the second immutable thing in this passage, which is what was actually said. The solemn promise, the first immutable thing, represents the essence of God, represents the fact that His person is absolutely perfect and any promise He makes is absolutely perfect. Now for the content of what God the Father said in the divine decrees.

The second immutable thing starts with the word “Thou”, the proleptic pronoun su. It can be translated “you and only you.” It refers to the Lord Jesus Christ. He was being addressed at this point in the divine decrees. It is referring to the Lord Jesus Christ in His appointment as high priest. First of all, God the Father made a solemn promise on the basis of His perfect character, and now He gives the content.

“a priest forever” — i(ereuj e)ij ton a)iwna. This is the eternal superiority of the royal priesthood. The superiority is involved in one person only. Jesus Christ was addressed alone in the doctrine of divine decrees. The extrapolation of the divine decrees mentions only Him. The extrapolation is in the Old Testament so obviously it could not mention the Church and the body of Christ. The Old Testament knows nothing of Church doctrine or Church Age doctrine. Church Age doctrine is called “mystery” and therefore completely obscured from the Old Testament prophets and from the Old Testament writings. Since this is a quotation from Psalm 110:4, obviously it is addressed only to the Lord Jesus Christ. “You are a priest forever according to the battalion of Melchizedek.” That is the extrapolation. When it is revealed to the Old Testament prophets there is no reference to the Church, the body of Christ. This would come from the Lord Jesus Christ Himself during the last day of His earthly ministry before the cross. In fact, this information was given in that same upper room where the communion service was first authorised by the Lord Jesus Christ. The unique person here is emphasised by the proleptic pronoun. The perpetuation of this priesthood is emphasised by the phrase “forever.” The “order of Melchizedek” gives us a categorical concept. Jesus Christ is not a family priest, not a Levitical priest; Jesus Christ belongs to the royal battalion, the first battalion.

Our parenthesis says in detail, “For in fact they [Levitical priests], without the taking of an oath, have become priests; but he [Jesus Christ] with the taking of a solemn oath through the one saying, face to face with him [God the Father], The Lord made a solemn oath and will not change his mind, You are a priest forever.”

The verb is definitely left out for two reasons: to give greater emphasis to the pronoun and to emphasise again the principle of forever. Whenever a verb is removed in either the Hebrew or the Greek it gives great emphasis to the words on each side. First of all the Lord Jesus Christ is emphasised and then the perpetuation of His priesthood. You know one thing for certain. Whoever is in the priestly line with the Lord Jesus Christ could not possible be there unless they had the same kind of life that Jesus Christ has — forever life, eternal life. This is why it is first of all necessary to believe in the Lord Jesus Christ in order to have this type of life. And at the moment of believing in Christ you are appointed into the priesthood. You have forever life so that forever you can be in the royal family and so that forever you can be a priest in the same order as the Lord Jesus Christ. He is not only the King of kings — He will rule many categories in the Millennium and many more in eternity — but there is one category that is absolutely unique: the royal priesthood. And you are a member of that royal family.

Verse 22 — the first conclusion. “By so much” is a prepositional phrase. It is the preposition kata plus the accusative of the demonstrative form of tosoutoj. It is an idiom, it means literally, “Before so much” but it actually means correctly translated, “By so much doctrinal evidence.” So this verse begins our conclusion on the basis of all true conclusions in the Christian way of life: doctrinal evidence. All doctrinal evidence is presented to the royal priesthood on the earth on the basis of Bible teaching. We also have the use of the adjunctive kai which should be translated here, “also”.

Next is the word “Jesus” emphasising the humanity of Christ in keeping with the fact that a priest must be a member of the human race to represent the human race before God.

“was made” — literally, “had become”, the perfect active indicative of ginomai. The perfect tense is the intensive perfect, it takes the action of the verb as completed with emphasis on its existing results. In other words, Jesus had become with the result that He keeps on being. The active voice refers to the Lord Jesus Christ, He produces the action. The indicative mood is the unqualified assertion of a dogmatic doctrinal principle. “By so much doctrinal evidence also Jesus had become a surety”. The word for “surety” is the noun e)gguoj, it means a guarantee. The Lord Jesus Christ has become a guarantee of a better testament. The word “better” is that genitive singular, the comparative of a)gaqoj, which is spelled in two different ways, kreisswn or kreittwn. With that we have the genitive singular of diaqhkh for “covenant.” It means a covenant or a contract. Really, the word “contract” came a little later in the Koine language. This was a papyri and a Patristic meaning of diaqhkh. In the Hellenistic use of the word it was a will, but it loses this concept when used as the translation for the Hebrew word berith which always means covenant. Jesus Christ is the guarantee of a better covenant than the Mosaic covenant, the one which authorised the Levitical priesthood. The Mosaic law is a covenant; this is a better covenant. The better covenant, by the way, is the extrapolation from the divine decrees — Psalm 110:4. As with Abraham’s supergrace in Hebrews 6:13-18 so also in the appointment and the guarantee of the royal priesthood. There are two immutable things: the oath representing the person of God, and the Word representing the doctrine of God.

Notice that verse 22 was really a continuation of verse 20, and we have in verse 21 a parenthesis. So the corrected sentence starts in verse 20, and reads: “And inasmuch as not without the taking of an oath our royal priesthood was appointed: by so much doctrinal evidence also [verse 22] Jesus has become a guarantee of a better covenant than the Mosaic code.”

Verse 21 is a parenthesis that sounds like this: “For in fact they [the Levitical priests], without the taking of an oath, have become priests; but he [Jesus Christ] with the taking of an oath through the one saying face to face with him [Psalm 110:4], The Lord has made a solemn promise and will not change his mind, You are a priest forever.” Thewords “after the order of Melchizedek” do not occur this time. They were simply added because it was found in the other phrases where Psalm 110:4 was quoted. This time the entire Psalm 110:4 was not quoted for a very definite reason. It isn’t necessary. The emphasis in the quotation this time is the fact that the Father made a solemn oath rather than the actual content of what He said.

Now we have the superiority established on the basis of perpetuation — verses 23, 24.

Verse 23 — “And they truly,” kai o(i men: three particles. It should be translated, “And they [Levitical priests] on the one hand.” The word kai is simply a conjunction; o(i is the nominative plural of the definite article, and the definite article is used for a personal pronoun, “they”; men means “on the one hand.”

“were many” — many in number. We have the nominative masculine plural of pleion, a comparative with poluj which a concept of quantity. It is used as the subject of a verb, even though it is an adjective, and as an adjective used as a noun — you have to supply a noun. So we translate, many numerically or many in number. “And they [the Levitical priesthood] on the one hand were many in number.”

Why use an adjective? Every time you turn around the Levitical priesthood with all of its greatness at the time that it functioned, and at some times it’s failures, cannot even be compared even remotely to the priesthood which we posses at this moment, the priesthood which functions right now. It functions in remembering the Lord at the communion table, it is functioning now in listening to the teaching of the Word of God, and then priesthood that you have is infinitely greater than the Levitical priesthood. And to downgrade it the Greek language has a very interesting way of doing it — an adjective instead of a noun, an adjective which shows a great numerical concept perpetuated over a long period of time, helping in their own generation but of absolutely no use in any other generation or at any future time. This is the Levitical priesthood which is being mentioned.

The word “were” which is our verb actually is a periphrastic perfect in which you have a perfect participle followed by then present tense of e)imi as the finite verb. Generally, most periphrastics are a combination of a participle and a verb. The verb has to be e)imi, the state of being verb, and the perfect periphrastic is a great intensive concept here. So we have e)imi as the present active indicative, and ginomai is the perfect participle. And ginomai plus e)imi means, “And they [Levitical priests], many in number, had become priests in the past with the result that they functioned as priests at a certain time.” The word “priests” is the predicate nominative with the periphrastic.

“because” — dia plus the accusative of the definite article. The accusative of the definite article is used as a pronoun, it gives it great emphasis, and so it should be translated “because they”.

Next in the Greek manuscript we have the instrumental singular of qanatoj. Everything was going fine except that you knew something was going to go wrong because of the fact that you have an adjective instead of a noun, and you have to supply the noun from the meaning of the adjective, and when you have to supply a noun for the meaning a an adjective already you have a peon on your hands by comparison. And that is exactly right, we have a peon priesthood as compared to a royal priesthood and even though the Levitical priesthood was very frequently great and very frequently terrible, no matter what it was it was still a peon priesthood — always was, always will be. Aaron was a peon. His younger brother Moses was the greatest leader that Israel ever had but Moses had no royal connections except that he had been adopted by the queen regent of Egypt. Had he stayed in Egypt Moses would have started a great kingly line and dynasty, but he chose to reject the rulership of the Egyptian empire and to become a peon leader of the Jews. And that is exactly what the tribe of Levi is. Levi himself was a crude person, always a troublemaker and always in trouble. So you knew that Levi’s line was not going to be too good and that the only thing that would ever help it out would be regeneration and doctrine. And that is exactly what happened. And there is always something of the peasant in the line of Levi, but God turns cursing into blessing and He did so by giving them the great spiritual responsibility which was theirs as long as Israel was a dispensation. But no matter how you slice it, whether you are talking about Phinehas or Samuel or some other great priest in the line of Levi, even their greatness must be qualified by a noun, peon. That is exactly what they are compared to the priesthood that would follow. This does not detract from greatness for those who were great in their day but no matter how great they were in their day they were still peons. Therefore there has to be an adjective. You can’t describe the Levitical priesthood with a noun when you are starting to compare it with you. You are royalty. You are by the baptising ministry of the Holy Spirit greater, and will be forever greater. You are under an eternal guarantee which makes you greater forever. This does not detract from those who were great in the Levitical priesthood but it does show the contrast. Grace has done something for you without ever lifting a finger, it was all accomplished for you by God the Holy Spirit.

“by reason of death” is literally “by means of death.” This is an instrumental of means of qanatoj.

“they were not suffered”, but it doesn’t say that at all. This is the present passive infinitive of kwluw which means to prevent. It means they were prevented. The present tense is an aoristic present, it is used to express the idea of a present fact without reference to progress. In other words, it is punctiliar action in present time. The aorist tense always portrays punctiliar action in past time, with some rare exceptions, but the present tense is used to portray punctiliar action in present time. And this is a rather unusual use of it because most present tenses in the Greek, as in similar languages, have linear aktionsart. This can also be called a customary present to denote that which habitually occurs. But it is an aoristic present. The passive voice: in this case the Levitical priesthood received the action of the verb which was hindrance or prevention from continuing. Death stopped them in their tracks. The moment they died physically they were all through functioning as a priest, they could only function in time. That means that all of the Levitical priests in heaven, while they were priests on earth authorised by the Mosaic law under the dispensation of Israel, they will never function as priests in heaven. There is just one priesthood in heaven and that is the royal priesthood. Aaron was a high priest on earth, he will not even be a priest in heaven. What they were in time was terminated by death. But no so with us. Death doesn’t stop or prevent or hinder, we go right on and on and on forever and ever. In fact, we have the guarantee of that from the eternal decrees as well as the fact that God made a solemn oath.

The infinitive is an infinitive of result. This use of the infinitive actually expresses three points of view in the Greek. First of all, the infinitive of result represents an actual result. Sometimes it represents a conceived result and sometimes it represents an intended result. We have here an actual result, death actually terminated the function of the Levitical priests. With this infinitive we also have a present active infinitive paramenw which means here “from continuing.” The present tense is tendential. The tendential present is used for an action which is purposed though not taking place. They probably wanted to continue but they couldn’t. The active voice: the Levitical priesthood wanted to produce the action of the verb but they were hindered by death. The infinitive indicates purpose. It was God’s purpose to hinder them from continuing.

Translation: “And they [Levitical priests] on the one hand, many in number, had become priests because they by means of death were prevented from continuing.”

What does God want you to do? God wants you to be loaded up with doctrine so that you can only think the divine viewpoint. God has many wonderful things for you, to share His happiness. He has many wonderful things for you and they all come through Bible doctrine. The thing He wants you to do is to think doctrine. That is why we have the communion service, it is designed to think doctrine, to think divine viewpoint in a certain category — the Lord Jesus Christ.

It is very hard for people who all of their lives have been trying to make points with God to stop and think; but that is what God wants you to do. The soul is the critical thing, not your body going from door to door, not your body kneeling and genuflecting, not your body out helping the downtrodden; it is your soul thinking that counts. The palace is designed for you to think, and you will never think without doctrine. The equipment for thinking is Bible doctrine.

The beautiful thing is that the moment you die your soul leaves the body and, still thinking, goes right into the presence of the Lord. Your soul is saved. The doctrine you have accumulated right to that moment you take to heaven with you. God intends for your soul to gather all of the doctrine it can. Some people in life may be compulsive eaters and they show it. Believers who are compulsive in taking on doctrine, in a very far different way, also show it. And God has many uses for the doctrine in your soul. God can always take the gold in your soul, Bible doctrine, and bring it out and use it — always. You are to make yourself useable by the intake of doctrine.

The Levitical priest was cut off by death. Aaron, with all the doctrine he had by listening to Moses; Phinehas who had more doctrine than Aaron; Eleazar, a man of doctrine; Samuel, one of the great men of doctrine in the Old Testament; they were priests with a lot of doctrine but when they died they couldn’t use it any more. We are going to use ours, and use it and use it and use it. We are a part of the angelic conflict in which no one in the Old Testament was a part.

Verse 24 — our first word is the adversative use of the conjunctive particle de. All continuity and development of thought in the Greek language is based upon the use of particles. The particle de sets up a contrast between your priesthood and the priesthood of the previous dispensation. The time from Moses to the time of Christ was the period in which the Levitical priesthood functioned. It functioned as a very wonderful priesthood. Many of the men who were in the Levitical priesthood were spiritual giants, led thousands of people to the Lord, and taught doctrine in such a way that supergrace was reached by their contemporaries. However, the priesthood itself was authorised by the law. The law came in time as an authorising agent, the Levitical priesthood began in time with the older brother of Moses who was Aaron.

Now when Jesus Christ came into the world and went to the cross and bore our sins in His own body on the tree, that was the beginning of the strategical victory of the angelic conflict. It began with the cross and terminated with Jesus Christ being seated at the right hand of the Father. Jesus Christ was alone on the cross, He was alone in resurrection. Jesus Christ was alone seated at the right hand of the Father. Now a bride is provided by God the Father for the last Adam. To do so there is a sudden halt to the Age of Israel, a dramatic, traumatic halt. That halt and the drama of it is portrayed by the Day of Pentecost on 30 AD, the day the Church Age began. It began in one locale only, Abraham’s home town. Remember that Abraham by paying taxes became a citizen of Melchizedek’s kingdom, Salem. That, of course, is Jerusalem. And one morning on the Day of Pentecost we have the baptism of the Spirit whereby all believers in that upper room were entered into union with Christ. That is where something new began, the baptism of the Spirit had never occurred before. The baptism of the Spirit is simply being in union with Christ, this is how the royal family is formed. Up to this time we have family of God through regeneration, now we have royal family of God through the baptism of the Holy Spirit which occurs at salvation.

So we have a contrast between the Levitical priesthood which was a bona fide function in the Age of Israel and the royal priesthood which functions in the dispensation of the Church, and forever because we have indestructible life. Many of the members of the Levitical priesthood were unbelievers and will not even be in heaven, but the ones who are will not be there as priests they will be there as members of the family of God. So now we have two categories from the Age of Israel. David was a king but in eternity David is just a member of the family of God, whereas you are royalty and David is not. Aaron was a high priest but in eternity Aaron is a member of the family of God and you are a royal priest. So they functioned in time only. So God has given you not only eternal life as a believer but indestructible life which means you are a priest forever, you will function as a priest forever.

The priesthood of the Lord Jesus Christ is perpetuated by means of resurrection. At this moment Christ is the only one whose royal priesthood has been perpetuated beyond death because He is in a resurrection body. So we have the conjunction “But this”. The word “this” is the definite article used as a pronoun. We should translate this “But on the other hand he [Jesus Christ]”, not “this.”

“because he continueth” — dia plus the accusative of the definite article, o(, plus the accusative of the intensive pronoun a)utoj. Altogether, it should be translated “But he on the other hand because he.” A)utoj is an intensive pronoun used as a personal pronoun to identify and emphasise what the contrast is all about. The contrast is simple. Jesus Christ as the high priest is in contrast to Aaron as a high priest. Then we have the word “continueth”, the present active infinitive of menw which means to remain or abide. Menw in the present tense is a static present, it represents a condition which perpetually exists. The active voice: Jesus Christ as the high priest produces the action of the verb. The infinitive: this was God’s plan in eternity past, that there would be three different types of priesthood in history authorised by God and only one would be perpetuated forever, and that is our royal priesthood. And we are perpetuated in the royal priesthood because of our relationship with the Lord Jesus Christ.

The word “ever” is actually a prepositional phrase, e)ij plus the definite article plus the accusative plural of a)iwn. It should be translated “unto the ages” or better, “forever”.

“hath” — present active indicative of e)xw. The static present represents a perpetual situation. The active voice: Jesus Christ produces the action. The indicative mood is unqualified and dogmatic assertion.

“an unchangeable priesthood” — these words are all in the accusative. First, “unchangeable” is a)parabatoj, it means permanent or unchangeable. It is an adjective. The word “priesthood” simply is our old word i(erwsunh, and it refers to the office of the priesthood.

Translation: “But he [Jesus Christ] on the other hand remains forever, he keeps on having a permanent priesthood.”

The doctrine of resurrection

1. Resurrection is best defined by distinguishing it from resuscitation. These are two different concepts. Resuscitation means to be dead and to be brought back from death — like Lazarus. Lazarus was dead, three days in the tomb. Jesus Christ performed a miracle with His voice: “Lazarus, out here.” And Lazarus did. But this is not resurrection, this is resuscitation because when Lazarus stepped out he lived for a number of years and then he died physically. In other words, resuscitation means to be brought back from the dead but it means to subsequently die; whereas resurrection means to receive a body, a new house for the soul, which lasts forever. So there is a very definite difference between resurrection and resuscitation. Only one person in history has so far been resurrected. Numerous people have been brought back from the dead — three recorded in the Old Testament and three during the time that Jesus Christ was on the earth, therefore recorded in the New Testament. But these people were all brought back from the dead but subsequently died. They were still subject to death. But the Lord Jesus Christ was given a new body as the house for His soul and His spirit and it is a body of incorruption. So in resuscitation a person is brought back from the dead in a body of corruption, therefore he dies again; but in resurrection a person is brought back from the dead never to die again.

2. Resurrection is a definite part of the Gospel and in the categorising of the Gospel is so declared — 1 Corinthians 15:1-4, 12-17. This does not mean that every time you witness to someone you present all of the Gospel but categorically it is included in that area. The Gospel includes the death of Christ, His burial, His resurrection.

3. Resurrection is also connected with the subject of theophany and Christophany. This, again, is technical and theological and therefore important to understand the distinction. Distinctions are understood by vocabulary. A theophany is an appearance of Jesus Christ prior to His incarnation, generally associated with the angel of Jehovah, sometimes He appears as a man. The one who fought with Jacob was the Lord Jesus as a theophany. A Christophany is different in that it is a resurrection appearance of Jesus Christ, it is Jesus Christ in the New Testament in resurrection body. Christophanies are mentioned in Mark 16:9; Luke 24:13-43; Acts 2:32.

4. The resurrection of Christ is part of the strategic victory of the angelic conflict — 1 Corinthians 15:20-25.

5. The resurrection is necessary for the perpetuation of the Davidic line — Romans 1:3,4; 2 Timothy 2:8.

6. The resurrection of Christ is the basis for the believer’s confidence in the future — 1 Peter 1:3-5, 21. Our body wasn’t designed to last more than 100 years. The resurrection body forms a purpose, it is a permanent house for the soul. Physical death is when the soul leaves the body but you are very much alive because the soul doesn’t die, it can’t die. The soul of the believer is going to live in a perfect house forever. This is described as having a body like the Son of God. Therefore the resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ has demonstrated that in His body He can travel through space, He can move vertically or horizontally, He can eat or not eat, He can walk through closed doors or open doors. These things we learn from observing the Lord in His resurrection body.

7. The resurrection of Christ indicates the completion of the ministry of justification — Romans 4:25.

8. Identification with Christ in His resurrection through the baptism of the Spirit is not only entrance into the royal family and into the royal priesthood but it also becomes motivation for the tactical victory of the supergrace life — Romans 6:4. Therefore, tactical victory is the heritage of the believer priest in time — 1 Corinthians 15:57,58.

9. There are two general categories of resurrection. The first category is for believers only, it is found in Daniel 12:2; John 5:24-29; 1 Corinthians 15:20-22; Revelation 20:6,13. The second resurrection is declared in Matthew 25:41; 1 Corinthians 15:24; Revelation 20:5-15.

10. Every man in his own battalion [tacij] refers to believers. The first battalion is equal to the first resurrection. In 1 Corinthians 15:20-23 we actually have a battalion review and “A” company has already passed the reviewing stand — Jesus Christ. It is also called the firstfruits. He has passed the reviewing stand in the sense that He has a resurrection body — Matthew 28; Luke 24:1-48; John chapters 20 & 21; Acts 2:31-34. Jesus Christ is resurrected. “B” company is going to pass the reviewing stand next, and you and I and all believers of the Church Age are “B” company — the royal priesthood. Royalty comes first, RHIP — “royalty has its privileges”. Furthermore, we are necessary for the coronation. So the next resurrection is “B” company, the Church at the Rapture — John 14:1-3; 1 Corinthians 15:51-57; Philippians 3:20-21; 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18; 1 John 3:1,2. Then comes “C” company. That is where the Old Testament saints fall in and the Tribulational martyrs — Daniel 12:13; Isaiah 26:19,20; Matthew 24:31; Revelation 20:4. Then finally, “D” company, the Millennial saints. This will be at the end of the Millennium and that will be the end of the first resurrection. There will be, then, every category of believer since the beginning of time. Christ the firstfruits, then the Church, then Old Testament saints from Adam to the Day of Pentecost plus the Tribulation martyrs, then the Millennial saints.

11. The agents of the resurrection of Jesus Christ: God the Father — Colossians 2:12; 1 Thessalonians 1:10; 1 Peter 1:21; God the Holy Spirit — Acts 2:24; Romans 1:4; 8:11; 1 Peter 3:18. Both God the Father and God the Holy Spirit had a part in the resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Summary of verse 24

1. In resurrection Jesus Christ in His humanity is no longer subject to death.

2. Therefore He continues to function as high priest. When Jesus Christ went to the cross and bore our sins in His own body on the tree the Father judged our sins in Christ. That was the ministry of the high priest. When He had finished bearing our sin He said He had finished so we would know that salvation was completed. Then He died physically. He was resurrected on the third day, He ascended, and seated at the right hand of the Father He continues His high priestly ministry. So resurrection is the link between the beginning of His priestly ministry on the cross and the perpetuation of His priestly ministry at the right hand of the Father, the second advent, the Millennium, and forever.

3. Christ’s high priesthood is unlike the Levitical priesthood which has many high priests. Physical death terminated the function of the Levitical high priest.

4. However, this verse declares that that is not true with our high priest. Physical death does not terminate His function. There is no provision for a successor to Jesus Christ as high priest. Why? He is the final high priest forever.

5. If our high priest lives for ever, and He does, so must we as members of the royal priesthood. Remember, we are in union with Christ. Death did not terminate His priesthood, it continued in resurrection and continues forever. We are a kingdom of priests, we continue forever.

6. Therefore, in anticipation of the next verse all members of the royal priesthood in the Church Age have eternal life at the moment they believe in Christ — not only eternal life but indestructible life.

7. This is emphasised in relationship to entrance into the royal family by means of the baptism of the Spirit, and its implications are stated in 1 John 5:11,12.

8. The next verse also divides the sacrificial ministry of Christ on the cross and the intercessory ministry of Christ at the right hand of the Father. Both are priestly functions but both functions are divided by resurrection. The resurrection is the key to the perpetuation of the priesthood of our Lord, just as the resurrection is the key to the perpetuation of our priesthood forever.

Verse 25 — in this particular passage we have the entire scope of the Levitical priesthood. We have the two major functions of our high priest. Once again we should be reminded that we in this dispensation, as believers, are members of the royal family of God. The family of God began when Adam believed in the Lord and it continues down to the end of time. But there is only one royal family: believers of the Church Age. We have been entered into union with Christ by the baptism of the Spirit, we are indwelt by the Spirit as the badge of royalty, and furthermore we are sealed by the Spirit as the security of royalty. The believer is also appointed a priest. We are in the order of Melchizedek, the royal battalion. The Lord Jesus Christ is the high priest and we are called in 1 Peter 2:9 a kingdom of priests.

The word “wherefore” brings us to a conclusion. It is an adverb o(qen meaning “for which reason.” It always takes the preceding paragraph and brings it down to the point of its conclusion. “For which reason also” — we have the adjunctive kai also used. This is a reference now to a permanent priesthood, a priesthood which has two kinds of life: indestructible life and eternal life. Eternal life means that the life goes on forever; indestructible life means that death does not destroy our priesthood, nor is there any way a coup de tat can remove us from the palace.

“he is able” refers to God the Father who is the author of the plan concerning you. You are in the plan of God, and not only for time but forever. And, furthermore, there is no failure on your part that can remove you from God’s plan. God’s plan calls for you to be a member of the royal family forever. God’s plan calls for you to have great blessings in time — material blessings, that which is contrary to the thinking of asceticism and legalism. You are not here to “suffer for Jesus”, to make great sacrifices; you are here for a much more important reason than that. You are here to be blessed by God with promotion, with success, with prosperity of all kinds, to share the very happiness of God in time. In other words, God has designed in His plan the principle of heaven now. This is your heritage as of the moment of the new birth. The heritage of regeneration is royalty and God is glorified by providing these blessings.

Here is a passage in which we see the panorama of our Lord’s priesthood. He is the high priest; we are a kingdom of priests. We see the fact that it is perpetuated, that there are two distinct and separate phases to the ministry of our Lord as a high priest. The first one has to do with His strategic victory. He bore our sins in His own body on the tree. God the Father judged our sins when they were poured out upon Christ on the cross. He was forsaken on the cross because He was dying spiritually. Spiritual death is isolation from God. Then, when all of the sins of the world had been judged in Christ — when He as our substitute, taking our place, had been completely judged, as per 1 Peter 2:24 — having completed it He said, “Finished”, which means salvation was completed and there is nothing man can do for salvation.

“able” here is a present active indicative of the verb dunamai. Dunamai in connection with God the Father is total ability. The present tense is a static present representing a condition as perpetually existing. The active voice: God the Father did the planning, God the Son does the saving. So God the Son produces the action of the verb. He has the ability and He does the work. The indicative mood is declarative representing the verbal idea from the viewpoint of reality, representing a dogmatic and unqualified assertion — “he keeps on being able.”

“to save” — the present active infinitive of swzw, which in this case refers to eternal salvation. The present tense here is what is called an aoristic present, it represents punctiliar action in present time. So this is a moment of time in which you personally believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, for His ability to save you depends upon your free will expressed in a non-meritorious way. Non-meritorious expression of positive volition is faith, for believing is non-meritorious thinking. And the object of faith has the merit. Therefore, once again, He saves when you believe in Him. The active voice: Jesus Christ produces the action of the verb by His work on the cross. This is an efficacious sacrifice, it is the sacrifice of the high priest. The only high priest who is a bona fide high priest today is Jesus Christ, the only kingdom of priests are those who are believers in Christ during this dispensation. The infinitive expresses God’s purpose and this purpose has been fulfilled for those who have personally believed in the Lord Jesus Christ.

“them” — the accusative plural of the definite article. The definite article is often used for a pronoun. Here it is so used. “Them” refers to believers of the Church Age, those who are members now of the royal priesthood.

The next phrase is a prepositional phrase and indicates that whenever Jesus Christ does something it is absolutely permanent. This, again, is a part of that great doctrine found throughout the scripture, the doctrine of eternal security. So “to the uttermost” is to add to that principle of eternal security. You are entered into union with Christ at the point of salvation. That is the positional approach to eternal security.

“to the uttermost” is the prepositional phrase that clinches it — e)ij plus the accusative of pantelej. Pantelej actually means for all time. The e)ij plus the accusative often means with reference to or for all time. So it is an idiom actually meaning forever — “he is able to save them forever”.

“that come” — present active participle projerxomai. Proserxomai means to come face to face with. It sometimes means to approach or to draw near but here it means the ones that come face to face with. We come face to face with God in the principle of believing in Him. The principle from the standpoint of the priesthood: we approach. Again we have the aoristic present to denote punctiliar action in present time. It refers to that moment when we believed in Christ. The active voice: mankind of the Church Age produces the action of the verb by believing in the Lord Jesus Christ. This is a circumstantial participle.

“unto God” is the dative of the direct object of qeoj, and in modern English that would be “to God.” The dative of direct object indicates that we are benefited by such an activity on our part of believing in Christ.

“by him” is literally “through him”, dia plus the genitive of the intensive pronoun a)utoj. A)utoj is an intensive pronoun used as a personal pronoun to identify specifically those involved. Those involved are the ones who believe in the Lord Jesus Christ.

The word “seeing” is not found in the original at all. The translator apparently tried to make a smooth sentence, to make a transition between two clauses. He tried to demonstrate that they are connected but they are not connected. He inserted one word which completely destroys the meaning of the verse. In the middle of the verse is the word “seeing” which does not occur in this passage at all. It has been added by a translator and therefore leads to a lot of confusion. Salvation does not depend upon the intercessory ministry of Christ, they are entirely different functions. Salvation was the pre-resurrection ministry of Christ whereas intercession is the post-resurrection ministry of Christ. And by putting the word “seeing” in it looks in the English as though our salvation depends upon His making intercession. By putting the word “seeing” in here we lose track of a great principle. Jesus Christ is a high priest forever whose ministry is not terminated by His death. It goes on beyond His death and continues in indestructible life as well as eternal life. And salvation does not depend upon the intercessory work of Christ on the cross as the English translation indicates. Far from it. These are two separate and individual clauses and both of them describe the ministry of the Lord Jesus Christ on our behalf.

When it says that He saved us this refers to the first high priestly ministry of the Lord Jesus Christ. In order to save us He had to go to the cross. While He was on the cross bearing our sins, taking our place, He was dead spiritually. When salvation was completed on the cross He was still alive, He was still talking. He didn’t die physically for our sins, He died spiritually. The wages of sin is spiritual death. When He said “Finished”, He then said “Father” in contrast to “My God.” “My God”: He is bearing our sins, He is being judged for our sins, He is our substitute. But when He says “Father” He is back in fellowship and He says “Father into thy hands I dismiss my spirit”, and when He did He died physically. Spiritual death provides salvation; physical death means that His work is finished. At that point the work of salvation is finished. The brazen altar with its animal sacrifices being sacrificed have all been fulfilled by the cross. All of the Levitical sacrifices, all of the sacrifices of regenerate people since the beginning of time were shadows pointing to the cross. The cross is the reality; they have all been fulfilled. The first ministry of the high priest is completed.

“For which reason also he [Jesus Christ] is able to save forever them who come face to face to the God through him [Christ].” The word “seeing” is not there, but something is. Instead we have a doctrine there which indicates a very important principle. In the physical death of Christ His spirit is in the presence of the Father. His soul is in Paradise. His body is in the grave. Physical death for the Levitical priest meant the end of his function. The high priest, once he died, no longer functioned. In heaven no Levitical priest will ever serve as priest. There is only one priesthood and that is the priesthood of the Church Age, the royal priesthood. You will serve as a priest in heaven forever, as well as a priest in time. You are a priest right now, and yet death will not terminate your priesthood any more than it terminated the priesthood of the Lord Jesus Christ. His ministry continues. The strategic victory of the angelic conflict is the cross, resurrection, ascension, and session. When Jesus Christ was seated at the right hand of the Father, that was it. That is the glorification of the Lord. That is the end of the first phase of the strategic victory, and for that reason the Age of Israel was interrupted before its completion and the Church Age is the intercalation dispensation. Now Jesus Christ is alone seated but God the Father provides for Him a bride.

We have an adverb which begins the second part of our Lord’s priestly ministry. The adverb is pantote, which means at all times or always. With that is a present active participle from the verb zaw, which means to live. It is a static present for a condition which always exists. It is the active voice: Jesus Christ produces the action of the verb through His resurrection. It is a circumstantial participle indicating that the resurrection separates the first and second priestly ministries of our Lord. His first priestly ministry: His efficacious death upon the cross. His second priestly ministry: His intercession in order that He might pray for you, as He is right now — intercession at the right hand of the Father. He is praying for you. So the translation should not be “seeing he ever liveth” but “always living”. That is the correct translation of the adverb and the participle. And He is always living to pray for you, right now. This phrase divides the death of Christ and His resurrection from His present ministry.

So literally so far, “For which reason also he is able to save forever the ones coming face to face to the God through him, always living...”

Summary

1. The priesthood of Christ does not terminate with physical death as with every priesthood in the past.

2. Jesus Christ is resurrected to continue His ministry as a priest. Resurrection, therefore, divides this verse right down the middle. It divides the cross and His priestly sacrifice from the intercession or His priestly ministry of prayer on our behalf.

3. The first part of the priestly ministry of Christ was the efficacious sacrifice of Himself — the only salvation.

4. This required spiritual death — bearing our sins, taking our place — plus His physical death because the ministry of the first advent was completed.

5. But through resurrection, ascension and session, Jesus Christ continues His priestly ministry of intercession. And notice the change in ministry. His first ministry was sacrifice — our salvation; His second ministry is intercession. Both of the ministries of our Lord are for us — He died for our sins, He makes intercession for us. Everything in the priestly ministry of our Lord is on our behalf. He thinks of us when we never think of Him. He is for us all the way.

“to make intercession” — the preposition e)ij plus the accusative definite article plus a present active infinitive of the verb e)ntugxanw. E)ntugxanw means to make intercession. With the preposition e)ij plus the accusative in the definite article it denotes purpose. E)ij plus the infinitive is used for the purpose of expressing purpose. So it should be translated “for the purpose of making intercession.” We have in the present tense a retroactive progressive present which denotes what has begun in the past and continues into present time. So it is a present tense of duration. This is a present tense that goes on as long as this dispensation. Until that moment when we see Him in resurrection body He will be praying for us constantly. The active voice: Jesus Christ produces the action of the verb as a continuation of His priestly ministry. If He died for you, what can He do now? He can do much more than that. But there is nothing greater than dying for your sins and giving you eternal salvation. But there is a much more principle: He is now praying for you. So He was sacrificed for you, now He prays for you constantly. And, again, the infinitive of the preposition e)ij denotes the concept of purpose.

“for them” is incorrectly translated. It is the preposition u(per plus the ablative of a)utoj, and intensive pronoun. Again, the intensive pronoun is used as a regular demonstrative pronoun to emphasise who is beneficiary. So it should be translated “on behalf of them.”

Translation: “For which reason also he is able to save forever the ones approaching to the God through him, always living for the purpose of making intercession on behalf of them.”

We have been studying verse 25 which includes one word which completely destroys the meaning of the verse. In the middle of the verse is the word “seeing” which does not occur in this passage at all. It has been added by a translator and therefore leads to a lot of confusion. Salvation does not depend upon the intercessory ministry of Christ, they are entirely different functions. Salvation was the pre-resurrection ministry of Christ whereas intercession is the post-resurrection ministry of Christ. And by putting the word “seeing” in it looks in the English as though our salvation depends upon His making intercession. By putting the word “seeing” in here we lose track of a great principle. Jesus Christ is a high priest forever whose ministry is not terminated by His death. It goes on beyond His death and continues in indestructible life as well as eternal life. And salvation does not depend upon the intercessory work of Christ on the cross as the English translation indicates. Far from it. These are two separate and individual clauses and both of them describe the ministry of the Lord Jesus Christ on our behalf.

In concluding our passage we have come to the fact that the superiority of our high priest has been established. So far ahead of all high priests in every possible way is our Lord that only a few things now have to be added. The superiority of Jesus Christ is established on the basis of the uniqueness of our high priest. He has been demonstrated as superior from the fact that He was authorised a high priest by two immutable things in eternity past, in contrast to the Mosaic law which was temporary and is gone. He was also declared to be superior because not only is He a high priest but He is a royal high priest. As a royal high priest He has established a royalty. Every believer in the Lord Jesus Christ in the Church Age is royalty. You are a member of the royal family of God forever. Therefore He is unique in every possible way and, as it were, we ride on the coat tails of His uniqueness.

Verse 26 — the uniqueness of His person. We have a conjunctive particle gar which begins this verse. It is used as a continuative particle, it is also explanatory. Inasmuch as the Lord Jesus Christ continues to have a priestly ministry on our behalf, inasmuch as He continues to pray for us every day, all of the time, and His prayers are effective because of who and what He is, we read some additional explanation. The Lord Jesus Christ is our high priest forever, He is our saviour forever, He is royalty forever, and we are members of His royal family forever. Therefore, everything must focus on who and what Jesus Christ is. Who is this Lord Jesus Christ?

“such” — a correlative adjective, toioutoj. “For such” is literally “For such a category” or “such a type.” It is hard to recognise this principle that uniqueness must also be categorised. Anything that is unique must be presented in such categories to emphasise uniqueness. So this correlative adjective reminds us that we are now on the edge of categorical concepts of the uniqueness of Jesus Christ — Jesus Christ our high priest, Jesus Christ our saviour, Jesus Christ the member of the royal family. Jesus Christ is the one who must be categorised. The words which are found in this verse are technical theological classifications to make us understand the uniqueness of the person of Jesus Christ.

“of high priest” — a)rxiereuj is the word for high priest, the high priesthood of the Lord Jesus Christ. “For such a category of high priest.” Thisis a reference to the previous verse where physical death would not terminate the priesthood of Jesus Christ. He continues to function as our high priest even after death. He is different, therefore, from any high priest who ever lived before Him.

“became us” — is not quite correct. First of all, they did not translate a little conjunction here. Not translated is the adjunctive use of kai. With kai we also have the imperfect active indicative of prepw. Prepw means to be fitting, to be suitable. With this we also have a dative plural of the personal pronoun e)gw. All of these words put together mean, “For it was also fitting that we should have such a category of high priest.” If we are royalty it is fitting that we have a royal high priest. If we are a kingdom of priests it is fitting that we have a king who is unique for that kingdom. So we start with us now and work back up to the uniqueness of the person of Christ. So let’s take a look here at what is meant by this little personal pronoun e)gw, and prepw — “it is fitting that we should have ...” Who are “we.” Before the cross we were nothing except sinners and spiritually dead. By one non-meritorious decision such as “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ” It is amazing that we went from nothing to the absolute, zero to 100, and we did this by the baptism of the Holy Spirit, which took place at the point of salvation, by which we were entered into union with Christ. All of a sudden because of union with Christ we are royalty, members of the royal family of God. Not only are we royalty but we find ourselves priests. We have done nothing for it and yet there we are. In addition to that we have many other things. We have the fact that we possess eternal life, can never lose it. The fact that we have a tactical objective for the Church Age which is moving to supergrace, moving to the place of phenomenal blessing. All of a sudden we find ourselves with many things. We find ourselves indwelt by God the Holy Spirit, indwelt by God the Son. We find ourselves with some orders and instructions. We find ourselves in the plan of God and with a life that has meaning and purpose and definition. And so we have a right to say, All right, if we are all of these things as the Bible says, and many more beside — many complimentary things — who is the person that makes all of this possible. We are royalty; who is the King? We are in the palace; who sits on the throne? We are priests; who is the high priest? We are saved; who did it? We are in the angelic conflict, but greater is He that is in us than he that is in the world. Who made it possible? Everywhere you turn the answer is exactly the same. The Lord Jesus Christ provided all of these things. It is the Lord Jesus Christ who is the high priest; it is the Lord Jesus Christ who is the King of kings; it is the Lord Jesus Christ who is the saviour. So we go, as it were, from the part to the whole. This is the system of reasoning. And we draw certain conclusions and the word gar told us that this was going to happen.

Now, putting everything in its proper word order, this is what we have in the passage. “For it was also fitting [or proper] that we should have such a category of high priest.” Why is it fitting and proper? Because now we find ourselves saved forever, we find ourselves members of the family of God, we find ourselves royal family of God, we find ourselves in the palace, we discover that God the Holy Spirit entered us into union with Christ, and that the Holy Spirit also indwells us, that He seals us, that He gives us spiritual gifts, that He has provided all of these wonderful things. We discover that the Father has been propitiated and we have been redeemed, that we have been reconciled to God by the death of His Son. Everywhere we turn we find that all roads lead somewhere. If you are anything, if I am anything, and the Bible says we are, then where do all of these roads lead? Contrary to human viewpoint of life all roads do not lead to Rome. All roads for the believer lead to the Lord Jesus Christ seated at the right hand of the Father.

Now here we are with all of these wonderful things that we can not always evaluate until we learn doctrine, but we are aware of the fact that we must have something. In knowing these few things we forget a principle. If Jesus Christ has improved your life — and He has — who is He? Why did He stop? Where did He stop? He gave you eternal life. Why is He letting you dangle around now? Well, He is really not. You are dangling around, all mixed up and confused, but because of Jesus Christ. It is because after the living Word comes the written Word. And your appreciation for what you have, and learning more about the things that you have now and the things that you can have is a matter of doctrine. Any person who is aware of his salvation has within 30 days of his being saved has the opportunity of making one of the greatest deductions of his life, and it is a simple one: If Jesus Christ saved me, if Jesus Christ has done this and that and the other thing, who is He? What is He? And what else is He doing for me? Where do we go from here? What is His idea? He is the leader, what is going on?

“For it was also fitting.” You are royalty, it is fitting you should know who is the leader. It is fitting you are a priest, it is important to know the high priest. The leader if the King of kings, Jesus Christ. The high priest is Jesus Christ, He is the royal high priest. In fact, He is more than that. He is the creator of the universe, He is eternal God. He was with God the Father in eternity past when God the Father said to Him, You are a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek. So, now the question will be answered in this passage after this beautiful syntactical approach: “For it was also fitting that we should have such a category of high priest.” The key here is the word “category”. And the word “category” comes from that correlative adjective toioutoj. We have a category that is unique for our high priest. The one who offered Himself as a sacrifice is unique. The one who makes intercession at the right hand of the Father is unique. Between that intercession and His death upon the cross is resurrection, and that is unique. He is the only person in the world up to this time who has been resurrected. Everywhere you turn He is unique. Therefore sooner or later you must come face to face with the fact that you must know who Jesus Christ is, you must know what Jesus Christ is, you must understand your saviour, your King, your high priest, your leader. And of you don’t know your leader how can you follow your leader? How can you take commands from your leader? You have to know Him. So immediately we begin to get categorical terms.

But they don’t look categorical in the English — “holy, harmless, undefiled.” We have three adjectives followed by a perfect passive participle. This lines up for us the categorical uniqueness of our high priest. The three words, “holy, harmless, undefiled”, all refer to the priesthood of Jesus Christ as it functioned on the cross, as it is functioning today; for the three adjectives which we have here not only describe His qualification for dying for our sins but they also express His qualification for having His prayers heard. Jesus Christ was qualified to go to the cross because He was “Holy, harmless, undefiled.” He was qualified to bear our sins in His own body on the tree because He was “holy, harmless, and undefiled”. Jesus Christ is qualified to pray for you right now — as He is — and be heard because He is “holy, harmless, and undefiled.” One thing should be noted before we analyse these three words. They belong to the humanity of Christ, they do not belong to the deity of Christ. And yet we will see that they suggest also the hypostatic union. But remember that Jesus Christ as a high priest is a Man, for by very Biblical definition no one can be a priest unless he is true humanity.

So we have adjective #1, “holy”, which is the word o(sioj. It has a number of meanings. It is translated “holy”, a legitimate translation. It also means “devout”, it means “pious.” The basic concept of o(sioj is to be separated unto God. It could also mean concentrating on what God wants, and doing it. In other words, being completely separated by following the plan of the Father all of the way through. So actually, “holy” here comes to mean pleasing to God. He never did anything as a high priest that was not pleasing to God. And immediately you see His uniqueness.

The word “harmless” is a pitiful word, and mistranslated. The word is a)kakoj, which means totally free from evil, unsullied, pure, impeccable.

The third adjective, “undefiled” is a)miantoj which means physically clean, moral, under establishment all the way. A)miantoj means to straight in thinking and not to be covered with erroneous thinking.

“For it was also fitting that we should have such a high priest, holy, pleasing to God [or, devout], impeccable, clear in his thinking ...”

But more than that, He was different from everyone else, not by the three adjectives but more so by the participle which follows — “separate” is the perfect passive participle from xwrizw. Xwrizw means to divide, to separate, to disassociate, to withdraw. Here the literal translation should be “having been separated”. The perfect tense is intensive perfect, which means separated in the past with the result that He was always separated. Now notice our Lord. He was perfect. He was virgin born so He didn’t have a sin nature, He didn’t have the imputation of Adam’s sin. Not once did He ever commit a personal sin though He was under greater pressure to sin than anyone who has ever lived. Yet not once, not under any circumstances did He ever sin. Not once did He ever fail. And in His perfection, in His separation from sinners He still did what sinners did: advocated income tax, advocated establishment, rendering unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s and unto God the things that are God’s. He was clear all the way through. Undefiled means clear-thinking.

“having been separated” — this is a circumstantial participle; “from sinners” is the preposition a)po plus the ablative of a(martwloj. “Sinners refers to the rest of the human race and this prepositional phrase says that Jesus Christ was absolutely, completely, totally unique in every way. He is separated from sinners by His impeccability; He is separated from sinners by His hypostatic union; He is separated from sinners by His resurrection; He is separated from sinners by His ascension and session. And the rest of the passage confirms this — “and made higher than the heavens.”

The doctrine of the hypostatic union

1. Definition: In the person of Christ are two natures inseparably united, without mixture or loss of separate identity, without loss or transfer of properties or attributes, the union being personal and eternal. (This is a classical theological definition — by which is meant that throughout the rest of this particular categorical study various aspects of this definition will be discussed. In fact, in this definition are five separate points in our study.)

2. The scripture which covers the hypostatic union — John 1:1-14; Romans 1:2-5; 9:5; Philippians 2:5-11; 1 Timothy 3:16; Hebrews 2:14.

3. The incarnate person of Jesus Christ includes deity. Jesus Christ, even though He is also man, is just as much God as the Father or the Holy Spirit. In fact, Jesus Christ is God, coequal and co-eternal with the Father and with the Spirit. The incarnation does not diminish His deity, hence He is undiminished deity. The fact that He is humanity does not in any way change His deity.

4. The incarnate person of Christ is also true humanity. Jesus Christ is a bona fide member of the human race with a body and with a soul. Also add the fact that He was born with a human spirit and retained it because He did not sin personally. He is minus, of course, the old sin nature from birth. He never had an old sin nature, never sinned. He would have had to sin to acquire one. He did not sin, therefore He did not acquire the old sin nature. With the virgin birth Jesus Christ avoided the imputation of Adam’s sin as well as the old sin nature by birth. Therefore He lived perfectly and under impeccability never had an old sin nature. But apart from that He is true humanity.

5. The two natures of Christ are united without transfer of attributes. The attributes adhere to their corresponding natures. The essence of deity cannot be changed — immutability; the infinite cannot be transferred to the finite. To rob God of any attribute of His essence would destroy His deity. This is impossible. To rob the humanity of Christ if a single attribute of His humanity would destroy His perfect humanity. So He is true humanity. He is God. He is the God-Man forever.

6. No attribute of the essence of deity was changed by the virgin birth and subsequent incarnation. In fulfilling the purpose of the first advent certain attributes of deity were used, but this does not imply that they were either surrendered or destroyed, as per the false doctrine of Kenosis.

7. The union of divine essence and the human nature in the incarnate Christ are put together you have a unique person, a hypostatic and personal union. This means that Jesus Christ is different from God in that He is Man; He is different from man in that He is God. This is called in the Greek u(postasij. The word means “standing under”, it means “substance”, it means “essence”, it means taking a thing upon one’s self. Jesus Christ took upon Himself true humanity — Hebrews 1:3. Hypostatic, technically, refers to the whole person of Christ as distinguished from His two natures which are divine and human. Not only do we have hypostatic but we also have the concept of personal. The personal concept refers to the fact that there emerges the unique person of Jesus Christ — always God and therefore always equal with the Father and the Holy Spirit, having the same essence. He always has the same essence, even though He also has a body, soul, and spirit of a human person and is called the last Adam. He has both of these, and this makes an unique person in the human race. As a man Jesus is superior to all mankind; as deity He is so-equal with the other members of the Trinity, and at the same time superior to mankind.

8. The false interpretation. The hypostatic union does not imply that deity possessed humanity. This is one of the liberal views, that Jesus Christ had God-consciousness and was so conscious of God that God dwelt inside of Him. Or, the deity of Christ indwells the humanity of Christ. Some liberals went further and said the union was merely harmony or sympathy (God sympathised with Jesus), and that that is the hypostatic union. In other words, all liberal views, erroneous views, ignore the fact that it was a personal union: the two natures, divine and human, had been combined in one u(postasij (hypostasis) or essence forever, so that you could no longer say that the essence of Christ is just deity or that the essence of Christ is just humanity. The essence of Christ is both. He is God and He is man, and He is both forever. Jesus Christ as God will always be true humanity, and there never will be a time when He drops His humanity. He is the God-Man, and that is His essence forever. So when we approach the hypostatic union we are talking about the God-Man. He is the only celebrity; He is God and man in one person forever.

9. Therefore, Jesus Christ has one hypostasis or essence forever, not two. The attributes of the divine and human nature are in one person. The characteristics of one nature are never attributed to the other nature. This means that during the first advent Jesus could be simultaneously omnipotent and weak, omniscient and ignorant. However the ignorance of His humanity was quickly overcome through the daily function of GAP and moving into supergrace through the ECS, as per Luke 2:40, 52; John 1:14.

10. The necessity for the humanity of Christ, or why the hypostatic union. The problem is that Jesus Christ for all of eternity past was no different in essence from the Father or the Holy Spirit. They are coequal and co-eternal. From the moment of the virgin birth everything is different. Why? Jesus Christ as God is eternal life, and it is obvious that eternal life does not die. So as eternal life Jesus Christ cannot go to the cross and die spiritually or physically. Sovereignty cannot become obedient unto death, and yet Jesus became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. Divine righteousness and justice cannot tolerate sin and could not have anything to do with sin, except to judge it. Omnipresence cannot get on the cross, you cannot reduce God to one point. Furthermore, He is immutable and can’t change any of His characteristics and make Him get on the cross. Principle: There is no way Jesus Christ can be saviour and be just God. To get on the cross He has to become a man. He has to be a perfect man, and then in impeccability the Father can pour our sins upon Him and judge them. While man can get on the cross and God cannot, once Jesus Christ becomes a man He can get on the cross. And as the God-Man He does get on the cross, but He gets on the cross in hypostatic union.

Philippians 2:7,8; Hebrews 2:14,15 say very clearly that Jesus Christ had to become true humanity before He could be our saviour.

Secondly, whoever is the mediator has to have the full essence of the hypostatic union. Mediator means someone who is equal with both parties: someone who is God, therefore equal with God; someone who is humanity and therefore equal with humanity. That is why there is only one mediator. This is emphasised in Job 9:32,33; 1 Timothy 2:5,6.

Jesus Christ cannot be a priest unless He is first of all a man. All priests must be bona fide members of the human race — Hebrews 7:4, 5, 14, 28; 10:5-14.

Then there is one other factor which is absolutely essential to understand. God the Father said to David that he was going to have a son who will reign forever. He would perpetuate David’s dynasty. This is fulfilled in Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ is descended from David through Mary, descended legally through Joseph. Mary was descended from Nathan; Joseph was descended from Solomon. Jesus Christ became a man, from the tribe of Judah, in the line, and He is the fulfilment of the Davidic covenant. He will reign forever as a man. This doesn’t mean that when He reigns His deity will go outside and park somewhere. He is one essence forever, deity and humanity. Not two people, one person, one essence.

11. Everything verbally communicated by Christ during His incarnation came from one of three sources. Sometimes His deity spoke — John 8:58; sometimes His humanity — John 19:28; sometimes His hypostatic union, His whole person — Matthew 11:28; John 14:6.

12. Categories of attributes as related to the person of Jesus Christ. The first of the categories are attributes of the whole person: redeemer, saviour. Both natures are essential to the function of being saviour and redeemer. There are attributes which are true just of His deity, but the whole person is the subject — John 8:58. It was the God-Man speaking but obviously only His deity preceded Abraham. There are attributes which are true of His humanity and the whole person is the subject — John 19:28 — “I thirst.” Only humanity thirsts. But the person on the cross was the God-Man, so the God-Man is the subject. The person is described by the divine nature but the predicate of the human nature. In Revelation 1:12-18 we have a description of Jesus Christ. It is obvious that the deity of Christ is in evidence, yet He is described as the one who was dead and alive again — verse 18. So death is only possible for the humanity, the human nature is said to have died, but deity produces the action. And it is describing the Lord Jesus Christ in His deity but He is the one who once died. Then we have the person described according to the human nature but predicate of the divine nature — John 6:62 where we have the title “Son of Man” which is a title for the humanity of Christ. But get this: “The Son of Man ascending up where He was before” is deity. So human nature, subject; attribute of deity in the predicate. Next, the person described according to His divine nature but the predicate of both natures. This time divine nature is the subject but both natures — hypostatic union — in the predicate — John 5:25-27. Christ as the Son of God spoke to those who are spiritually dead, and those who heard — positive volition — lived. But He went on to say that in the future Christ will execute judgement as the Son of Man. Then we have the person described according to the human nature but the predicate of both natures. The best illustration is Matthew 27:46. Christ was speaking from the viewpoint of His human nature, but the pronoun “me” has reference to both natures. “Why hast thou forsaken me?” What was forsaken? The God-Man was forsaken. That is as close as you can get to the inscrutability of the fact that when Jesus Christ was on the cross His deity was there too. “Me” is the same one who was in the cradle as a baby. From there, all of the way to the cross, there was no separation of His hypostatic union.

The doctrine of impeccability

1. Christ did not have an old sin nature by birth, nor did He commit an act of sin during the incarnation — Hebrews 4:15; 1 Peter 1:19; 1 John 3:5.

2. Christ was tempted in the area of His humanity. The unique temptation: Matthew 4:2-11; principle: Hebrews 4:15.

3. As with Adam in innocence, or sinlessness, so Jesus Christ in hypostatic union: all temptation came from without. Neither had a sin nature. Adam was created without a sin nature; Jesus Christ was born without a sin nature. 4. All temptations to Christ had to come through His human nature. The human nature of Christ is temptable; the divine nature of Christ is not temptable — James 1:13.

5. Christ resisted the greatest of all temptations at Gethsemane when He faced the cross in all of its horror and reality — Luke 22:42; Matthew 26:39; Mark 14:25,26. The first Adam failed the volitional test; the last Adam passed it with flying colours.

6. Christ resisted the Kenosis temptation in Matthew 4. He did not use His own divine attributes independently of the Father’s plan. He resisted the temptation to use His divine attributes in independence of the Father. He could have turned the stones to bread through His omnipotence but the humanity under the filling of the Spirit refused and depended upon God the Father.

7. The categorising of the doctrine is very simple. The humanity of Christ was temptable and peccable; the deity of Christ , not temptable, not peccable.

8. In the hypostatic union Christ is temptable but impeccable.

9. It is possible for the humanity of Christ during the incarnation to suffer physical limitations of an unmoral sort. That is, He suffered weakness, fatigue, sorrow, hunger, thirst, righteous indignation and physical death. But none of these sufferings presented complications which in any way affected His holiness.

10. Christ was able not to sin and not able to sin. So Christ is God. Christ is never the source of evil under any circumstances. Evil stems from angelic and human volition, never from divine sovereignty.

Verse 26 — “and made higher,” the aorist active participle of ginomai means “having become.” The aorist tense is a culminative aorist, it views the event in its entirety but emphasises the existing results. The ascension and session of Christ is seen as the entirety but the results are emphasised here, the result in strategic victory, intensification of the angelic conflict, the need now for a royal family, all of these are results from the culminative aorist. The active voice: Jesus Christ produces the action of the verb in ascension and session, seated at the right hand of the Father, as per Psalm 110:1, 4. The participle has antecedent action to the main verb. The main verb: “for it was fitting”. Before it was fitting the Lord Jesus Christ had to be glorified at the right hand of the Father.

“higher” is a nominative singular comparative from u(yhloj, which actually means “more elevated.”

“than the heavens” — an ablative of comparison plural from o(uranoj, the word for heavens.

Translation: “For it was also fitting that we should have such a high priest, holy, impeccable, moral, having been separated from the sinners [through resurrection and ascension], and having become more elevated than the heavens [seated at the right hand of the Father as the God-Man].”

Verse 27 — the unique sacrifice. We start out with the relative pronoun o(j, referring to the Lord Jesus Christ in His uniqueness as the God-Man.

“needeth not” — o)uk e)xw a)nakkh. O)uk is the strong, close the door, shut it tight, negative. Then we have the present active indicative of e)xw plus the accusative singular of a)nagkh, a direct object. All of this should be translated, “who does not have need”, or “who never has need.” “Who does not have need” goes better with the prepositional phrase translated like an adverb, “daily.” It is the preposition kata plus the accusative of h(mera, the word for “day.” This is literally, “according to the standard of the day”, but it becomes an adverb really which is a good way to translate it — “who does not have daily need”. In other words, the prepositional phrase used as an adverb modifies a)nagkh, the substantive. But it must be understood He never will have daily need.

“as” is an adverb, w(sper, and the adverb sets up a comparison between the Lord Jesus Christ as the unique perfect high priest and the Levitical high priests; “those high priests” refers simply to the Levitical priesthood. The Levitical priesthood had to offer daily sacrifices for themselves. They offered for others as well. This is contrasted with Christ who offered one efficacious sacrifice for sins for all time.

“to offer up” — present active infinitive of a)naferw, a technical word for sacrifices. The present tense is a progressive present used in the sense of description. It is the same as the pictorial present in the Greek, used to present to the mind a picture of events as in the process of occurring. In other words, you are supposed to picture in your mind a Levitical high priest offering animal sacrifices for himself and for the people. The active voice: the Levitical high priest produces the action of the verb. The infinitive is circumstantial.

“sacrifices” — the accusative plural of qusia is the accusative of direct object and it describes the various categories of Levitical sacrifices.

“first” is a neuter singular — proteroj — used as an adverb. The adverb means first in sequence and very important. First in sequence, he had to offer for his own sins. He can’t function at the altar if he is out of fellowship. He can only function if he gets himself in fellowship and then he can function on behalf of others — “first for his own sins, and then for the people’s”. The word “people’s” is ablative plural definite article followed by a genitive singular definite article, followed by the genitive singular of the noun laoj. Then we have with all of this the preposition u(per plus the genitive. U(per goes with the ablative plural and it is used as the demonstrative pronoun. With two definite articles, one preposition and one substantive — “and then on behalf of those [sins] of the people.” The genitive of reference here is better translated “with reference to the people.” The phrase describes the routine of the Levitical high priest who on the day of atonement offered first for his own sins and then for the sins of the people.

“for this he did” — the aorist active indicative of poiew means here to accomplish. We have an explanatory gar plus a demonstrative pronoun referring back to what has just been said — “he accomplished.” We have a gnomic aorist here for an absolute fact. No high priest ever did anything but follow this procedure.

“once” — the adverb “once” is really a little stronger, e)fapac. Now a(pac means “once”; e)fapac means “once and for all”.

“when he offered up” is the aorist active participle of a)naferw. The dramatic aorist states a present reality with the certitude of a past event. This is a very dramatic thing, as a matter of fact. Jesus Christ produced the action of the verb on the cross. He did everything in three hours that all of the high priests represented over a thousand years. Because of impeccability Jesus Christ was qualified to offer Himself and therefore the reflexive pronoun which goes with this verb, e(autou, emphasises the uniqueness of the hypostatic union.

“Who does not have daily need, as those high priests, who keep offering up sacrifices, first on behalf of their own sins, and then on behalf of the sins with reference to the people [of Israel]. For this he accomplished once and for all, when he offered up himself.” Jesus Christ did something different. He offered once and for all Himself.

Verse 28 — “For the law.” We have the explanatory use of the conjunctive particle gar — o( nomoj refers to the Mosaic law, but more than that, it refers to the law as the authorising agent for the Levitical priesthood.

“maketh” — the present active indicative of kaqisthmi means to appoint, to authorise. “For the law authorises” — the customary present, it denotes that which habitually occurs or is expected to occur. This is a customary historic present, this always happened. The active voice: the Mosaic law produces the action of the verb by appointing the Levitical priests and the Levitical high priest. The indicative mood is a declarative indicative representing the verbal idea from the viewpoint of reality. Always there was a high priest in Israel, always authorised by the Mosaic law.

“men” — the accusative plural of the direct object from a)nqrwpoj indicating the fact that all priests are members of the human race — and that includes Melchizedek.

“high priests which have” — present active indicative of e)xw, they have and they hold it. This is a retroactive progressive present which denotes that which was begun in the past and continues to the present time. It is the present tense of duration, it is always true. The active voice: the Levitical priest produces the action of the verb. It is a concessive participle, it concedes the existence of the old sin nature in every man that the law appointed as a high priest. But God appointed a high priest minus the old sin nature. The only high priest in all of history who was without an old sin nature is the Lord Jesus Christ.

“infirmity” — accusative singular direct object of a)sqeneia referring here to the old sin nature.

“but the word of the oath” — o( logoj de thj o(rkwmosioj means God the Father’s oath-taking. This introduces once again the two immutable things. God the Father in declaring this phase of the decrees took a solemn oath — Psalm 110:4 — “but the word of the solemn oath-taking [by God the Father].”

“which was since the law” — meta plus the accusative of nomoj which is literally “which came after the law.”

Summary

1. While the authorisation for the priesthood of Christ occurred in eternity past it did not exist historically until after the law, after the function of the Levitical priesthood. There is a reason for that. The Levitical priesthood could make nothing perfect, it could not produce teleiwsij. Therefore the Levitical priesthood came first in history while the actual appointment in the decrees came first in eternity past.

2. The Church Age accompanied by the royal priesthood interrupts the Jewish Age with its Levitical priesthood.

3. Here now is the completion of the contrast between the Levitical high priests having weaknesses [the OSN] and the King high priest, Jesus Christ having perfection.

4. Not only is there a contrast in the quality of high priests but in the quality of the authorising agents. And both meet at this point, the two roads cross. The quality of the authorising agent: God the Father is greater than the Mosaic law; the quality of the high priest: Jesus Christ, minus the old sin nature, is greater than any Levitical high priest with his sin nature.

Now we have to supply the word “authorises the Son” — the accusative singular from u(ioj without the definite article. The absence of the definite article calls attention to the quality of the noun. The quality of this noun: the unique person of Jesus Christ the God-Man, the only celebrity for the Church Age.

“who is” is not found in the original manuscript and not necessary to smooth out the translation. The reason is because “consecrated” is a perfect passive participle, teleiow. It means to be perfect. The perfect tense is intensive, it sees the action of the verb as completed with emphasis on existing results. Jesus Christ as God is perfect, as humanity He is impeccable and perfect, and cannot be anything else. Therefore we have the hypostatic union, the sum total of uniqueness and perfection both together under the intensive perfect tense. The passive voice: Jesus Christ receives perfection forever. The participle is ascriptive which treats this verbal form as an adjective describing a characteristic of the new high priest which is perfection. And not just perfection but perfection forever. So literally, “authorises the having been perfected Son forever.”

Translation: “For the law appoints men [high priests] having weaknesses [old sin nature]; but the word of the solemn oath by God the Father, which came historically after the law, authorises the having been perfect Son forever.”