Who appointed Jesus to the Priesthood?

Elijah John · Post by **Elijah John** » Sun Nov 17, 2019 9:12 pm

Who, (besides the unknown author of Hebrews), appointed Jesus "Priest"? Some defenders of Pauline Christianity point to this role to support the validity of his atoning "blood sacrifice".

But who appointed him to this role? Where was this done?

Isn't the unknown author of the book of Hebrews simply offering his/her own theological interpretation of Jesus role in his own martyrdom?

Eloi · Post by **Eloi** » Sun Nov 17, 2019 9:21 pm

Good question ... and the Bible answers that directly:

Heb. 5:1â€‚For every high priest taken from among men is appointed in behalf of men over the things pertaining to God, that he may offer gifts and sacrifices for sins. 2â€¯He is able to deal moderately with the ignorant and erring ones since he also is surrounded with his own weakness, 3â€¯and on its account he is obliged to make offerings for sins as much for himself as for the people.
4â€¯Also, a man takes this honor, not of his own accord, but only when he is called by God, just as Aaron also [was]. 5â€¯So too the Christ did not glorify himself by becoming a high priest, but [was glorified by him] who spoke with reference to him: â€œYou are my son; I, today, I have become your father.â€� 6â€¯Just as he says also in another place: â€œYou are a priest forever according to the manner of MelÂ·chizÊ¹eÂ·dek.â€�
7â€¯In the days of his flesh [Christ] offered up supplications and also petitions to the One who was able to save him out of death, with strong outcries and tears, and he was favorably heard for his godly fear. 8â€¯Although he was a Son, he learned obedience from the things he suffered; 9â€¯and after he had been made perfect he became responsible for everlasting salvation to all those obeying him, 10â€¯because he has been specifically called by God a high priest according to the manner of MelÂ·chizÊ¹eÂ·dek.

Elijah John · Post by **Elijah John** » Sun Nov 17, 2019 10:31 pm

Eloi wrote: 5â€¯So too the Christ did not glorify himself by becoming a high priest, but [was glorified by him] who spoke with reference to him: â€œYou are my son; I, today, I have become your father.â€� 6â€¯Just as he says also in another place: â€œYou are a priest forever according to the manner of MelÂ·chizÊ¹eÂ·dek.â€�

Where do these quotes come from? The Hebrew Bible? Where? Or did the unknown author of Hebrews simply make them up? Also, IF these refer to Jesus, then this is evidence that God was not always his Father. "Today I have become your Father. "Today" as in a point of time. Not "eternally begotten of the Father, God from God, Light from Light, True God from True God" as stated in the Creed.

9â€¯and after he had been made perfect he became responsible for everlasting salvation to all those obeying him,

"Made perfect" so there you have it. Jesus was not always perfect.

10â€¯because he has been specifically called by God a high priest according to the manner of MelÂ·chizÊ¹eÂ·dek.

Where did this come from? Who is the author quoting? Did the original quote apply to Jesus? What is the evidence of this beyond the author of Hebrew's opinion? The author's opinion is all you have provided here, unless the quotes are rooted in Hebrew Scripture.

onewithhim · Post by **onewithhim** » Sun Nov 17, 2019 10:33 pm

I looked over a few verses in Isaiah, and in chapter 61 (Jesus applied this to himself at Luke 4:17-21) he is talking about being anointed to declare the good news, etc., and in verse 10 he says:

"I will greatly exult in Jehovah, my whole being will rejoice in my God. For he has clothed me with the garments of salvation; he has wrapped me with the robe of righteousness, just like a bridegroom who wears a turban like that of a priest."

I just thought it was interesting. Nothing absolute there, but interesting.

Then I read a little about the priesthood as far as Christians are concerned. The Aaronic priesthood ceased on the day of Pentecost, 33 A.D.Later Peter spoke about the Jewish "builders" rejecting Jesus Christ as the cornerstone and said to Christians: "YOU are a 'chosen race, a royal PRIESTHOOD, a holy nation, a people for special possession.'" (I Peter 2:7-9) He said that the new priesthood is "a spiritual house for the purpose of a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ," (I Peter 2:5). If spiritual sacrifices are being offered THROUGH CHRIST, then he must also be a priest.

It is logical that Jesus can be a priest, even the great High Priest, seeing as his co-rulers are priests, or, "under-priests," if you will. Unlike the Aaronic priesthood, the kingship and priesthood are combined in the "royal priesthood" of Christ and his joint heirs. (See Rev.1:5,6.)

So there seems to be Scriptural support for Jesus being a priest, not only in Hebrews but in other books as well. Of course, Hebrews explains it all very well, and I don't see any reason to discount the book of Hebrews as irrelevant.

Elijah John · Post by **Elijah John** » Sun Nov 17, 2019 10:37 pm

[Replying to post 4 by onewithhim]

Does Jesus ever claim the Priesthood for himself in the Synoptics? If you reference the epistles, they are theological commentary, and should not be read as Jesus' biographical material..

onewithhim · Post by **onewithhim** » Sun Nov 17, 2019 10:45 pm

Elijah John wrote:
Eloi wrote: 5â€¯So too the Christ did not glorify himself by becoming a high priest, but [was glorified by him] who spoke with reference to him: â€œYou are my son; I, today, I have become your father.â€� 6â€¯Just as he says also in another place: â€œYou are a priest forever according to the manner of MelÂ·chizÊ¹eÂ·dek.â€�
Where do these quotes come from? The Hebrew Bible? Where? Or did the unknown author of Hebrews simply make them up?

The quote of verse 6 comes from Psalm 110:4 where Jehovah is speaking to the Lord, Messiah, saying, "Jehovah has sworn an oath, and he will not change his mind: 'You are priest forever in the manner of Melchizedek!'"

So David records Jehovah as saying this to his Lord, the Messiah.

tam · Post by **tam** » Mon Nov 18, 2019 12:45 am

May you all have peace,

Elijah John wrote: [Replying to post 4 by onewithhim]

Does Jesus ever claim the Priesthood for himself in the Synoptics? If you reference the epistles, they are theological commentary, and should not be read as Jesus' biography.

At Matt 22:43-45, Christ (Jaheshua) says that He is the One being referred to in the Psalm (Psalm 110 that onewithhim referenced). That Psalm refers to Him, then, as being a priest forever in the order of Melchizedek.

The author of Hebrews understood this - he did not just make quotes up - and he made reference to this when he wrote to the Hebrews. He is not writing to Gentiles, he is writing to the Hebrews who would have had knowledge of these scriptures.

Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

Elijah John · Post by **Elijah John** » Mon Nov 18, 2019 6:11 am

[Replying to post 7 by tam]

Thanks for the references, Tammy and OWH. I have a different interpretation of Psalm 110 which makes sense, but I cannot prove. The Psalm makes more sense if the first LORD is YHVH, I think we agree on that much. But the 2nd "Lord" is not the Messiah, but King David himself, the Psalmist's earthy "Lord". I doubt David wrote this particular Psalm.

And where is the precedent of a priest ever offering himself as the human, blood-sacrifice? Certainly not with Melchizedek. So it was not "Melchizedekian" practice for a Priest to sacrifice himself, or offer human sacrifice.

The "order of Melchizedek" is simply an earlier, non-Aaronic priesthood. And, it seems, comprised only of an "order" of one, Melchizedek himself. The Hebrew Bible records no other.

And he only offered bread and wine, nothing bloody as far as we know.

tam · Post by **tam** » Mon Nov 18, 2019 9:49 am

Peace to you, EJ,

Elijah John wrote: [Replying to post 7 by tam]

Thanks for the references, Tammy and OWH.
You're welcome!

I have a different interpretation of Psalm 110 which makes sense, but I cannot prove.
Your interpretation is in conflict with what Christ said, Himself.

The Psalm makes more sense if the first LORD is YHVH, I think we agree on that much. But the 2nd "Lord" is not the Messiah, but King David himself, the Psalmist's earthy "Lord". I doubt David wrote this particular Psalm.
A - Christ said it was David speaking. How can your interpretation (man's interpretation) trump His word?

B - David was not a priest. David was only a king. This cannot be referring to him.

And where is the precedent of a priest ever offering himself as the human, blood-sacrifice?
The precedent is in a priest offering sacrifices for the sins of the people, to begin with.

Certainly not with Melchizedek. So it was not "Melchizedekian" practice for a Priest to sacrifice himself, or offer human sacrifice.
The significance of Melchizedek (and we have only a line or two) is that he was not from the Aaronic/Levitical priesthood. He was from before that priesthood. And he was both a king and a priest. Just as Christ is both King and Priest. King of Salem (King of peace) and priest of God Most High.

The "order of Melchizedek" is simply an earlier, non-Aaronic priesthood. And, it seems, comprised only of an "order" of one, Melchizedek himself. The Hebrew Bible records no other.

And he only offered bread and wine, nothing bloody as far as we know.
And you don't think the bread and wine is significant? He offered bread and wine, just as Christ does the same, bread that represents His flesh and wine that represents His blood.

**

The evidence you ask for is present, EJ.

Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

Elijah John · Post by **Elijah John** » Mon Nov 18, 2019 10:43 am

tam wrote: The precedent is in a priest offering sacrifices for the sins of the people, to begin with.

You're not addressing what Melchizedek was sacrificing. It was not himself, and it was not a human being.

tam wrote:
And you don't think the bread and wine is significant? He offered bread and wine, just as Christ does the same, bread that represents His flesh and wine that represents His blood.

Do you suppose Melchizadek had in mind the body and blood of the Messiah when he was offered El Elyon bread and wine?

And regarding the attribution of Psalm 110. Do you think certain Psalms were ever erroneously attributed to King David? Possible or even likely even in Jesus own day?