[Transcript represents full sermon's text]

       Hebrews chapter 7, starting in verse 1: “For this Melchizedek, king of Salem, priest of the Most High God, met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings and blessed him, and to him Abraham apportioned a tenth part of everything. He is first, by translation of his name, king of righteousness, and then he is also king of Salem, that is, king of peace. He is without father or mother or genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life, but resembling the Son of God he continues a priest forever” (ESV).

       Our focus fixes today on Melchizedek, and he is where we left off the last time. The author recaps the story of Abraham and Melchizedek found in Genesis chapter 14. We dove into this a little bit last week. Indeed, there is great mystery that surrounds this person Melchizedek, and some discussions have been witnessed over the years by Christians. You know, trying to figure out who this fellow is. Some people have supposed him to be an angel of the Lord. Recollection can be made from the Book of Revelation, for instance, that angels can and do perform ritualistic activities in Heaven (see Revelation 8:3). Some have even gone so far as to think he is Christ himself, another form, appearing on the scene there in the Old Testament. So, individuals have their opinions and theories. Nevertheless, it seems that things have gotten a little overly complex, and that the real intention of the writer of Hebrews in speaking of Melchizedek is to show that the Scripture record lacks his genealogy, it lacks when he was born, and it lacks when he dies. Thus, due to the missing facts, he remains in the minds of the Jews “a priest forever.” It’s not that he really was a priest forever or still is, but he certainly died at some point in the past; it’s just not recorded in the Scripture. It reminds the speaker—to try to draw a modern contrast so we can understand—it reminds the speaker of one historian commenting on President John F. Kennedy, wherein he said because he died young, that it’s that youthful image we have in mind. We might say of President Kennedy—“he remains young forever.” It’s this type of thought-process, then, that the writer of Hebrews seems to have in mind.

       Regardless, it is pointed out that Melchizedek was both king of righteousness and king of peace. Sounds familiar, doesn't it? Of course we can recall the prophesy of Isaiah, back in Isaiah chapter 9, which states, starting in verse 6: “For to us a child is born, to us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder, and his name shall be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. Of the increase of his government and of peace there will be no end, on the throne of David and over his kingdom, to establish it and to uphold it with justice and with righteousness from this time forth and forevermore. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will do this” (6, 7, ESV). These two verses seem to encapsulate the two phrases of King of Righteousness and King of Peace. Indeed, it’s these two characteristics that display God the Son’s Kingship. When he reigns, it will be righteously. There won’t be any corruption on the earth. What is the truth will be followed; there won’t be any sin. Consequently, in following the truth and with a lack of sin, there will peace. Because everyone who inhabits the earth will act righteously, there won’t be any disturbance. There won't be a need for police, or for firefighters or medics. Have you ever noticed that? Most jobs currently on the earth relate in some way, shape, or form to sin. Even lawyers and doctors do. Yet, when Christ reigns, there won’t be any of that. Anyhow, going back to Melchizedek, just as he doesn’t have key elements of his life recorded, so this correlates well with Christ because while he does, the mere fact he is God means he has no beginning and no end. And since he’s God, while he does have a human linage, at the same time he doesn’t have any. Therefore, Melchizedek became a foreshadowing of what was to come in Christ.

       Verse 4: “See how great this man was to whom Abraham the patriarch gave a tenth of the spoils! And those descendants of Levi who receive the priestly office have a commandment in the law to take tithes from the people, that is, from their brothers, though these also are descended from Abraham. But this man who does not have his descent from them received tithes from Abraham and blessed him who had the promises. It is beyond dispute that the inferior is blessed by the superior. In the one case tithes are received by mortal men, but in the other case, by one of whom it is testified that he lives. One might even say that Levi himself, who receives tithes, paid tithes through Abraham, for he was still in the loins of his ancestor when Melchizedek met him” (ESV).

       Much to break down here, much to break down. For starters, we are given are review, and it may be new to some Gentile readers, how the Levitical priesthood worked. The Law prescribed that the people “take tithes” to the high priest. What peaks our interest is the Melchizedek received the tithes even though he was not from the linage of Levi. Indeed, the Levitical priesthood hadn’t even been established yet. But, but, Abraham had the promises—remember, that all peoples would be blessed through him. Even though Abraham had these promises, it is still shown that Melchizedek was in fact superior to Abraham. This is interesting as it’s not what we would probably think inside our minds. The mind might want think that the superior one is Abraham since he has the promises. We would think that this ‘Gentile’ high priest Melchizedek, if we can call him that, would be inferior. One might take this point and try to show some kind of foreshadowing of the Church Age wherein the Jews and Gentiles are in separate groups, as the Apostle Paul talks about in Romans chapters 9 to 11. Perhaps that is so, and perhaps it is not. A significant thing to point out in this section, and really this would be more so for Jewish listeners or those particularly familiar with the Jewish Law, is that one might suspect that the Levitical priests would end up being greater than Abraham. And then Abraham would be behind them. That would leave Melchizedek in third place. Yet, the writer of Hebrews says it’s the reverse. He says that Melchizedek is the greatest, followed by Abraham, and then followed by the Levitical line.

       All this being said, what is the author in our epistle of Hebrews really getting at? The logistics of the whole thing of priesthood and the Jewish Law can be spoken of, but what is really behind it? What the author is getting at, what is trying to be argued, is that Christ is the superior One. He is superior to all others. Remember, Melchizedek represents a type of Christ. He represents a foreshadow of Jesus. In showing that Melchizedek is superior both to Abraham and the Levitical high priests, he’s showing that Jesus Christ who came to the earth, who spoke, who died, and who was risen from the dead, is greater than both Abraham and Melchizedek. It’s not that Jesus is simply another line, from the tribe of Judah, wherein the Hebrew Christians can choose to follow this line instead of the Levitical line. That’s not what’s going on here. Jesus isn’t simply just another pathway, another option they have to choose from. And, he’s not optional. Even better, Christ is, than the old system that had been in place. Jesus is superior. That’s another reason why it wouldn’t make any sense for these Hebrew Christians to give up the ‘Christian’ part of their religion. If Christ is superior, why would one go back to the old way of doing things without him? How could one toss him aside? That doesn’t make any sense. So, this whole argument in this section from the author of Hebrews is to show that in Melchizedek being superior to Abraham, so Christ is superior both to Melchizedek and to Abraham. The new way is superior to the old. It’s great news, great news. It’s something that Jewish people can choose to trust in, choose to believe in.

       Verse 11: “Now if perfection had been attainable through the Levitical priesthood (for under it the people received the law), what further need would there have been for another priest to arise after the order of Melchizedek, rather than one named after the order of Aaron? For when there is a change in the priesthood, there is necessarily a change in the law as well. For the one of whom these things are spoken belonged to another tribe, from which no one has ever served at the altar. For it is evident that our Lord was descended from Judah, and in connection with that tribe Moses said nothing about priests” (ESV).

       Understanding is in the mind from our studying of the Old Testament that the Law of Moses could not perfect the human, the Jewish person, back at that time. A temporary fix it provided. We know that; we are aware of that. The Jewish Law could not get into the inner core of a person. No spiritual transformation for them. It couldn’t even permanently take away their sins. If it could have done all this, and even the order before it, under Melchizedek, if it could have accomplished every good thing that God desired, then there was no need for a further elaboration. No need existed for the Law of Moses to begin with, or even the Levitical priesthood. The beginning with Melchizedek would have been enough. And further, dare it be thought, there would have been no need for Jesus to come to the earth. If the original system were that great, then nothing else would be required. Yet, we believe and know it wasn’t. So, God had to send Christ into the world to be the ultimate high priest. But, but, the question then becomes, ‘Why did Jesus descend from the tribe of Judah? Isn’t the high priest supposed to be from the tribe of Levi? Why is there this difference in linage?’

       Further complication comes to this whole matter in that the Jewish people believed their Law given by Moses to be perfect. David and the other psalmists even speak of that. Probably ringing in our minds at this point is what David says in Psalm 19. Remember? It says, in verses 7 and 8: “The law of the LORD is perfect, reviving the soul; the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple; the precepts of the LORD are right, rejoicing the heart; the commandment of the LORD is pure, enlightening the eyes; the fear of the LORD is clean, enduring forever; the rules of the LORD are true, and righteous altogether. More to be desired are they than gold, even much fine gold; sweeter also than honey and drippings of the honeycomb. Moreover, by them is your servant warned; in keeping them there is great reward” (ESV). Therefore, if all this is true, and we know that it is, why was there a problem? Why did God choose to have Jesus come from the tribe of Judah, and basically deviate from his own prescription? Ah, we can bring to mind how Jesus was while he was here on the earth when it came to matters of the Law. Jesus didn’t like legalism, and often was offended by it and sought to poke fun at it. It’s almost as if God was saying in doing this, “Hello my fellow Jews, the Law is not God; I am God.” Perhaps there’s this idea in the Jewish consciousness that the Law is so great that it has become more important than God himself. Ever think about that? Yes, the Law accomplished what God wanted it to accomplish back at that time, during its use. But God is making something new, as the writer of Hebrews is going to make plain at the end of the next chapter. Thus, God demonstrates this new way but deviating from the old way. He shows, covertly, that a change is taking place.

       Verse 15: “This becomes even more evident when another priest arises in the likeness of Melchizedek, who has become a priest, not on the basis of a legal requirement concerning bodily descent, but by the power of an indestructible life. For it is witnessed of him, “You are a priest forever, after the order of Melchizedek. For on the one hand, a former commandment is set aside because of its weakness and uselessness (for the law made nothing perfect); but on the other hand, a better hope is introduced, through which we draw near to God” (ESV).

       Again, the author is reiterating things he’s already touched upon to sure up his argument. The point is being made that Christ is like Melchizedek because Melchizedek had no end—that is, the Scripture doesn’t record it—which signifies the reality of Christ. The Old Testament high priests were each part of a descended line of Levi; each of them perished, one by one. Human beings they were; they grew old and died. Christ is the opposite of that because, though he lives in human body, through the power of his resurrection, he became the first of us to rise from the dead, and he lives forever in Heaven as our personal high priest. This obviously contrasts to all the other high priests in the past who could not live forever. Displayed for us also is the contrast between the Old and New Testaments, in that the old had “weakness and uselessness.” No permanent fixing for this since it doesn’t have power behind it to transform people’s lives. It cannot cause a new creation in each of us, like the Spirit of God does through the New Covenant—through our believing in what Jesus has accomplished for us. Yet, through our now newly formed and reconciled relationship with God, we are part of the new hope. Indeed, we ourselves have a new hope, and through this pathway we are able to actually be in personal relationship with God. Through our believing in the truth, we can “draw near,” we can be friends with, God himself. It was the original purpose that God had with the creation, first back with Adam and Eve. That’s what he desired with them, for that’s why he created them. And that’s what he still desired with humans, and now this new way creates a path for him and us to have that.

       Verse 20: “And it was not without an oath. For those who formerly became priests were made such without an oath, but this one was made a priest with an oath by the one who said to him: “The Lord has sworn and will not change his mind, ‘You are a priest forever.’” This makes Jesus the guarantor of a better covenant. The former priests were many in number, because they were prevented by death from continuing in office, but he holds his priesthood permanently, because he continues forever. Consequently, he is able to save to the uttermost those who draw near to God through him, since he always lives to make intercession for them” (ESV).

       The old way continues to be compared with the new way. What is first observed is that the old way, that is, the way of the Levitical priests, had no oath behind it. It was simply something that God setup in the past, under the Jewish Law. What colors this whole argument here, that the author of Hebrews is making, is that it shows that the Law didn’t have absoluteness like is so often taught in Western church settings. The Jewish Law, indeed the entire Bible for that matter, is often thought of as this ‘legal’ document and has to be carefully gone through, delicately dealt with. Yet, we see in this first century Jewish writer a different line of thinking. Awareness is present of that since he notes that that old Levitical system was not guaranteed with an oath. It’s the oath that makes it more sure, and that’s what the New Covenant has. It has the oath. Not something that can change, like the old way could. No, God guarantees the setup with Christ using an oath; it’s not something he will change his mind about (which, by the way, this mere argument demonstrates that God for sure can change his mind, but that’s a whole other topic altogether). Thus, we see that this New Covenant is a “better covenant” when compared to the old. This is one way we can know, as Christians, that our salvation is guaranteed. Really, verses 20 to 22 are good eternal security verses. They often aren’t thought of in this way, or are easily overlooked. But that is what’s going on here.

       That last verse of this part of our section is probably one of our favorites, and it is certainly an encouragement for us that the Lord Jesus Christ makes intercession for us for this, that, and the other, whether for the good or of the bad. Before that intercession part, the writer states, “Consequently, he is able to save to the uttermost.” “[H]e is able to save to the uttermost.” What does that mean? Well, one thing we could note is that right before that he’s talking about the high priests dying as they could not live forever like Christ currently lives. Accordingly, we could point out that part of Christ’s intercession for us is that Satan and his forces do not destroy us, or kill us, in our journeying here on the earth. Possibly coming to our minds at this point is the scene from the Gospel of Luke where Jesus notes this very thing to the Apostle Peter. In Luke 22, Jesus says to him, “Simon, Simon, behold, Satan demanded to have you, that he might sift you like wheat, but I have prayed for you that your faith may not fail” (31, 32, ESV). A vivid example that is, and we can no doubt suspect that the same thing happens with each of us at one point or another. We have to remember that we have an enemy, and that enemy has sometimes focused his attention on us personally. It’s no different than the United States as a country. At times, we have enemies that have fixed our attention on us. At times, we have peace. The fluctuation is one reason why prayer is important. Anyhow, the Apostle Paul also told the Romans that Christ makes intercession for us (see Romans 8:34). And when he spoke of it, again, it was right around troubles we could face. Nevertheless, in all of this it is good to remember that we always have someone praying for us, even if there aren’t Christians down here praying.

       Verse 26: “For it was indeed fitting that we should have such a high priest, holy, innocent, unstained, separated from sinners, and exalted above the heavens. He has no need, like those high priests, to offer sacrifices daily, first for his own sins and then for those of the people, since he did this once for all when he offered up himself. For the law appoints men in their weakness as high priests, but the word of the oath, which came later than the law, appoints a Son who has been made perfect forever” (ESV).

       We believe that Jesus is in Heaven with God, and sits at his right hand. He is perfect and holy, righteous and good. No human being in existence is there who is like him, since he himself does not have to offer any kind of sacrifice for his own sin, since he doesn’t have any sin, and never has. We are aware the Jewish high priests were nothing of the sort since they had their own sin to content with. They had sinful habits they had to ward off at one point or another. The Apostle Paul told Titus what a current day minister of the Lord is to be like. He said, “For an overseer, as God's steward, must be above reproach. He must not be arrogant or quick-tempered or a drunkard or violent or greedy for gain, but hospitable, a lover of good, self-controlled, upright, holy, and disciplined. He must hold firm to the trustworthy word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to rebuke those who contradict it” (Titus 1:7-9, ESV). Therefore, that is the goal of every current minister of God. But even the high priests of old sat on councils, as we are aware of from the Gospels and the Book of Acts, and they were surrounded by persons with the same kind of internals—namely, with an internal sin-nature. Jesus is different in that since he doesn’t have a sin-nature, anything he says can be trusted as good leading, good advice. With people, we never know where there is an ulterior motive in play. Even the best group of pastors or elders at a church doesn’t match the direction of Christ. It cannot. Persons have “weakness,” while Christ does not. And he underwent suffering on the earth, and was triumphant in it. God the Father by his Word has made Jesus the perfect high priest and that stands forever.

- Daniel Litton