Leckie, Albert: Ministry From Hebrews-08 ~ Heb 7

Chapters seven, eight, nine, and ten of the Epistle to the Hebrews direct our attention to interesting characteristics of our great high priest. In chapter seven, we have his inauguration to that particular office. In chapter eight, uh our attention is directed to the sanctuary in which he ministers, and in chapters nine and ten, our uh attention is directed to the covenant of which this one is the mediator. But tonight we're thinking in particular of chapter seven. and in a very simple way, this chapter in my mind divides itself into three. There are, of course, other divisions, but broadly speaking, this chapter, as I see it, divides itself into three. From verse one to ten, we have Christ as priest after the order of Melchizedek, infinitely superior to the Levitic priesthood. Now let me repeat that. Our attention in the first ten verses is directed to Christ as a priest after the order of Melchizedek, and in consequence thereof, superior to the Levitic priesthood. And then from verse eleven to twenty two, our attention is directed to certain changes that were necessary if the Levitic priesthood is to be superseded. The superseding of the Levitical, Levitic priesthood involved certain necessary changes. And then from verse twenty three to twenty eight, we have the great blessing of all this to you and me. And in the closing verses, our attention is directed to the important truth that Christ is a priest after the order of Melchizedek, but in a certain sense, still after the pattern of Aaron. After the order of Melchizedek, but after the pattern of Aaron. Now, let me try and explain what I mean by these divisions. The first ten verses. No doubt the writer is continuing the thought that he has stated at the end of chapter six, whether the forerunner is for us entered, even Jesus, made an high priest forever after the order of Melchizedek. Now, I want to say just a few words on this man, Melchizedek. Not much is said about this man in the Old Testament scriptures. He is mentioned historically in Genesis chapter fourteen, uh and three verses suffice us in that chapter to give us the account of Melchizedek there. Only three verses in Genesis fourteen uh are taken up with the historical mention of Melchizedek. Then, of course, he is mentioned, uh, prophetically by David in Psalm one hundred and ten: Thou art a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek. Hebrews chapter seven speaks of Melchizedek on this wise, king of righteousness and king of peace. Indeed, the meaning of the name Melchizedek is king of righteousness, and the opening verses speak of him as the king of righteousness and the king of Salem, the king of righteousness and the king of peace. Not only that, but he is, in these opening verses, termed the priest of the Most High God. When we go back to Genesis chapter fourteen, the circumstances are these. After Abraham's encounter with those four kings, led by Cheder Leomer, Melchizedek ministered succor to Abraham. He ministered to him bread and wine, and not only did he do that, did he do that, but he blessed Abraham, and he blessed God as well. Now, these are points important to notice, that it was after the slaughter, after the battle, that Melchizedek ministered succor to Abraham, and in addition thereto, he blessed both God and Abraham. All this, of course, speaks in a remarkable way of Christ in the future. Abraham was a king, or rather Melchizedek was a king priest, king of righteousness, king of peace, and priest of the Most High God. Reminding us of the language of Zechariah chapter six in relation to our blessed Lord, he shall be a priest upon his throne. And our hearts anticipate with joy when Christ, as a royal priest, shall minister the entire universe to the glory of God. And we believe this evening that that is an absolute must and necessity. You will remember that this was never to be true of any man save Christ. Uzziah, you remember the king in two Chronicles chapter twenty six, because he endeavored to function as a priest, he was smitten with leprosy until the day of his death. This combination of king and priest is reserved entirely for Christ himself. Now you'll notice that Melchizedek, he brought forth bread and wine, and he blessed both Abraham and God in Genesis chapter fourteen. Now, there are certain omissions that we must observe in order to rightly understand what the scripture has to tell us about Melchizedek. We're not told that Melchizedek prayed for Abraham's success in the battle. Nor are we told that Melchizedek interceded for Abraham during the battle. There's no mention of any sacrifices that Melchizedek ever made. In connection with Melchizedek, there's no thought of him being a priest for a sinful people. In connection with Melchizedek, there's no thought of Melchizedek helping a people in their wilderness journey. There's no thought of his sympathy for a feeble people. All this has really nothing to do with Melchizedek. The great thought is his succoring Abraham and blessing both God and Abraham. He succored Abraham with bread and wine. It may be in that there was not only a succor, but a delightful foretaste of what shall obtain in the coming kingdom. Bread and wine. Might have something to say about that later. And then not only did he grant this succor to, uh, Abraham, but he blessed both God and Abraham, and in that he united in a delightful bond, heaven and earth, as he blessed both God and man, undoubtedly directing attention to what shall be true of Christ in a day that's yet to be, ministering succor to the nation of Israel after their dreadful tribulation days and during his millennial reign, binding together in his own glorious person both heaven and earth. And then he's king of righteousness and king of peace. There shall be peace because his kingdom shall be established in righteousness. There can be no peace apart from righteousness. And it may be as king of righteousness, we think of him as David, and as king of peace, we think of him as Solomon. He's the priest of the Most High God, Melchizedek. The Most High God is a millennial title. That wasn't connected with the Aaronic priesthood. You remember on that golden plate there were the words, holiness to the Lord, holiness to Jehovah. But in connection with Melchizedek, it's not Jehovah, but he's the priest of the Most High God. As our brother Bell was reminding us on Saturday evening, many there are that are called gods, but here we have the most high God, high above them all, high above both heaven and earth. Now then, that is the pattern of Melchizedek's ministry, but Hebrews chapter seven doesn't occupy us with that. Hebrews seven only barely refers to the pattern of Melchizedek's ministry. We need to observe in our study of this chapter that our attention is directed to the order of his priesthood, not the pattern of it, but rather the order of it. The type of Melchizedek that is developed in Hebrews chapter seven is only insofar as it applies to Christ in heaven now, and as it relates to the people of God in the day in which we now live. What it shall be in its earthly fulfillment, as we have it in Genesis chapter fourteen, is only barely hinted at in Hebrews chapter seven. Now then, eh, he is mentioned historically in Genesis fourteen, and then he's mentioned again by David in Psalm one hundred and ten. And in between Genesis fourteen and Psalm one hundred and ten, we have the introduction of the Levitic priesthood. Hebrews chapter seven makes it clear that the Levitic priesthood, it was in a sense provisional, and it would be superseded. And the very fact that, though Melchizedek is first mentioned in Genesis fourteen, and then subsequent to that we have the Levitic, Levitic priesthood, does not mean that the Levitic priesthood succeeded and superseded the Melchizedek priesthood. That's why the Spirit of God mentioned again in Psalm one hundred and ten to show that the Levitic priesthood did not really, uh, supersede the Melchizedek priesthood. And thus we discover that Moses, he spoke of a prophet that was yet to be. A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up like unto me. David, he spoke of a priest that is yet to be. Psalm one hundred and ten, thou art a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek. Now then, the writer in Hebrews chapter seven, in the first ten verses, wants to show the amazing superiority of Christ over the Levitic priesthood. And how does he do it? To Melchizedek, who was but a type of Christ, who was but a shadow of Christ, Abraham, the father of the faithful, he bowed. He bowed to one who at that time was the highest representative on the earth of the Most High God. And in this willing act of obedience, Hebrews seven remarkably tells us that there was involved all that sprang from Abraham, both Levi and Aaron. Thus, our attention is directed to what an amazing person Melchizedek must have been. Now let me sum up how the writer shows the amazing superiority of Christ as a priest after the order of Melchizedek. He takes us back to Melchizedek in Genesis chapter fourteen, and observe this. First of all, he emphasizes in our minds in verses two and four that Abraham or Abram, he gave tithes of all his spoil to Melchizedek, and Melchizedek, he received them. By way of contrast, verse five tells us that the Levites under the law, they tithed their brethren by commandment. Abraham wasn't commanded to pay these tithes to Abra- to Melchizedek. Abraham offered them willingly and without commandment, and Melchizedek received them. Now notice the difference. Abraham gave them willingly, and Melchizedek received them. But by way of contrast, the Levites, by commandment, took tithes from their brethren, but not so Melchizedek. Secondly, verse one, Melchizedek blessed Abraham, and Abraham received that blessing. And thus, in verse seven, the writer says, without all contradiction, the less is blessed of the better. And thus, if Melchizedek blessed Abraham and Abraham received it, Melchizedek must be superior to Abraham, the father of the faithful, for the less is blessed of the better. That's why in Luke chapter two, Simeon blessed Joseph and Mary, but not the child Jesus. He could not bless Jesus on this principle that the less is blessed by the better. Thus, by paying tithes to Melchizedek and receiving from Melchizedek a blessing, Abraham, their forefather, recognized without doubt the superiority of Melchizedek. And then, thirdly, Levi was descended from Abraham, and as being in the loins of Abraham, verses nine and ten tell us, they virtually, in this act of Abraham, paid tithes to Melchizedek. Now let me repeat that. In verses nine and ten, the writer tells us this, that Levi, being descended from Abraham, as being in the loins of Abraham, virtually in that act of Abraham, he paid tithes to Melchizedek. And then fourthly, whilst here men receive tithes who die, and generation succeeds generation, there one received tithes of whom it is witnessed he liveth. That simply means that scripture gives no record of the death of Melchizedek. The Levitic priesthood were dying men, but there's no record of the death of Melchizedek that he might portray to us one who liveth. Now then, having shown the infinite superiority of Melchizedek, then our attention is directed to the infinite superiority of Christ, who is a priest after the order of Melchizedek. And then the second section, verse eleven to twenty four. Since there is this change, then certain changes are necessary. And thus, in verse eleven, uh our attention is directed to a change of priest. And in verses twelve to seventeen, our attention is directed to changes of the law, and the reason is given for the change of priest, and two reasons are given for the change of the law. Why the change of the priest, verse eleven. Well, says the writer, there was no perfection in the Levitic priesthood. Nowhere was there perfection. How? It was a faulty people who could not draw near to God, as things were. All that they knew of was a figurative redemption and typical sacrifices. No perfection could be found associated with the Levitic priesthood. And not only was it a faulty people, but theirs was a failing priesthood. These priests associated with the Levitical system, they drew near to God in fear and with trembling. All that was associated with them, merely rites and ceremony, and they approached in fear and trembling because theirs was death if they dared to transgress. And there was no perfection connected with the Levitic priesthood, and that involved a change of priest. But secondly, there was a change of law, and there's a twofold reason given for this change of law. Verses twelve to seventeen tells us how that the Levitic law made men priests only who were of Aaron's family, who were of Aaron's family tribe, the Levites. But you remember Christ, he was saluted of God on resurrection ground as a priest. As a risen man, he was a priest, but in his birth, he sprang from the tribe of Judah. He came in on the line of David as a risen man, a priest, but he was born of David's line, and that involved a change of law. And secondly, verses fifteen and sixteen make it clear that the Levitic priests were made after the law of ca- of a carnal commandment. Now that simply means that the commandment in connection with the Levitic priesthood, it concerned men in the flesh. It concerned dying men. Now that's the significance of the word carnal here. It's not carnal in its evil sense. It's a carnal commandment because it's a commandment applied to men in the flesh and men who were dying. And obviously Christ could not come under such a commandment, for, says verses fifteen and seventeen, his life is indissoluble. A carnal commandment could not apply to him whose life was indissoluble. According to Numbers chapter four, the Levites served from the age of thirty to fifty. That was the span of their service. And with regard to the high priest, the high priest in death was succeeded by another priest, and thus the commandment with regard to them, it was a carnal one. It applied to men in the flesh, men who were dying. But Christ is after the power, not the law, but the power of an indissoluble life. Thus there must need be the change from a commandment that related to men in the flesh and men who were dying. Verses eighteen to twenty two give us a delightful twofold deduction from all this, introducing us to a better hope and a better covenant. Verses eighteen to nineteen, we have the abolition of all the antecedent injunctions because they were weak and unprofitable, verse eighteen. Verse nineteen, we have the bringing in of a better hope. Thus Christ not only was himself perfect, but he brings in perfection. And what is the perfection connected with this better hope? Just this. By the which we draw an eye to God. Uh, Brother Bell mentioned that in his prayer. Who are meant by the we? The people of God, without exception today, have this blessed privilege, connected with a better hope, all without exception able to draw nigh to God. It's a tragedy that Christendom today should resurrect what was made obsolete by the death of Christ. We have a better hope, whereby all of us, without exception, have the blessed privilege of drawing near to God. Now, last year we considered some of the better things of the Epistle of the Hebrews that we won't take time to touch this evening. But another interesting deduction is this, verses twenty to twenty two, the Levitical priests, because that priesthood was provisional in character and its ministry as well, these priests were made without an oath, for if they had been made priests with an oath, there could be no change. But by way of contrast, Christ has been made priest by an oath, and God will not repent, and because of this, he has become the surety of a better covenant. And the idea in the surety of a better covenant is this, that he is the pledge of every blessing connected with the new covenant that the writer will develop in further chapters of this book. Now, in closing, what does all this mean to us? What are the blessings that we derive from all the teaching to which I've drawn your attention? We have it in verses twenty three to twenty eight. What are they? We today have a high priest who is living. Verse twenty three: and they truly were many priests because they were not suffered to continue by reason of death. Death marked the Levitic priesthood, but praise God, we have a living priest. But verse twenty four, not only is he living, but he is an unchanging priest. This man, because he continueth ever, hath an unchangeable and untransferable priesthood. He's a living priest. He's an unchanging priest, and perhaps better still is the language of verse twenty five. He is an interceding priest who ever liveth to make intercession for us. Ah, brethren, have this impressed on your heart and mind tonight. The great benefit and blessing of all this for you and me is this, that we have a living priest, an unchanging priest, and an interceding priest. And I want to suggest that his being living and unchanging has to do with him as a priest after the order of Melchizedek, living and unchanging, but the interceding priest is his priesthood after the pattern of Aaron, living and unchanging after the order of Melchizedek, interceding after the pattern of Aaron. I wonder, dear brethren, if we appreciate tonight that we have a living priest. He liveth, and he liveth in the power of an indissoluble life, is the teaching of this chapter, and he ever liveth. Why sometimes we go through life and we fail to appreciate that we have a living priest. How many of us from day to day go through life, and we fail to benefit from the ministry of a priest who is living? He's a living priest, but he's unchanging. How many a time, when parents have to change their doctors, they become a little sad. It may be their doctor dies and if they start with a new doctor. And you've heard it said before that we had our old doctor. He knew the family from they were babies. He's known all their, all their ailments and all their diseases. But brethren, we have an unchanging priest. One to whom we can go, who knows us from the very beginning. All the trials and vicissitudes of life. His priesthood is untransferable. It's never taken from him and given to another because he never dies. Praise God for an unchanging priest, the same yesterday and today and forever. And he's an interceding priest. How delightful. Interceding, living, unchanging, and interceding, and because of that, he is able to save to the uttermost. This is not the salvation of the soul by his death, it's the salvation of the life by his constant intercession. He is able to save to the uttermost of the wilderness journey. And how do we avail ourselves of it? As we come to God through him, coming to God through him, we avail ourselves of this priest who ever liveth to make intercession for. But verses twenty six, twenty seven, and twenty eight make it clear that though he's after the pattern of Aaron, in person and character he's altogether different. For such an high priest became us. Now, I think I've said more than I should have said by way of introduction, but let me just say this briefly. Chapter two, it says, for it became him, it became God, for whom are all things and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons to glory, to make the captain of their salvation perfect through suffering. But here it's not what became God, that that's consistent with his holiness, but what becomes us connected with our need and the tremendous blessing that is ours today to have an high priest holy, harmless, undefiled, separated from sinners as the word in his resurrection, made higher than the heavens in his exaltation. Now, the meaning of these words is most delightful. I won't pause to think of them now, but this is the high priest exactly suited to you and me, and this is verses twenty seven and twenty eight: Who needeth not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the peoples? For this he did once, when he offered up himself. Now, at first sight, there would appear to be a difficulty in this verse, for the verse speaks of a daily offering up of a sacrifice for sin. Scripture, the Old Testament, speaks of a daily burnt offering and a daily meal offering, but not a daily sin offering. And does it mean that the priest had to offer every day of his life a sin offering for himself? No, that's not the thought. In verses twenty seven and twenty eight, our attention is directed to the consecration of the priesthood. And during those seven days, every day, the priest offered a sin offering for himself, and on the last day he offered a sacrifice of sins for the people. That had to do with the, the consecration of the priests of old, but not so our high priest. He offered up himself, not for himself, but for you and me. His priesthood is not based on a sacrifice. His priesthood is based on an oath. Thou art a priest forever. And the next verse makes that clear. For the law maketh men high priests, which of infirmity, but the word of the oath, which was since the law, maketh the son or son who is consecrated or perfected forevermore. I was telling our brother Bell Erna today that I'll leave the deep theological questions to him as a learned friend. And I shall return them back to Mr. Lecky. Would you say, Mr. Lecky, that chapter seven, eh, follows a sequence of thought in chapter five, he speaks of Melchizedek, of whom we have many things to say, but they are hard to be uttered, seeing he a dull of hearing. There are many things he wants to tell us about Melchizedek. In chapter six, he says, leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on into perfection. In other words, leading, leaving the law, let us go on to think of this risen man, our high priest. Now, in chapter seven, he leads us on into the truth concerning our vision, ascend at high peace. Do you mean, Brother Bell, that chapter, the teaching of chapter seven would take into account that we've benefited from the teaching of chapter six? Yes, yes. You'd see in verse one then, Mr. Lecky, that Melchizedek had a, a ministry of succor, a ministry of, eh, building up of renewal. Abraham comes from the slaughter of the kings, tired and weary in the battle. Melchizedek comes out and ministers bread and wine and refreshes him. Yes, yes. In that sense, he would be in contrast to Aaron. Yeah. The Aaronic, the pattern of the Aaronic priesthood is not to suffer after the trial, but during the trial. Yes, yes. Chapter four says, uh, uh, let us come boldly in front of grace that we obtain grace to help in time of need. Yes. That's the Aaronic pattern. Yes. Mm. The order of Melchizedek, did it start in him, or was it in being before them? The order of Melchizedek, did it start in him, or was it there before? I think the order of Melchizedek is just taken up with the thought that in connection with Melchizedek, we have no recorde, no record of his father or mother, no record of his genealogy. He just appears in a scene to direct our attention to an order that's not marked by death. And the pattern of Aaron then, how do you define that? Well, the pattern of Aaron is a priest that has to do with worship, a priest that has to do with sympathy and succor and so on during the trial. That's the pattern of it. And Christ functions on our behalf today after the pattern of Aaron in his sympathy, and as we'll see, uh, tomorrow evening in relation to our worship, but he doesn't functionate after the order of Aaron because that was an order that was marked by succession and death. But it's after the pa- after the order of Melchizedek, an order which isn't marked by succession because he liveth. You would say then that Melchizedek was alive. No, I think the thought here is this, that when he says he liveth, he's taken up as one who portrays Christ. It's the superintendence of the Holy Spirit over a scriptural record, no record of his father or mother, no record of his descent, no record of his genealogy, that that was most important to the Lydic priesthood, that he might represent one who liveth. Well, I should have d- I should have thought that the, the words of the psalmist in Psalm one hundred and ten would certainly suggest that the man s- was still, uh, ministering. No, I don't think so. I think the thought is that he was a man who was born, a man who had a father and mother, and a man who died. But these things are withheld that they might portray to us a priest who is after that order which knows no death and knows no succession. Would it be true to say then, Mr. Legge, that actually what the apostle is doing here, as moved by the Holy Spirit of God, is actually to interpret both the substance and the silence of the record? Exactly. Genesis 14. Yes. Are you thinking that, uh, Melchizedek possibly was translated like Enoch and Elijah? Well, seeing as we've got no record, and seeing as, uh, Jehovah says, thou art a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek, remember that that's the first occasion where the everlasting priesthood of Melchizedek is mentioned, I would have thought that, uh, there was something unique about Melchizedek. Of course, in Psalm one hundred and ten, it's a messianic psalm referring to Christ. Thou Christ, you see, thou Messiah, art a priest after the order of that man in Genesis fourteen, a priest forever, that man about whom we're not told of his, uh, parents or his successors, not told of his birth, not told of his death, that he might be made like unto the Son of God, and that he was made like unto the Son of God, who had neither beginning of days nor end of life. Uh, you know, I s- hesitate in saying this, but in order to clarify my own mind, I ask it. Uh, may I ask in humility, uh, was the Lord Jesus in eternity ministering as a priest. Will he minister in a priest in i ariv na, you mean? Before, in eternity past. Well, I think that the idea of a priest of the Most High God involves time and kings, heaven and earth. Only, you see, as you remark, there is no mention of sacrifice here. It's blessing. Blessing, I believe, is the characteristic Mm. of the Melchizedek priesthood, and that to me it's a savers of Ephesians one and what you remember, what you reminded us of on Lord's demonic. Blessed be God. Blessed. However, that's only going through my mind. I only wanted it clarified. No, I am inclined to think not, uh, Mr. uh, Merrick, with all due respect. It only refers to as peacehood, doesn't it? This without mother, without father, without mother, and so on. It's only in relation to peacehood, isn't it? The idea is without record of it, without recorded genealogy. The question did crop, did uh, crop up in a Bible reading some time ago, the same thought our dear brother gave. That this brother thought that Melchizedek was still alive, and another brother said that he must have been immortal. That cannot be. You see, at the end of verse three, abideth a priest continually. That's right, which means that, uh, Melchizedek, there's no record of his death, Mm. you see? And because of that, there's no record of the cessation of his priesthood, and in that sense, he's made like unto the Son of God. I gather that to be the simple meaning to that. The record is that he was like the Son of God. Yes. That he was like the Son of God, but not made like the Son of God. Sent by her, but made like unto the Son of God. He was not like the Son of God, but made like unto the Son of God. Yes, that's right. And made like into the Son of God in regards to his duration of his priesthood. Forever. That is the Lord Jesus Christ. You, what you mean, brother Rees, is this, that if he were eternally a priest, Yes. he would be like the Son of God. Yes. Mm-hmm. But scripture doesn't say he was like, but made. Yes. That's right, yes. Made by the withholding of these details. Because there are some who say that Melchizedek was, that he was the Son of God. Yes, yes, exactly. And the other say that he was sin. Yes, yes, that's right. Is it because there is no priest before him, neither is there a priest following him? Melchizedek, I mean. That is why he is made like unto the Son of God. There was none before him in that order, and there's none to follow him in that order. Well, the verse said, without father, without mother, without descent or genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life, but made like unto the Son of God. For the Son of God hath neither beginning of days nor end of life. And the fact that we're not given an account of his birth or death was that he might be made like unto the Son of God, abiding a priest continually. But we do gather that there was such a man who lived. Without a doubt. And that he was a priest of the Most High. Yes, without a doubt. But you see, what we're emphasizing is that the Spirit of God has withheld Yes. This record, Mm. that he might be made like unto the Son of God. I don't like to throw a stone into the wheel, and I don't want to cause confusion, but, uh, what about verse eight? And here men that die receive tithes, but there he receiveth them of whom it is witnessed that he liveth. Well, once again, it's the same answer as far as I see it. The very fact that there's no record of his death means that Melchizedek speaks of one who liveth. It might be helpful to point out here, uh, apropos this problem, that in the record in Genesis fourteen, the actual, uh, record is that he blessed Abraham first, and then he blessed God, indicating, at least to my mind, that there must have been, um, someone there for whom to him, for him to minister as a priest, both in blessing the man and leading, as it were, him to God in blessing God. So it necessitated that the man would w- must be there first for him to function as a priest. Oh yes, I think the idea of the priest of the Most High God, the Most High God is a relative expression. He's not termed a high priest ever, uh, Melchizedek, because there were no other priests. He needed not to be distinguished that way, but he's the priest of the Most High God, which is a relative. There are gods many. So you'd say then, Mr. Lecky, that in verse three, Melchizedek is said to be made like unto the Son of God. In verse fifteen, there writes another piece after similitude of Melchizedek. So Melchizedek was made like unto the Son of God. The Son of God was after similitude of Melchizedek, Yes. which necessarily implies that they were two distinct persons. Yes. And the difference would be that, uh, Melchizedek was made like to him as to his person. Yes. But Christ was made like to Melchizedek as to his office. Exactly. Yeah. Yeah. It's interesting too, Mr. Lecky, in connection with that, we read about Melchizedek in Genesis fourteen. We don't read any more about him un- until Psalm one hundred and ten. Now, uh, Melchizedek was, was, was king of Salem. Salem was in heathen hands. We don't read any more about Melchizedek, but then when David comes to the throne, uh, through Joab, he captures it, captures Jerusalem, and Jerusalem becomes his royal city. Then once more, Melchizedek appears, the priest forever after the order of Melchizedek. Yes. Time always falls short, doesn't it? We have to bear in mind, always falls short. Yes, I think it's, uh, it to me, it, uh, breathes of the inspiration of the scriptures, that even in Genesis chapter fourteen, the Holy Spirit was superintending the, the, the, the writing of God's word, that with a view to the omission of these certain things that might be taken up in Psalm one hundred and ten and in Hebrews chapter seven, But he only brought forth the memorials of the sacrifice, bread and wine. I wonder, Mr. Lecky, would you please say something about the actual point of the introduction of the, this, uh, these allusions to Melchizedek here? We haven't yet considered why the apostle brings him in and, uh, and, uh, what relation it has to the problem in the minds of those to whom he's writing. Well, I, I, perhaps I didn't make it very clear at the commencement, but it's to establish something that's superior to the Levitic priesthood, to indicate to these converted Jews that they can't go back to something that's weak and unprofitable, that they're associated now with a priest that's after the order of Melchizedek, something that has superseded all that they were formerly associated with. I judge that to be the significance. You remember last year in Hebrews chapter six, we were pointing out that they were connecting Christ and his teaching with the onside of the cross. But when we come to chapter seven, having benefited from the teaching of chapter six, we're now connected with Christ, the other side of the cross. Could I say, sorry, could you say, Mr. Lecky, something about the Most High God? You said it was merely a relative expression. Um, Dami says it's a millennial term. Can you explain that, please? Well, uh, if I said merely, I wasn't, uh, diminishing from the, uh, greatness of it. Uh, you'll discover when you go back to Genesis fourteen, he's the Most High God, possessor of heaven and earth. And in that respect, we can see it beautifully as a millennial title, when heaven and earth are brought into harmony again, and it was befitting that the priest of the Most High God, possessor of heaven and earth, should bless a man and bless God. Heaven and earth brought into harmony again. And it relates to the scene when every hostile force shall be brought into subjection to the one who is the Most High. You'd say then, Mr. Leckie, that prophetically it relates to a coming day when all opposing po- powers shall be put down and God shall be established, as it were, as the Most High God, possessor of heaven and earth, in the prophetic sense. Then in the moral sense, in the present spiritual sense, Mr. Lecky, would you say we get a glimpse of it in Psalm ninety one. He that dwelleth in the secret place of the Most High shall abide under the shadow of the Almighty. Exactly. By reason of the o- o- of the priesthood of Christ, we dwell in the secret place of the Most High. Exactly. I think so. In Acts chapter sixteen, the damsel with the spirit of divination who met the apostle, he followed Paul and us and cried, saying, these men are the servants of the Most High God, which show unto us the way of salvation. And this did she many days, and Paul, being grieved, turned and said to the Spirit, I command thee in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her, and he came out the same hour. They rejected that title because it was a millennium title. Well, that is the time when, of course, the devil shall be cast into the bottomless pit. Art thou come to tempt us, eh, eh, eh, to tempt us before the time? And the time of the, when the Most High God will be seen particularly as such, as our brother Bell has mentioned, when every hostile force shall have been brought into subjection. Does the relationship of the Most High God has its relation with the world every time? I rather think so. We don't think of God today as the Most High, really. Uh, we, as a heavenly people, we don't think of God as Most High as being in the heavenlies ourselves. But as our brother, uh, Bell has pointed out, there is, there are certain aspects in which we can. But broadly speaking, as a heavenly people, we don't think of God as Most High. That's rather remote, you see. Exactly. The Most High doth rule in the kingdoms of men. Every time. Yes. And therefore, would that be, would coming out of Melchizedek in blessing Abraham, would it be a type of the deliverance of the children of Israel, as he delivered Lot in the day of the Armageddon? I'm sure it is, yes. Yes, that's right. That has to do with the world again. That's right. That's why they'll come forth and minister succor to the nation of Israel, I judge, after the tribulation days. And I think, I rather think the bread and wine is a kind of foretaste of the coming kingdom. Amen. When they shall, eh, beat their, eh, their, eh, swords into pruning hooks and their spears into plowshare, vice versa. Well, the the plowshare is that that's necessary to produce bread, and the pruning hook, that's that's connected with the wine, you see? So I'll say it, the bread and wine of the coming kingdom. But... Mr. Lecky, this man Melchizedek is referred to as a king priest. Yes. And then in the passage, this title is applied to Christ. Um, in what sense is Christ king to the believer today, if any? Well, you see, he's not king today. Well, may I ask a question then? Why is he bringing it in to believers, the title King priest to Christ? Well, perhaps you'll remember that I emphasized that, uh, here it's not his relation to earth and his earthly people or the pattern of the priesthood of Melchizedek. It's the order that's brought in, not his ministering as king priest, but his being a priest after that order that's not marked by death. See what I mean? Yes. Would you say too, Mr. Leckie, that it's the thought of the king in waiting? It's from Psalm one hundred and ten, sit thou at my right hand until I make thine enemies thy footstool. Yes. So it's the king in waiting. Yes, exactly. For the day of his manifestation. Yes, yes. May I ask a question? You'll have to speak louder if you're going to ask a question, David. In, um, Zechariah chapter six, where we have shall sit as a priest upon his throne, it then says, and the counsel of peace shall be between them both. What's the significance of the counsel of peace in the connection of king and priest? I think that's the results of a king priest on the throne. There must be peace. As the king, he will administer in righteousness, and as the priest, he will minister to the need of the people. But of course, it won't be a priest in sympathy as it is after the pattern of Aaron, because, eh, Psalm one hundred and ten speaks of thy people shall be willing in the day of power. Not a disobedient people, but not a failing people, but a people who are willing. Are you prepared to say that Abraham is a type of the believer here? Well, I don't think he's taken up in that way, no. Only I was thinking that Abraham gave. Mm-hmm. I. I think he comes in particularly here as the father of the faithful, or those from whom the nation sprang, to show the superiority of Melchizedek. Why should a tenth part of the spoils, uh, emphasize that? Consider how great this man was to whom Abraham gave the tenth part. I rather think that the contrast, as I mentioned in the beginning, was this, that Abraham gave it willingly, a tenth part of the spoils, whereas under the law, Israel, the Israelites were commanded to give tithes, whereas Abraham gave it willingly without a command. Under the law, it was a command to give the tithes. Would you agree with that, Mr. Yes, yes. And it's interesting, Mr. Decky, that first of all, he gave the, he gave the tenth part of all, suggesting the dominion and the glory of Christ. And then it says he gave lower down the tenth part of the spoils. That word spoils, I, I believe it has to do with the first fruits, and it's that which was on the top of the pile. He gives to the Lord that which is on the top of the pile, the very best, the very grandest. Yes, I think some render it the best, if I remember correctly, yes. It's interesting, Mr. Lecky, isn't it, how we have Melchizedek viewed here. Eh, for this Melchizedek, eh, king of Salem, priest of the Most High God, there we have him viewed officially, king and priest. Who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings and blessed him. Here we have him viewed, eh, historically, being first by interpretation king of righteousness and then king of peace. Here we have him viewed morally. Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days nor end of life, eh, here we have him viewed personally. And then he abides the peace continually, here we have him viewed continually. Mm, very good. Yes. Thank you. Well, isn't that just like a type of our Lord here in fulfilling the righteousness of God upon the cross as King of righteousness, Calvary, and then in view of what took place at Calvary, he's the King of peace, peace through the death of his cross. Well, I had rather thought that the, as the king of righteousness, it's connected with his administering everything righteously in the coming kingdom as a king, you see? Yes. And of course that righteousness and peace always go together. The kingdom of God is righteousness, peace. David was a king of righteousness. He subdued every foe, and Solomon was a king of peace. Yes. And there can only be peace when things have been dealt with a righteous basis and every foe has been subdued, and they're both connected and associated with Christ. Yes. The righteousness and peace met at the cross. That's right, yes. In the person of his son. Yes. But I had thought that here it was anticipating, you see. Mm. Have we any connections, Parecki, with, uh, Luke nineteen thirty eight, when the people, when the disciples said, blessed be the king that cometh in the name of the Lord, uh, peace in heaven, glory to God in the highest. Have there any bearing on that, with that verse connected with this truth here? Oh yes, I suppose that that, uh, uh, the language of them then will be taken up in a greater way when in fact he does come, instead of crucifying him as they did then, he shall be acknowledged that he's appearing. Mm. You would say too, Mr. Recke, in relation to our brother's question, that in Luke chapter two the angel said, peace on earth. In chapter nineteen they say, peace in heaven. The peace had been rejected by the earth, and it's gone back to heaven. But now, in this, in this day that we're looking at, when the Lord comes in the Melchizedek character, it will return from heaven to earth. He'll come from heaven bringing peace. Yes, that's why in chapter twelve he says, suppose you that I come to give peace, I say, nay, that's not. Yes. Yes. If you'd known the things that belong to you, I'd be, yeah. Interested to notice the about the righteousness of our Lord Jesus Christ, that in his life, righteousness was manifested. He was a righteous one. In his death, righteousness was magnified, and in his resurrection, righteousness is ministered. He's made to us wisdom, righteousness, sanctification, and redemption. It's manifested, magnified, and ministered. May I ask, is there a hint here in verse three when we have that beautiful title, Son of God, only occurs on another occasion in the epistles, a hint of his eternal sonship? Oh, I think if anything would be the death knell to the denial of his eternal sonship, this would be. Without beginning of days or end of life made like unto the Son of God. So Melchizedek then was greater than Abraham, greater than Aaron, and greater than the law. Exactly. And brings therefore the glory of the priesthood of Christ at the present period. Certainly. And he, you remember that it was possibly one of the greatest moments in Abraham's experience as a victor. Yes. When he gave willingly tithes to Melchizedek. In that word, um, continually, I think it can be, um, interpreted forever or eternally. Is that the right to do? Um, the verse, verse 3, um, so may, but may liken to the son of God abideth a peace eternal. I don't think it's the abideth eternally. It's not to the ages here, but it's to perpetuity, without cessation action, without interruption. I rather think the thought is. That's why. Hmm. Can you explain the principle in scripture, Mr. Lecky, whereby a man is reckoned to have ministered or done something to a person even when he wasn't there, but in the loins of his forefather. Well, I think that was a principle connected with Judaism. It was a reckoning connected with Judaism. I gather, uh, that it is emphasized because that Melchizedek, there's no record of his, his, uh, death and no record of any successors. Had there been successors living contemporary with them, that might have negatived this thought, but it's a more because it appears, and there's no record of any successor, and I think that's what enhances the thought here. You follow what's in my mind? Think it over, okay. I was thinking, is there a connection, as in Romans five, with the sinner today, with Adam, for instance? Is there the same principle involved? Might well be, yes. Federal headship. Yeah. Yeah, yes. But there's something more in this than that, I think. Uh, you remember in John chapter eight, who hath sinned this man or his spirit, you see, that he was born blind. That there is a Jewish line of thought that it was, you remember the children wrestling before they were born. There is a line of thought connection with that, eh, in, in Judaistic thinking. You would say, Mr. Lecky, in connection with that, unto whom even the patriarch Abraham gave tithes and so on. The patriarch Abraham, patriarch, the first father. He is the, he is the head, he is the ancestral head of the race, the patriarch, the first father. And so, representatively in him, Levi also paid tithes in Abraham. Yes, they're all involved in him. Yes. And that time, yes. Yes. As the patriarch, yes. Yes, yes, good. How would you assume from this that, uh, nobody is entitled to take tithes, only, uh, the sons of Levi, according to the word of God? Well, they had a commandment to do it, but you have no commandment in the New Testament to do it. Is that what you mean? Yeah. There's certain lands where certain people take the tithe. It's some scripture, isn't it? England to do that. I suppose Wales as well. I'm forgetting we're in Wales. Actually, you would say, you would say, Mr. Lecky, that grace goes far beyond this. Under the law, a tenth was demanded, but under grace, well, the very grace of God calls for, for all. Love so amazing, so divine, demands my heart, my life, my all. Don't you think that's involved, Mr. Leckie, when, uh, our brother has mentioned he gave the tenth of the spoils? The best. For God. Well, yes, it's, uh, the teaching in one Corinthians sixteen about giving is very searching. Let every man, let each without exception, rich and poor, lay by a definite exercise in store or at home, as some render it. But in any case, there's abundance in it, in store or at home, and it's commensurate with one's prosperity, according as God hath prospered you. That's the teaching today, rather than tithing, which, as our brother Bell says, is much higher. And that when Paul treats of it in second Corinthians, he introduces two texts that we invariably connect with our worship and instead of our giving. Thanks be unto God for his unspeakable gift, and the one who for, who though he were rich, for our sakes became poor. We give in the light of that. And then too, Mr. Leckie quotes the example of the Macedonians. Yes. They first gave themselves. I was going to ask Mr. Leckie, eh, but he whose descent is not counted from them received tithes of Abraham. The Levitical priesthood received tithes by reason of descent, by reason of a, of an office that was inherited from their fathers. But he is one who takes tithe by virtue of his own personal rights, what he is in himself. So what was most important with the, the, uh, Levitic priesthood, according to Nehemiah, was their genealogy. Exactly, yes. Yes. Melchizedek stands aloof from that. Yes, yes. In his own dignity. Yes, yes. His own personal, essential, inheavened rights, not something handed down to him. Yes. I was thinking in relation to that, that's why we see Abraham gladly giving tithes to him in the presence of one who is so great. Mm-hmm. And if we would, uh, when we give our little, if we thought and were really in the realization that we're giving to one who is so great, how different our giving would be. Yes. I suppose in these days, if a poor brother or sister gave a tenth, it would be a sacrifice, but for a wealthy brother, you wouldn't miss it. If you're very wealthy, a tenth would be nothing. So it's as the Lord purposes, isn't it? Would you suggest now then from verse eleven, Mr. Lecky, Lecky, if therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood for under to receive the law, what further need was there that another priest should rise? Uh, there's been a change of the priesthood, consequently a change of the law, so that that necessarily implies that the law didn't bring perfection, the law didn't take away sin. If it had, it would have remained, but the very fact that it's been superseded show- shows that perfection never came by the law. Yes. Yes, that will be further developed in the remaining chapters. Yeah. Could never take away sin. Yeah. Mm. Mm. Which in- which shows that, uh, the Levitic priesthood was really provisional. Yeah. Wasn't it? Yeah. Mm-hmm. Until the better hope. Yes. Yeah. Mm. Does the change of the law involve the moral law as well as the ceremonial law? I think the definite article is omitted here. It's a changing of law. Uh, it's just the law relative to the priesthood that's in view here, I gather. And the- you'd say, Mr. Decky, that the other is true, although it's not the point here. Not the point here, exactly, yes. Yes. You say it's a change in relation to the law of the priesthood? Yes. Because the law cannot change, can it? The holy law of God. Well, it's fulfilled, it's filled out, you see. Yes. Yes. It's fulfilled in us. Will you explain the change of the law? Well, the change of the law here, uh, involves, eh, the fact, first of all, that there was no perfection connected with the priesthood of old. And if there's to be perfection, there must be change of law that will introduce perfection with Christ. And then there was the change of the law that related to men who were in the flesh and dying, because here we have a priest who is a priest forever. That's the law that relates to, eh, the priesthood, where one priest dies and another takes his place, that must be changed. And then the law as it relates to the fact that only those of the tribe of Levi could function as priests, whereas Christ came from the tribe of Judah, that must be changed as well. You- you'd say, Mr. Lecky, that the law centered around the high priest, everything in the ritual of the law centered around the high priest. Well, now there's a change in the priesthood, therefore necessarily there's- there's a change in that law. That, that law is suspended because it was, it's centered around these, around the high feast, so that these Jewish professors to whom Paul is writing, they are being tempted to go back to the law. Paul says, no, no, that law is altogether changed. There's a new high feast, and so the law is set aside, so you cannot go back to it. Yes, and that, it has now been made weak and unprof- apparently it's been shown to be weak and unprofitable now, yeah. Yeah. We'll come in a very much deeper way. This really introduces much that's going to follow, doesn't it, Yeah. Mr. Bell? Yeah. I mean, what a difference, say, eh, our experience on Thursday morning with what obtained under the law. The Israelite would come and see the priest, a tired, weary priest offering sacrifice after sacrifice, and blood being shed, and not another praise being sung. Sins never taken away, for as we come, we sit around the loaf and the cup that speaks of a sacrifice made. Sins dealt with finally, fully, and forever, and we can praise our God. Do you think, Mr. Lethy, of this statement here, that our Lord sprang out of the tribe of Judah, of which tribe Moses speak nothing concerning priesthood, do you think we see a hint of it in the book of Genesis, in the book of Exodus, when they built the tabernacle? It was Bezalel and Aholiab. Bezalel of the tribe of Judah and Aholiab of the tribe of Dan. Eh, here's Bezalel of the kingly tribe. He builds the tabernacle, and here's, eh, here's Eholiab of Dan, the lowest tribe. He also builds the tabernacle. So our Lord Jesus Christ, eh, the kingly one, Bezalel, and the lowly one, Aholiab, eh, he performs now that priestly function. He's a high priest over the house of God. Very good. That word sprang, uh, is an interesting word that's usually connected with the rising sun. Yes, yes. Yeah. Takes our minds back to Luke chapter one, the day spring from an high visit. Yes. Then shall the sun of righteousness arise. Yeah, yeah. You know, Mr. Lecky, it said that, eh, it was like the driving of G Hugh, for he driveth furiously. Do you think you could go at G Hugh speed and take us down to the end of the chapter? We've got about seven minutes. I will, right you are. Well, verses fifteen to eighteen I tried to introduce as connected with the, the change of the law in relation to a priest, the, the priest who was subject to a carnal commandment, a commandment related to men in the flesh, uh, who were dying and had to be succeeded. But he, Christ, is after not the law of an endless life, a law that might be changed and broken, but after the power of an indissoluble life. For he testified there are priests forever after the order of Melchizedek. And then, of course, we have the abolition of, uh, of the annulling of everything that went before connected with the old law, the old covenant, and the bringing of a better hope by which we draw nigh to God. As I mentioned already, it belongs to all of God's people. And then, of course, in verses twenty to twenty two, uh, the uh, Aaronic priesthood were not instituted by an oath. It was just a matter of descent with them. Had they been made priests by oath, that could never have been changed. But Christ is made priest by an oath. Um, inasmuch as not without an oath he was made priest, for those priests were made within an oath, but this with an oath by him that said unto him, the Lord swear and will not repent. Thou art a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek. By so much has Jesus been made the surety of a better covenant. That is a covenant that will never be succeeded by another. And then, of course, he's he's leading up to the blessings of the covenant that he'll deal with in chapters eight and chapters ten. And then verse twenty three, um and they truly were many priests, and the reason for the plurality of priests was they could not continue because they, they were not suffered to continue because by reason of death they died. Another took their place, but this one, because he continueth ever hath an untransferable priesthood. His priesthood cannot be transferred to another because he continueth ever. Mr. Rechy, in the margin here, ever is translated unto the age. Does that suggest an end? Is Christ's priesthood functioning in eternity? Well, there is a divided mind about this. I think that, eh, the idea of forever is as long as a priest is needed, you see? In contrast to, um, eh, forever in relation to, eh, a priesthood that was marked by succession and death. As long as we need a priest, we'll have a priest. There are those who feel that he will be a priest in eternity. One brother suggested last year that he'll be a priest and the leader of the praise. Some think, as, uh, Brother Bell thinks, that in administration in eternity he'll be a priest as well. But I incline to the thought that the idea of a priest forever is as long as a priest is needed. Well, that'll be forever, won't it? I mean. Well, I don't think we'll need a... Well, you see, I don't think he'll be a priest in eternity, because it's God with man, and he hands the kingdom over to God the Father and so on, you see? Yes, I bel- believe that he will be a priest forever in view of the fact that he will be leading the praise of his people forever and ever. Well, you remember what I said about that last year. That's right. Is the Lord Jesus a mediator forever? The mediator? Well, I reckon that the, the new covenant is more or less connected with the coming kingdom. I should like to ask one question, if you were covering the 28th verse. For the law maketh men a priest, which have infirmity, but the word of the oath, which was since the law, maketh a son who is consecrated forevermore. When was the word of the oath? The word of the oath is what you have in Psalm one hundred and ten. Thou art a priest forever. And I reckon that Christ was saluted in that way on resurrection ground. Yes. Thou art a priest forever, after the order of Melchizedek. But the oath was given before the law. No, I don't think so. But the word of the oath, which was since the law. The point is that the word of the, word of the oath came after the law, and therefore the law didn't rescind it. The law didn't set it aside.