Shem as Melchizedek

Long before Jesus was born Jewish tradition was that Melchizedek was Shem, God's priest who blessed Abraham in Genesis. Christianity is rather oblivious to this ancient tradition and some people see Melchizedek as pre-incarnate Christ but both can't be true and the Bible doesn't support the Jesus theory unless you really stretch the truth. Melchizedek was Shem to the Jewish people who have always had a written tradition AND an oral tradition (that eventually gets written down) so I see no reason to over rule the traditional teachings of the religion you are adopting as Christianity did Judaism because it is just not what they taught. Melchizedek was not Jesus. What Paul means when you read "High Priest forever in the order of Melchizedek" is that Jesus belonged to the same priestly order as Melchizedek. This probably includes Zadok High Priest of Solomon and eventually the Essene order of Zadikkim. James was his successor. But it started with Shem.

Shem is so revered in Judaism that his name means name AND is used as a substitution for YHWH, Ha-Shem is used several times in the Bible to mean god and God in the Hebrew tongue. In the tower of Babel story it reads in english
" Let us make a name for ourselves."

But the correct translation is "Let us make a (ha-shem) god for ourselves." , which was Nimrod. And the tower was a temple and not a tower that reached the heavens literally.

But Shem is almost a demi-god in Judaism and the Jews are not the only Semitic people. Arabs are also Semitic, and roughly 1/3 of the earth as Noah had 3 sons making us all descendants of one of the three, Ham and Japheth being the other 2.

He was God's High Priest Melchizedek, meaning King of Righteousness. He passed Abraham the torch so to speak.

a reply to: Mazzini

Long before Jesus was born Jewish tradition was that Melchizedek was Shem, God's priest who blessed Abraham in Genesis.

this is not Jewish tradition

a reply to: wisvol

Yes it is.

a reply to: Mazzini

Chazal commentary is not Jewish tradition

Also worth noting is that Melchizedek is a title, not a patronym

And that Jesus in the epislte to the Hebrews is given this title as well as several other biblical characters.

But Shem is almost a demi-god in Judaism

There are no demi-gods in Judaism.

a reply to: wisvol

www.hebrew4christians.com...

This is one link and the first one I clicked on but you just have to Google Shem Melchizedek and by the time you type the M in Melchizedek it will pop up and you will find out that you are incorrect.

Flat out saying saying something is untrue before you know is not a wise move.

a reply to: Mazzini

This is what I believe as well. I even think Shem/Melchizedek could be the author of the religios text of zoroastrianism.

It is also possible the three wise men (magi) from the east were followers of Zoaster.

Which would truly make Shem/Melchizedek a priest forever, as the 4000 plus year old Zoroastrian religion still has followers.

a reply to: wisvol
I said practically. l didn't say was. You are obviously fishing for errors.

Check out the link I put in a better one and it's working.

a reply to: Isurrender73

The modern day Zoroastrians known as Parsees claim Ibrahim Zeradust was Zoroaster/Abraham, that they are the same.

I've thought it through, I believe it.

a reply to: Mazzini

Your point of view is interesting to me, this is why I have responded.

Melchizedek is a title: many have worn it.

I am not fishing for errors, what I say is that in order to properly make sense of old texts, it is important to make distinctions that may at first seem negligible.

kudos for presenting your perception of them

a reply to: wisvol

I am with you on your last comment and add that Shem was the first " King of Righteousness " or Melchi Tzedek. Indeed a title.

Zadokite, Levite and Aaronic were, if I am not mistaken, the 3 priesthoods.

a reply to: Mazzini

They are three priesthoods, more are mentioned in the pentateuch, and interestingly enough are seen as compatible insomuch as they worship an indivisible creator god, no matter which name they assign it.

a reply to: Isurrender73

I also believe that Abraham converted the Chaldeans to Monotheism fromDaeva worship. Zoroaster did it in Persia, so I just connect the dots that Abraham traveled far and wide converting many and they were at the least contemporaries.

a reply to: Isurrender73

A Magi is what the Greeks called the priests of Zoroaster. So that's a definite with the Magi of the Gospels and a nod to the Persian Zoroastrian influence on both Judaism and Christianity. The Jews Qabalah is rooted in the Zend Avesta. Strayoshant was the Messiah in Zend and the concept coincidence with the time the Jews and Persians exchanged wisdom after the Babylonian captivity and subsequent liberation.

originally posted by: Mazzini
a reply to: Isurrender73

The modern day Zoroastrians known as Parsees claim Ibrahim Zeradust was Zoroaster/Abraham, that they are the same.

I've thought it through, I believe it.

The reason I differ in opinion is due to Hinduism. The root of Hinduism is Monotheism. As Brahman is the One God of all creation. Many have linked Abraham with Brahman, and I partially agree with this assessment.

In my opinion.

Noah is the High Priest responsible for telling the tell of Horus. Melchizedek was the High Priest of Zoroastrianism. Abraham the High Priest of Hinduism followed By Moses.

After Moses we have Buddha and Plato, who I believe qualifies as a prophet. Jesus Christ followed and Mohammad gave us the final chapter.

That's what my studies have lead me to believe. I believe that also explains why Ghandi, many others and myself believe all the Scriptures tell the same story. Because they are the same.

a reply to: Isurrender73

I agree that Abraham was A Brahman as I have made the connection myself but I think he came from northern India through Persia as Ibrahim/Zoroaster and ended up among the Chaldeans, a priest caste that also originated in India and then ended up in Canaan where he met Melchizedek High Priest of El Elyon.

"God" means completion. Wholeness in balance. Which is why it is linked to the cycles which are necessary for time to exist.

"Tower" is a figure. Body.

"Temple" is the mind.

"Come, let us name our own completion".

It was a attempt by 're-legion' to dictate the terms of the cycles in their favour.

They thought that if they could mask the "personal empowerment" of the cycles true intended 'completion', they could will it to themselves.

To make themselves God.

Whether or not Judaism stole their claim before Christianity is a pointless arguement. They both stole it, and raped it of all its true meaning.

Neither shall ever know 'completion' (God), because neither are OF GOD! Their composition is intended to DIVIDE from the true nature of 'God' (Completion) IN SELF! And can therefore never be anything more than a hurdle on the path towards true completion.

Therefore, anyone who subscribes to religion, has lost without a fight.

That's why they refer to you all as sheep. And not the shepherd.

The lost. Who are happy to stay lost.

Signed,

Samual Sabbas.

S.G.S.K

a reply to: IamSandSHEisB

Do you think you are a prophet? We know religion is a corrupt mess. The fun part is peeling away the lies and getting to the truth. What is better than knowing more about the Bible than the people who profess to follow it? I get satisfaction from it.

You sound like you're hoping for the Apocalypse but I can tell you it has already begun. The un veiling is what Apocalypse means and the Dead Sea Scrolls, Gnostic Gospels and codices found in within the same decade and both revealing more about Christianity than we ever knew before is a sign that the veil has been lifted for anyone who asks the Holy Spirit with a pure heart.

a reply to: Mazzini

Apocalypse means (exactly): "The drapery falls".

Not a prophet.

Unwilling God.

I don't want to be. I'm being 'forced' to 'Completion'!