Melchizedek

In the book Thy Kingdom Comes we find on page 15:

The generations of Abraham were Shem, begat Arphaxad, Shelah, Eber, Peleg, Reu, Serug, Nahor, Terah, Abram who became Abraham. Amongst all the descendants of Shem, there were many that disagreed and even fought over who should be the rightful heir to the blessings of Shem. Shem was rightful king as elder of the family of man and, according to Bible chronologists, Shem was still around when Abraham expatriated from his father and the matrix of the City-State. Since Noah and his wife had died, Shem was a righteous king of peace. He was without Father and Mother and was possessor of all his rights. Shem was sui juris according to the family laws that preceded the codification by kings. Although he had produced many heirs, no one had been chosen. There was no one worthy of the honor and blessing of that royal office of the righteous King of Peace.

“And Melchizedek [righteous king] king of Salem [peace] brought forth bread and wine: and he [was] the priest of the most high God. And he blessed him, and said, Blessed [be] Abram of the most high God, possessor of heaven and earth:” Genesis 14:18-19

Modern Christians reading this have immediately concluded that the book is in error because that is not what they were taught saying "Equating Shem to the King of Salem and Melchizedek (pg 15) is completely false as the context quickly indicates."

The context of what?

It certainly contradicts what some churches are teaching today to promote their private interpretation of the Bible.

It is clear that it will be difficult to except the truth that is in the books if we balk at the idea that Melchizedek is Shem. Many, if not most, Jewish scholars before and after Christ believed Shem and Melchizedek were one in the same and wrote about them as the same individual.

The idea is not really un-scriptual nor in conflict with the scriptures but it is in conflict with Modern Christian interpretations of the scripture. It does not contradict the consensus nor the context of History.

It is only modern church goers and some seminary graduates who are unaware of the connection. In most of the copies of the Masoretic Hebrew text the word "malki zedek" is written as two words. It was the Septuagint that slid the two terms together. But even that does not make it a name as we think of it. Both the Epistle to the Hebrews and Josephus interpret the word "malki" as meaning "the king", and "tzedek" as meaning "righteous" or "just". It was a description of an office or status like the word Augustus which was not the name of Octavius but his title. Even the term Caesar was an office, not a name of the individuals who held the office.

Anyone who thinks the king's name just happened to be the Hebrew word for righteous King is being wishfully naive.

Just Google the words Melchizedek and Shem and you will see a wealth of information that corroborates the fact that it has always been well accepted and common knowledge that Shem and Melchizedek were the same. [1] [2] [3]

Even Wikipedia [4] along with stacks of ancient Hebrew texts from the Targums to the Talmud write of them being one in the same.

Parallels between this righteous King of peace and Jesus of Nazareth should be clear. Both Melchizedek and Jesus serve God as the the righteous firstborn son. Both were priest and king. Both were princes or kings of peace with Jesus actually the king of Jerusalem physically and spiritually. Jerusalem means double peace. Both brought offerings of bread and wine which we call the Eucharist which symbolized the benefits of God's kingdom on earth from generation to generation. They were able to feed the people because they both received tithes and offerings.

The priesthood of all these nations had the responsibility of welfare for society and there were always two types of welfare which defined the nature of religion and the methods used by the temples.

But if someone wants to read the books and only hear verification of what they have already accepted as true, they will be disappointed. The books by their nature are iconoclastic. Just as the Pharisees had misinterpreted the Torah, so also do many modern Christians misinterpret the truth expressed with in the Biblical texts.

Just as an example, Modern Churches tell their supporters that it is okay to desire benefits from governments and rulers who call themselves Benefactors but exercise authority one over the other. This is contrary to the fact that Jesus Christ instructed very clearly that it was not to be so with us and so did Moses.

As for what Romans 13 is actually saying there is a whole Book that deals with the Modern interpretations and confusions: The Higher Liberty. And the belief in the Constitution as something sacred and/or designed around biblical principles is shattered in the book Contracts, Covenants and Constitutions.

== Footnotes ==

About the author

• 

  Brother Gregory
  White Rock

Subscribe

HELP US at His Holy Church spread the word by SUBSCRIBING to many of our CHANNELS and the Network.
The more subscribers will give us more opportunity to reach out to others and build the network as Christ commanded.

Join the network.
Most important is to become a part of the Living Network which is not dependent upon the internet but seeks to form The bands of a free society.
You can do this by joining the local email group on the network and helping one another in a network of Tens.

His Holy Church - YouTube
https://www.youtube.com/user/hisholychurch

Bitchute channel will often include material that would be censored.
https://www.bitchute.com/channel/o6xa17ZTh2KG/

Rumble Channel gregory144
https://rumble.com/user/gregory144

To read more go to "His Holy Church" (HHC) https://www.hisholychurch.org/

Brother Gregory in the wilderness.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCJSw6O7_-vA4dweVpMPEXRA

About the author, Brother Gregory
https://hisholychurch.org/author.php

PreparingU - YouTube
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC9hTUK8R89ElcXVgUjWoOXQ

Facebook
https://www.facebook.com/HisHolyChurch