-11-
The Priesthood of Jesus
Since the destruction of Herod's
temple in A.D. 70, Israel has been without a priesthood to offer sacrifices for
the last two thousand years. They have sought to rectify their dilemma with the
doctrine that God has replaced the sacrifices with prayer and good works. (The
fallacy of which has been demonstrated in chapter three.) But nowhere in the
Tanakh did God ever prophesy that prayer and good works would replace the
sacrifices offered by Aaron’s priesthood. To the contrary, the Tanakh
anticipates the succession of Aaron's priesthood by that of Melchizedek's. We
shall now examine Melchizedek's priesthood and its relationship to Jesus'
intercessory ministry.
Priest in the Order of
Melchizedek
In the Psalm of David, we find an
unquestionable prophecy about the Messiah and His priesthood:
The LORD saith unto my lord: 'Sit
thou at My right hand, Until I make thine enemies thy footstool.' The rod of thy
strength the LORD will send out of Zion: 'Rule thou in the midst of thine
enemies.' Thy people offer themselves willingly in the day of thy warfare; In
adornments of holiness, from the womb of the dawn, Thine is the dew of thy
youth. The LORD hath sworn, and will not repent: 'Thou art a priest forever
after the manner of Melchizedek.' The Lord at thy right hand doth crush kings in
the day of His wrath. He will judge among the nations; He filleth it with dead
bodies, He crusheth the head over a wide land (Psalm 110:1-6 The Holy Scriptures
According to the Masoretic Text).
Fulfilled in Jesus
No other prophecy from the Tanakh
is more often applied to Jesus by New Covenant writers than Psalm 110! (Sitting
at God's right hand: Acts 2:33-34; 7:55-56; Rom. 8:34; Eph. 1:20; Col. 3:1; Heb.
1:13; 8:1; 10:12; 12:2; 1 Peter 3:22. A priest in the order of Melchizedek: Heb.
5:6; 6:20; 7:17; 7:21). Based on this Psalm, Jesus posed a cogent argument to
the Pharisees who mistakenly believed that the Messiah was merely a human
descendant of David:
While the Pharisees were gathered
together, Jesus asked them, saying, "What do you think about the Messiah?
Whose Son is He?" They said to Him, "The Son of David." He said
to them, "How then does David in the Spirit call Him 'Lord,' saying: 'The
LORD said to my Lord, Sit at My right hand, till I make Your enemies Your
footstool?' If David then calls Him 'Lord,' how is He his Son?'" And no one
was able to answer Him a word...(Matt. 22:41-46).
This argument is just as
unanswerable today. If David calls Him his Master, how could the Messiah be just
a lineal descendant of David? To whom did David refer when he said, "The
Lord said to my Lord, sit at my right hand until I make Your enemies Your
footstool?" Who was David's Lord? No one! He was the anointed king of
Israel. There was no lord higher than himself.
The preexistence of Messiah is
powerfully conveyed by this prophecy. The Messiah who was to become David's
descendant according to the great Messianic prophecy found in Isaiah 11:1-10,
was first of all his Lord. Interestingly enough, the New Covenant expands on
this paradox calling Jesus "the root and offspring of David"
(Rev. 22:16). In other words, David owes his existence to the Messiah,
yet the Messiah owes his human descent to David. This point alone argues
powerfully for the New Covenant interpretation that the Messiah was to be
virgin-born. If the Messiah preexisted, then He could not be the mere by-product
of a physical union between man and woman.
Psalm 110 Non-Messianic?
To preempt Psalm 110's
fulfillment in Jesus, Judaism simply denies the Messianic nature of the
prophecy. Troki asserts that Psalm 110 is a Psalm written "to David,"
not a psalm of David (Troki, p. 192). Therefore David is the "Lord" (Adonai)
at God's right hand. Sigal follows Troki's interpretation (Sigal, p.104). In
contradiction to both, Levine claims that Abraham is the Lord at God's right
hand (Levine, p. 38).
But both of these positions are
wholly untenable for the following reasons:
(1) According to the context, The Lord who sits at God the
Father's right hand is King Messiah who is to rule the world. It is the Messiah
exclusively who is to sit at God's right hand "until" God makes his
enemies His footstool" (v. 1). Are either Abraham or David sitting at God's
right hand? Not even the anti-missionary will go that far. Feeling the weight of
this argument, Troki replies, "It appears to be a most unjustifiable
assertion for the Christian expounder of the Psalms to maintain that the phrase,
'To sit at the right hand of God,' applies to an actual son of God, for the
Bible contains numerous proofs that the metaphor, 'the right hand of God,'
solely signifies 'omnipotence of the Deity...'" (Troki, p. 194).
While it is true that the phrase
"right hand of God" is used metaphorically in Scripture to represent
God's power, Troki greatly errs in implying that this is the meaning of the
phrase in this passage. From the way "right hand of God" is used in
Psalm 110:1, it is obvious that it signifies a position close to God's right
side. The invitation to "sit down" at the Lord's "right
hand," of necessity, implies a physical position that is assumed by the one
invited. The fact that one could be physically at God's right or left hand is
affirmed by the prophet Micaiah when he said, "Hear thou therefore the word
of the Lord: I saw the Lord sitting on his throne, and all the host of heaven
standing by him on his right hand and on his left" (1 Ki. 22:19).
Obviously, these angelic hosts weren't standing by God's "omnipotence"
but rather beside His being. Every time the words "sit,"
"sat" or "stand" are used in connection with the right hand
of God or the right hand of a person, it always refers to a literal physical
presence. (See also 1Ki. 2:19).
Some might argue that "the
right hand of God" is a metaphor that represents being in a close
relationship with Him. But it would make no sense for God to say "be in a
close relationship with me until I make your enemies a footstool for your
feet" implying that the condition of being close spiritually to God is
suspended when it is time for the Messiah to rule His enemies.
(2) It is the Messiah,
exclusively, who is to sit at God's right hand "until" God says
"Rule thou in the midst of thine enemies"(v.2). Who else but the
Messiah is to "crush Kings in the day of his wrath" (v.5) and
"judge among the nations" (v.6)? According to Isaiah 2:1-4, a passage
regarded as Messianic by the anti-missionary, it is the Messiah who is to
"judge among the nations" and bring world peace (cf. Isaiah 11:1-4).
Certainly, no one expects David or Abraham to do so.
(3) Some of Judaism's own sages agree with the Messianic
interpretation of Psalm 110.
The Midrash Thillim (to Psalm 2:7): In the decree of the
writings it is written: 'The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand,
until I make thine enemies thy footstool' (Psalm 110:1), and it is also written:
'I saw in the night visions, and, behold, there came with the clouds of heaven
one like unto a son of man; and he came even to the Ancient of days, and he was
brought near before him. And there was given him dominion and glory, and a
kingdom, that all the people, nations, and languages should serve him’ (Daniel
7:13-14). In another comment, the verse is read: 'I will tell of the decree: The
Lord said unto me: Thou art My son...Ask of Me and I will give the nations for
thine inheritance, and the ends of the earth for thy possession’ (Psalm
2:7,8). R. Yukan said: 'All these goodly promises are in the decree of the King,
the King of Kings, who will fulfill them for the Lord Messiah...' (See also note
G Beresh, Rabbah; note Z Midrash Numbers; note D Sanhedrin (98a); note W Midrash
Tanchuma and Saadiah Gaon.)1
Interestingly, Jesus applied
Daniel 7:13 to Himself when he told the Sanhedrin: "...I say to you,
hereafter you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power, and
coming on the clouds of heaven." For this prophetic utterance He was
immediately given the death sentence and handed over to the Roman authorities
for crucifixion (Matt. 26:62-66).
A Priest Close To God
After declaring that Israel's
sins had separated them from God (Isa. 59:2), Isaiah stated, "And he saw
that there was no man, and wondered that there was no intercessor: therefore his
arm brought salvation unto him; and his righteousness, it sustained him" (Isa.
59:16). The Hebrew word "intercession" is "maphgeah." According to Isaiah 53, the Messiah,
after his death, was to make "intercession ("maphgeah") for the
transgressors" (53:12).(Intercession is a function of the priesthood.) He
also was to be high and exalted (52:13). According to Psalm 110:4, the Messiah,
while at God's right hand, was to be a priest in the order of Melchizedek. After
Jesus was "cut off,” then resurrected, He accepted God's invitation to
sit at His right hand:
And every priest stands
ministering daily and offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never
take away sins. But this Man, after He had offered one sacrifice for sins
forever, sat down at the right hand of God, from that time waiting till His
enemies are made His footstool. For by one offering He has perfected forever
those who are being sanctified (Heb. 10:11-14).
Once and for All Sacrifice
We learn from the prophet
Zechariah that the Messiah, called "the Branch," would take away the
sin of the people "in one day" (Zech. 3:8-10). Jesus, by one offering
on the day He was crucified, made "perfect forever" those who would
look to Him in faith. His death caused the curtain of the temple to be
supernaturally torn in two, signifying the abrogation of the sacrifices of the
law. "And Jesus cried out again with a loud voice, and yielded up His
spirit. Then, behold, the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to
bottom...(Matt. 27:50-51). Josephus confirms the New Testament testimony of the
miraculous dividing of the curtain:
This curtain was before this
generation entire, because the people were pious; but now it was grievous to
see, for it was suddenly rent from the top to the bottom, when they through
bribery delivered to death the benefactor of men and him who from his actions
was no man at the same Festival (Nisan) moreover, the eastern gate of the inner
(court of the) temple, which was of brass, and vastly heavy,...was seen to be
opened of its own accord" (Flavius Josephus, The Jewish War, Part V, Page
214f and Part VI, 5,3).2
The veil separated the Holy Place
from the Most Holy Place. Only the high priest could go behind the veil, but
never without blood to make atonement for himself and the people (Lev. 16). Why
then did God destroy this veil at Jesus' death? He was showing that the way into
God's presence was now opened up for us by the death and sacrifice of Jesus'
body.
Therefore, brethren, having
boldness to enter the Holiest by the blood of Jesus, by a new and living way
which He consecrated for us, through the veil, that is, His flesh, and having a
High Priest over the house of God, let us draw near with a true heart in full
assurance of faith...(Heb. 10:19-21).
As priest in the order of
Melchizedek and a mediator of a New Covenant (Heb. 9:15-16), Jesus was the one
designated by God to make permanent and lasting atonement for the people and to
intercede for them on a continuing basis:
We have such a High Priest, who
is seated at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens, a
Minister of the sanctuary and of the true tabernacle which the Lord erected, and
not man (Heb. 8:1-2).
Therefore He is also able to save
to the uttermost those who come to God through [Jesus], since He always lives to
make intercession for them (Heb. 7:25).
Aaron's Priesthood Done Away
From the pen of Rabbi David
Kimchi (1160-1235), we find a most fascinating quotation:
Talm. Bab. Treatise Yoma fol. 39,
col.2: 'Our Rabbis have handed down the tradition, that forty years before the
destruction of the Temple, the lot for the goat that was to be sacrificed on the
day of Atonement did not come out on the right side, neither did the scarlet
tongue (that used to be fastened between the horns of the scapegoat) turn white
(as, according to tradition, it used to do, to signify that the sins of the
people were forgiven), neither did the western lamp burn; the doors of the
sanctuary also opened of their own accord, until R. Johanan the son of Zacchai
reproved them. He said: 'O sanctuary, sanctuary! why dost thou trouble thyself?'3
Of course, Jesus was sacrificed
for the sins of Israel forty years before the destruction of Jerusalem. Once He
was sacrificed, the sacrifices of Aaron's priesthood were abrogated (abolished).
That is why God no longer accepted them. As Paul forcibly argues:
Therefore, if perfection were
through the Levitical priesthood (for under it the people received the law),
what further need was there that another priest should rise according to the
order of Melchizedek, and not be called according to the order of Aaron? For the
priesthood being changed, of necessity there is also a change of the law. For He
of whom these things are spoken belongs to another tribe, from which no man has
officiated at the altar. For it is evident that our Lord arose from Judah, of
which tribe Moses spoke nothing concerning priesthood. And it is yet far more
evident if, in the likeness of Melchizedek, there arises another priest who has
come, not according to the law of a fleshly commandment, but according to the
power of an endless life. For He testifies: 'You are a priest forever according
to the order of Melchizedek' (Heb. 7:11-17).