Israel's Monarchy & The Melchizedek Priesthood

[David T]

Somewhat related to the Israelite Kings = Gods thread, but taken down a notch:

Psalm 110:4

The Lord hath sworn, and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek.

It's known that 'King' is, in different degrees of authority, a Priesthood Office. How much did this extend to the Israelite kings? Is it possible that kings properly and duly appointed and anointed by proper Authority had this Melchizedekian (the Priest-King) priesthood, without having attendant Keys bestowed upon them? If so, what was the extent of their authority, of this Priesthood Office?

[e=mc2]

Somewhat related to the Israelite Kings = Gods thread, but taken down a notch:

Psalm 110:4

The Lord hath sworn, and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek.

It's known that 'King' is, in different degrees of authority, a Priesthood Office. How much did this extend to the Israelite kings? Is it possible that kings properly and duly appointed and anointed by proper Authority had this Melchizedekian (the Priest-King) priesthood, without having attendant Keys bestowed upon them? If so, what was the extent of their authority, of this Priesthood Office?

Good question! Now for a bad answer, I dunno. I am sure others here have some great insights into this though. The *first* thing that popped into my pointy little head was the theme of Melchizedek as one of the beni Elohim in the Dead Sea Scrolls 11Q Melchizedek fragments, if not actually described as one of the Elohim! I have to assume, bringing in LDS theology here, that the beni Elohim had the priesthood, else how could they be the Sons of God? I know, I know, the heavenly armies were also involved, stars, sun, etc. since this is the nature of Yahweh Sabaot, "The Lord of Hosts." I am not sure if there is much in ancient materials on the Priesthood of the Kings. I shall have to look into it a bit. By the time I get done, since I am so slow about it, others will have taken this thread into the dozens of pages, but I shall see what I can find.

[katherine the great]

Well, the Kings were annointed, but they mostly (with the exception of David and Solomon) seemed to operate as Kings and not spiritual leaders. I'm not as well read on this as some on the board, but my understanding is that they left the priestly duties to the Levites and the prophecies to the prophets. David seemed to even bow to the superior spiritual authority of the prophet Nathan. I suppose they could have functioned somewhat (in a very loose sense) like a Bishop by seeing to the temporal welfare of the people, but the Melchizedek Priesthood seems deal with the spiritual welfare of the church.

[David T]

Perhaps there was a separation of sorts - Sort of like Bishops today have two sets of authority - because they are a Bishop, they are a) President of the Priests/Aaronic Priesthood, and B ) are in control of Temporal Affairs. (Because they hold the office of Melchizedekian High Priest, they are also the presiding Priesthood Holder, responsible for and holding the keys for the Spiritual blessings as well.)

Perhaps the High Priests (of the Aaronic Order), while they held the responsibility over the Levites, and held the keys to the Aaronic Priesthood blessings and ordinances, did not hold the 'temporal affairs' responsibility, which was split with the King.

The Prophet would then hold the authority and keys of the blessings of the Melchizedek Priesthood.

You often hear of the three-fold offices, Prophet, Priest, King.

However, it has been stated that David had authorized wives given unto him by the prophet, and it's thought that those may have been Sealed to him by Nathan, or other of the Prophets. Would this then have necessitated an ordination to the Melchizedek Priesthood to David, and Solomon (sans keys)?

[Ron Beron]

Well, the Kings were annointed, but they mostly (with the exception of David and Solomon) seemed to operate as Kings and not spiritual leaders. I'm not as well read on this as some on the board, but my understanding is that they left the priestly duties to the Levites and the prophecies to the prophets. David seemed to even bow to the superior spiritual authority of the prophet Nathan. I suppose they could have functioned somewhat (in a very loose sense) like a Bishop by seeing to the temporal welfare of the people, but the Melchizedek Priesthood seems deal with the spiritual welfare of the church.

David B. et al has written extensively on this here... http://www.mormonapologetics.org/index.php...entry1208614202

I think the evidence shows many of the kings of Israel operated in a dual capacity as both secular king and ecclesiastical high priest. More so, the king was adopted by God to his son and messiah as in the case of David in Psalms 2. NET Bible commentary...

â??You are my son!â??

The Davidic king was viewed as Godâ??s â??sonâ? (see

2 Sam 7:14

;

Ps 89:26-27

). The idiom reflects ancient Near Eastern adoption language associated with covenants of grant, by which a lord would reward a faithful subject by elevating him to special status, referred to as â??sonship.â? Like a son, the faithful subject received an â??inheritance,â? viewed as an unconditional, eternal gift. Such gifts usually took the form of land and/or an enduring dynasty. See M. Weinfeld, â??The Covenant of Grant in the Old Testament and in the Ancient Near East,â?

JAOS

90 (1970): 184-203, for general discussion and some striking extra-biblical parallels.

[Ron Beron]

Perhaps there was a separation of sorts - Sort of like Bishops today have two sets of authority - because they are a Bishop, they are a) President of the Priests/Aaronic Priesthood, and B ) are in control of Temporal Affairs. (Because they hold the office of Melchizedekian High Priest, they are also the presiding Priesthood Holder, responsible for and holding the keys for the Spiritual blessings as well.)

Perhaps the High Priests (of the Aaronic Order), while they held the responsibility over the Levites, and held the keys to the Aaronic Priesthood blessings and ordinances, did not hold the 'temporal affairs' responsibility, which was split with the King.

The Prophet would then hold the authority and keys of the blessings of the Melchizedek Priesthood.

You often hear of the three-fold offices, Prophet, Priest, King.

However, it has been stated that David had authorized wives given unto him by the prophet, and it's thought that those may have been Sealed to him by Nathan, or other of the Prophets. Would this then have necessitated an ordination to the Melchizedek Priesthood to David, and Solomon (sans keys)?

The reference here is to a non-Levitical priest and ostensibly a priesthood who superintended Judah's cultic practices and had authority over the Levites. In I Chr. 15:11-15 David instructs the Levites to bring the Ark to Jerusalem while the king, himself joined in the procession, offered sacrifices, word the ephod and blessed the people (2 Sam 6:12-19). We can also surmise that this priesthood was generational because David's son, Solomon also conducted himself in eccliastical matters without the benefit of the Aaronic Priesthood. Some have suggested, notably, Robert Eisenman that this priesthood was extant at the time of 1st century Judaism and that both Jesus and James were holders of this priesthood.