No, in reading Gen 14:19, we find Melchizedek was just a cohen, priest. High Priest would be worded as Cohen Gadol in Hebrew, and it's not as in Zechariah 3:8.
Indeed, neither happened. Have you checked his lineage lately?
Ok, I'll add kid games too. Like what you've been doing here.
Rotfl... you're speaking of physical ailments. But, you're neither of your examples and your feelings are hurt. Poor baby 👶.
Is that what they serve at Waffle House or Motel 6?
Great 👍. Unsupported theology seems to be your thing.
Never been to a Motel 6 or read the Gideon. The NT on the other hand is unscriptural and unsupported by the Original Testament.
Correct. Yours is interior - hurt pride and feeling a boo boo.
Again, too bad about your feelings.
Wow! You know lots of useless stuff. It's part of your Encylopedia, huh.
Jesus is in the line of David and called a priest after the order of Mechizedek (an eternal priest). Jesus was the final sacrifice for sin. The levitical priesthood is no longer needed. The old covenant of Moses has been replaced. Jesus is the prophet Moses spoke of.
Oh, that's what happened to my favorite syrup!
LOL, one liners seems to be your thing.
Have you ever read the NT? The authors are frequently quoting scriptures to support their claims as is Jesus.
I'm sorry, if you've studied the lineage of Jesus in Matthew and Luke, they contradict each other, and in either case descent from David is absent since he was born from a virgin. Mothers don't pass tribal lineage, nor does adoption help the case.
This isn't true either as sacrifices continued after his death until 70 CE. Ezekiel 37 - 45 also show sin sacrifices during the future temple, of which the prince Messiah will present sin sacrifices for himself.
And yet Jeremiah 33:17-26 shows the Levitical priesthood and the Davidic king together with future sacrifices.
Wrong. Jeremiah 31:31-34 shows the same, renewed covenant written on the hearts and minds, not stone. It applies to the houses of Israel and Judah, not the church.
I doubt that. Moses never spoke of a god-man prophet, or one that fulfills ones obligation in the law.
If it's a easy setup, why not. If you can show me where a High Priest will come from outside of the Levitical Priesthood predicted by Tanakh, by all means please do. If not, then you have a false High Priesthood being described in the book of Hebrews. Stiggy Wiggy doesnt seem like he can defend his POV.
Yes, which is why I know the problems with it.
It seems that way, but upon examination, you'll find things taken out of context or just plain wrong.
And I'm not interested in your false gospel. Please show me your support for the High Priesthood for Jesus in Tanakh.
I've haven't been desperate enough to stay in one.
Who said the NT is scriptural? It doesn't replace anything as the Torah specifically calls out not to add or subtract from it, and the NT and Christianity are all about abrogation.
You're using your same lame lines. You got something else? Maybe something that shows some intelligent thought?
What sect of Judaism do you adhere to? Do you attend a synagogue weekly? Hebrews would be the book that speaks on the priesthood of Christ in the most detail.
I would likely use the same arguments and scriptures that the NT authors and Jesus use. I suppose you've heard them all before.
Are you still looking for your Messiah to come? It sounds like you are.
Where would I find proof about the lineage? Is tribal lineage the same as inheritance?
Jesus' priesthood is not after Aaron but Melkizedek and before the law of Moses was given.
As for sacrifices after his death and resurrection, that is to be expected since many Jews didn't accept Jesus as their Messiah. The Jewish religious leaders rejected him. As for the future temple in Ezekiel, I'll have to read it again.
I read this again also.
And Paul claims that passage for Jesus and his followers. It's the new covenant we have in Christ.
No, Moses thought the prophet would be someone like himself. I'm not sure what you are referring to in the bolded.
I'm orthodox, and attend a synagogue.
Yes, I've heard it all.
Yes. The important thing to remember is that Messiah is just a human being, anointed for his service, as are the kings and priests were. Nothing divine behind it.
Start with Numbers 1. Lineage is based on the father's house, not mother's. As to Abraham's promised seed, they would be as the stars of the sky, and not adopted, Genesis 15:2-5.
Yep, heard that before. Still, Melkitzedek wasn't a High Priest. And again, Psalm 110 speaks of David.
Even those that accepted him still brought sacrifices. The books of Acts shows this.
Right. There's no problem in that.
Ok. Read Jeremiah 33 as well.
Doesn't apply to the church. Jeremiah is clear on that.
That Jesus can't fulfill the law for anyone, or apply his righteousness to anyone. It doesn't work that way. Read Ezekiel 18.
Why not?
You don't have to be sorry. I believe it whether you do or not. Is the Tanakh referenced with chapters and verses similar to the OT?
You don't see a suffering Messiah coming first and then returning as a King in the OT scriptures? Jesus' disciples didn't believe the Messiah would suffer either.
Will your Messiah be as powerful in word and deed as Moses was? One last questions, have you looked at the prophecies from the OT that Jesus fulfilled? Do you not think that they support Jesus' claim to be the Messiah?
I asked the question about lineage vs inheritance because of Numbers 27:1-3.
The Tanakh is what Jews call what Christians incorrectly refer to as the OT. The grouping and ordering is different than Christian OT bibles, and some of the numbering of chapters and verses as well.
I don't see the need for one. Nor do I see what you do.
That's fine.
He should observant to the law and teach others the same, even gentiles.
Yep. I haven't seen any fulfilled. There are made-up prophecies that Christians think he fulfilled.
LOL, no I don't. You wouldn't be able to support his Davidic lineage to start.
Yep, so we have here a discussion on inheritance of land as it pertains to the tribes.