- Topic
Melchizedek the Priest
7 This Melchizedek was king of Salem and priest of God Most High. He met Abraham returning from the defeat of the kings and blessed him, 2 and Abraham gave him a tenth of everything. First, the name Melchizedek means “king of righteousness”; then also, “king of Salem” means “king of peace.” 3 Without father or mother, without genealogy, without beginning of days or end of life, resembling the Son of God, he remains a priest forever.
So this is one of the verses from About Melchizedek. Allegedly Ahn fits the criteria for these three items:
1) Without father or mother
2) without genealogy
3) without beginning of days or end of life
LOL. I can imagine sending them with messages. I used to be worried about the things they might report on me. Throughout my entire time in I couldn’t stop watching reality tv and playing video games. I was thinking they probably tell on me all the time
Lol. That goes to show that if you fake it you make it with deception. We went in seeking change only to come out oblivious.
The sad thing is I went in knowing a few things I know now, yet they tried soooooo hard to convince me otherwise. It worked for a bit then reality set and friends started eliminating themselves saying I was odd and naive. I actually was, Disturbed.
Yeah I lost some friends too. My best friend searched the web when I told her I joined the church. She called me the next day & blurted out the church was a cult. At the time I didn’t believe it because everything was shown to me through the bible. Looking back I wonder if she was ever my friend because she left me and never looked back. Because of her I understand the true value of friendship. My real friends stuck it out, along with my family.
Two angels?
Also i heard noone was there when he died
@Simon, huh?
Hal wrote:
emil wrote:
^ Hal I don't know what exactly you are talking about. All I can see about a tithe in the scripture you have provided is in verse 22. In that verse Jacob is promising a tithe to God.
Its refutation that Melech Zedek is in someway or shape any sort of human deity or the precursor to Yeshua…
You first said God was offering Jacob a tithe in that passage. In any case I don't see how the passge refutes what you say it does.
Hal this topic is to debunk the wmscog claim about Melchizedek. You muddy the waters against Christianity in general in these forums and you are not helping with the goal of examining the wmscog. If you want to examine Christianity, it would be better to start a topic about it.
Hal might not be Christian though.
I know that and that is why he constantly challenges Christianity. I have the greatest respect for Hal but I do not want to get into any discussion about Christianity with him in this forum because it diverts my attention from the main goal, which is to examine the wmscog. Some of Hal's posts are very helpful to me but some of his posts tend to divert the topic and allow those from the other side to escape providing answers.
Makes sense Emil.
Placebo. Lol.
What didn’t you understand Sarah
Disturbed wrote:
I agree Sarah2013…I felt like it was told to me after I saw it in the video for the first time. I wonder if all those videos had subliminal messages to help with the brainwashing. I personally watched a lot of videos.
WOW! I never thought of it that way.. My group leader in Seattle kept trying to convince us to watch a video rather than do a bible study. I watched more videos in the short months I spent in Seattle than I did in the year I spent at Santee.
In regards to Melchizedek mentioned in Genesis 14: 17-20, we were taught at WMSCOG that he was a gentile king in 1920BC. He was the only High Priest giving blessings with the bread and wine. Other High Priests blessed with the blood of an animal sacrifice.
Is this correct or incorrect?
renita.payno wrote:
Disturbed wrote:
I agree Sarah2013…I felt like it was told to me after I saw it in the video for the first time. I wonder if all those videos had subliminal messages to help with the brainwashing. I personally watched a lot of videos.
WOW! I never thought of it that way.. My group leader in Seattle kept trying to convince us to watch a video rather than do a bible study. I watched more videos in the short months I spent in Seattle than I did in the year I spent at Santee.
Lucky you cause that preaching was imperative.
@Hal – these things makes sense to those who believe in the NT and believe in Jesus. I am not trying to get you to change your mind about it. To each his own. We believe that Jesus is God and Paul was his apostle.
All Pharisees are traitors so leaving traitors isn’t a bad thing
You don't need to take any label of those you could just say you choose to follow Tanakh by your own understanding rather than pharisee (or any other you have a problem with)
Sarah2013 wrote:
Smurf wrote:
Freedfromreseda wrote:
To celebrate the death of Jesus has a very different meaning than celebrating the death of Ahn. We know Jesus died for our sins and for our salvation…what about Ahn?
Ahn died because… eeeeer to fulfil eeeeer prophecy..
You don't understand the love of Mother!!
There is no prphecy awarded that man to fulfill. Jesus has done his bit and it is finished. When the book of Revelation unfolds(which slowly is) we'll remember John's account of what he saw and not Ahang's account. In due time the truth shall prevail and that's the beauty of life.
The part about saying that there was no prophecy for that man to fulfill is a little misguided/misinformed i think, and that's fine. I just want to clear things up a bit. I wish my brother (or sister) would have explained the prophecy he or she speaks of, but it is understandable why they didn't, because it can get a little long winded.
He/She means that one of the characteristics of the Messiah is that he will be called the "Son of David" and he will reign on David's throne.
The "Son of David" part was fulfilled by Jesus Christ, because he had geneaology that traced back to David, so to speak.
What about Isaiah 9:7? This is the prophecy that speaks of David's throne.
"Of the greatness of his government and peace there will be no end. He will reign on David's throne and over his kingdom, establishing and upholding it with justice and righteousness from that time on and forever. The zeal of the LORD Almighty will accomplish this."
(If you start from verse 6, you will see that clearly the context of this verse is talking about the Messiah, because it referred to the child as Mighty God)
Let's now take into consideration where it says "He will reign on David's throne." Clearly, this is not literal language. The actual throne that David used to sit on was probably somewhere buried, or who knows where. The other literal interpretation we could give is that he is going to have an actual reign over David's kingdom. Clearly, this would have to be a wrong interpretation as well. Jesus certainly did not have a kingdom or a reign, he actually came from a very humble living.
Then, why does the verse say "he will reign on David's throne"?
Simple, there has to be symbolic meaning to it. Let's consider the life of King David, and maybe we can start to get an idea. Let's take a look at 2 Samuel 5:4.
"David was thirty years old when he became king, and he reigned forty years."
Now let's take a look at Luke 3:23
"Now Jesus himself was about thirty years old when he began his ministry."
So here we can see a similarity. Jesus may not have reigned over an actual kingdom, but he did have a ministry, which he began at the age of thirty. I don't think that's a coincidence (although it may be). In this context we can interpret the prophecy to have a symbolic meaning; "kingdom" in the prophecy is referring to a ministry in real life.
As a matter of fact, if we interpret the prophecy of Isaiah "he will reign on David's throne" to mean that the ministry of the Messiah will have certain symbolic similarities to David's reign, then we can find a good number of similarities, and the prophecy starts to make sense. (Simply put, I won't go into all the similarites because I don't know them all, and the only one I remember clearly is this one.)
According to 2 Samuel 5:4, David's reign over his kingdom lasted 40 years, but Jesus only preached for 3 years.
But the Messiah, had to have a "reign" of 40 years, a.k.a. a ministry of 40 years.
Remember, Hebrews 13:8 tells us
"Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever."
And Hebrews 9:28 tells us
"Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many; and he will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who are waiting for him."
So clearly we can see, that the same Messiah, that was on earth roughly 2000 years ago, will appear a second time.
This means that the remaining 37 years of ministry of the Messiah can be carried out by Christ's second appearance.
WMSCOG members interpret the death of Christ Ahnsahnghong Being baptized and started his ministry in 1948, and dying in 1985 as the fulfillment of this prophecy.
Of course, this ALONE cannot possibly show that Ahnsahnghong was the second appearance of the Messiah, but it is one clue.
The throne of David prophecy in Isaiah goes into more detail, but I won't get into that. My original intent was to provide support for my brother/sister's statement that Ahnsahnghong died to fulfill prophecy.
God bless you
emil wrote:
Hal wrote:
emil wrote:
^ Hal I don't know what exactly you are talking about. All I can see about a tithe in the scripture you have provided is in verse 22. In that verse Jacob is promising a tithe to God.
Its refutation that Melech Zedek is in someway or shape any sort of human deity or the precursor to Yeshua…
You first said God was offering Jacob a tithe in that passage. In any case I don't see how the passge refutes what you say it does.
Hal this topic is to debunk the wmscog claim about Melchizedek. You muddy the waters against Christianity in general in these forums and you are not helping with the goal of examining the wmscog. If you want to examine Christianity, it would be better to start a topic about it.
WMSCOG (and Christianity in general) state that Melech Zedek (there is no such beast as a "Melchizedek") is the forerunner to Yeshua based upon the writings of a traitor named Saul. I merely debunked the myth that Melech Zedek is any shape of a human deity based upon the passage that if Abraham gave a tithing to Melech Zedek who by any accounts is "G-d in the flesh". If Melech Zedek is G-D, then why the needed to tith back to Jacob (Israel)? Then why institute a tithing system later on back to G-d. Makes no sense.. If Melech Zedek was in any shape G-d, then as yeshua once stated "give to G-d what is G-d's, and give to Caesar, what is Caesar's".. WMSCOG and Christianity in generally make the ASSUMPTION that Melech Zedek was a human deity and the forerunner to Yeshua, Ahn, Krishna, Moon etc…
I don't think there is a claim made by Christianity that says Melech Zedek (Melchizedek) is G-d.
The passage I think you are referring to is Hebrews 7:1
"This Melchizedek was King of Salem and priest of God Most High. He met Abraham returning from the defeat of the kings and blessed him."
Hebrews is believed to have been written by Paul (or by his original name, Saul), so I think this is what you are referring to. Clearly the claim here is that Melek Zedek (Melchizedek) was a PRIEST of G-d.
As far as Melech Zedek being a forerunner to Yeshua (or Jesus), refer to Hebrews 5:6-10
It says that Jesus was designated to be a "high priest in the order of Melchizedek"
Now, the interpretation been givin by WMSCOG is that this means that there are certain similarities (symbolically) between the life of Melech Zedek and Yeshua. Nothing close to Melech Zedek being G-d.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.