Genesis 14 and Psalm 110

[Matthias]

“Genesis 14 and Psalm 110 are connected in Israel’s history through the theme of a human agent defeating kings in battle. …

Genesis 14 and Psalm 110 are among a unique group of Old Testament texts that involve a leader who is a descendant of Abraham (through Judah), and who gains a victory over kings with the help of Yahweh. This group includes Genesis 14, Judges 1:1-20, 2 Samuel 10:1-19, Isaiah 41:1-12, Psalm 2:1-10, and Psalm 110:1-7. When a priestly function is included in the story, the number of similar texts drops to Genesis 14 and Psalm 110, thus showing the importance of the theme of sacral kingship in connecting these two passages. Yet even without the sacral kingship theme, the theme of ‘victory over kings’ still connects the texts in a unique group of six texts within the canon.”

(Steven J. Paul, “Yahweh and His Human Agent - Victory over Kings”)

Yahweh and His Human Agent -- Victory over Kings

This paper compares all of the passages in the Hebrew Bible where Yahweh and his human agent gain victory in battle over kings.

www.academia.edu

 

[Mr E]

“Genesis 14 and Psalm 110 are connected in Israel’s history through the theme of a human agent defeating kings in battle. …

Genesis 14 and Psalm 110 are among a unique group of Old Testament texts that involve a leader who is a descendant of Abraham (through Judah), and who gains a victory over kings with the help of Yahweh. This group includes Genesis 14, Judges 1:1-20, 2 Samuel 10:1-19, Isaiah 41:1-12, Psalm 2:1-10, and Psalm 110:1-7. When a priestly function is included in the story, the number of similar texts drops to Genesis 14 and Psalm 110, thus showing the importance of the theme of sacral kingship in connecting these two passages. Yet even without the sacral kingship theme, the theme of ‘victory over kings’ still connects the texts in a unique group of six texts within the canon.”

(Steven J. Paul, “Yahweh and His Human Agent - Victory over Kings”)

Yahweh and His Human Agent -- Victory over Kings

This paper compares all of the passages in the Hebrew Bible where Yahweh and his human agent gain victory in battle over kings.

www.academia.edu

In what way is Genesis 14 about "a descendant of Abraham through Judah?" Isn't it a story about Abram, before he had any descendants at all?

 

[Matthias]

In what way is Genesis 14 about "a descendant of Abraham through Judah?" Isn't it a story about Abram, before he had any descendants at all?

The $0.64 question, and the right one to ask.

Earlier in the Appendix Pahl states, “We observe that Genesis 14 and Psalm 110 stand together in a list of only six texts where David and his ancestors or descendants are victorious over kings. The two texts are linked by comparison of the sacral kingship of David to the sacral kingship of ‘Melchi-Zedek’ and through David’s victory over kings in 2 Samuel 10.” See also Table 4:3 in the linked paper.

The human agent priest/king descendant of David is Jesus of Nazareth. I don’t have an issue with that.

The human agent priest/king ancestor of David is Melchi-Zedek. I have an issue with that. Scripture doesn’t provide ancestry/descendant data for Melchi-Zedek.

The argument hinges on speculation (i.e. Melchi-Zedek being an ancestor of David.)

For me, that spoils an otherwise good argument concerning the connection between human agency and priest/king functionality. Remove the speculation about Melchi-Zedek‘s genealogy and retain the connection between agency and priest/king typology would be my recommendation to Pahl.

 

[Matthias]

Trying to think of ways to save Pahl‘s argument.

Attempt: Melchi-Zedek is an ancestor of David not by direct line but in the general sense that all human beings are indirectly related through decent from Adam.

Does this work?

 

[Matthias]

Attempt: Jesus is Melchi-Zedek.*

Jesus is the descendent of David. Jesus is Melchi-Zedek. Jesus is related to David. Melchi-Zedek is older than David. Jesus, therefore, is both David’s ancestor and David’s descendant.

Does this work?

*I’m not certain but I suspect that this is what Pahl has, or may have, in mind.

 

[Matthias]

The $0.64 question, and the right one to ask.

Earlier in the Appendix Pahl states, “We observe that Genesis 14 and Psalm 110 stand together in a list of only six texts where David and his ancestors or descendants are victorious over kings. The two texts are linked by comparison of the sacral kingship of David to the sacral kingship of ‘Melchi-Zedek’ and through David’s victory over kings in 2 Samuel 10.” See also Table 4:3 in the linked paper.

The human agent priest/king descendant of David is Jesus of Nazareth. I don’t have an issue with that.

The human agent priest/king ancestor of David is Melchi-Zedek. I have an issue with that. Scripture doesn’t provide ancestry/descendant data for Melchi-Zedek.

The argument hinges on speculation (i.e. Melchi-Zedek being an ancestor of David.)

For me, that spoils an otherwise good argument concerning the connection between human agency and priest/king functionality. Remove the speculation about Melchi-Zedek‘s genealogy and retain the connection between agency and priest/king typology would be my recommendation to Pahl.

“The book of Hebrews doesn’t say that Melchizedek was literally the Son of God making a cameo appearance. Rather, the author drew parallels between the two figures, suggesting that what Melchizedek was literarily, Jesus Christ is literally.

(Michael J. Svigel, “Melchizedek as a Type of Christ”)

Melchizedek as a Type of Christ

Melchizedek, the king of Salem mentioned in Genesis 14, was a mysterious figure. This article draws parallels between him and another King.

insight.org

 

[Mr E]

Trying to think of ways to save Pahl‘s argument.

Attempt: Melchi-Zedek is an ancestor of David not by direct line but in the general sense that all human beings are indirectly related through decent from Adam.

Does this work?

I don’t think it’s salvageable. Neither do I think it’s important. In fact I think it misses the point and tries too hard to make a point that is pointless.

 

[Mr E]

Attempt: Jesus is Melchi-Zedek.*

Jesus is the descendent of David. Jesus is Melchi-Zedek. Jesus is related to David. Melchi-Zedek is older than David. Jesus, therefore, is both David’s ancestor and David’s descendant.

Does this work?

*I’m not certain but I suspect that this is what Pahl has, or may have, in mind.

Jesus was Jesus. Melchi-Zedek was Melchi-Zedek. John was John, yet in a certain manner -Jesus himself explained that John was Elijah.

You must be born again.

 

[Matthias]

I don’t think it’s salvageable. Neither do I think it’s important. In fact I think it misses the point and tries too hard to make a point that is pointless.

I think we disagree. Appreciate your contribution though.

 

[Mr E]

Attempt: Jesus is Melchi-Zedek.*

Jesus is the descendent of David. Jesus is Melchi-Zedek. Jesus is related to David. Melchi-Zedek is older than David. Jesus, therefore, is both David’s ancestor and David’s descendant.

Does this work?

*I’m not certain but I suspect that this is what Pahl has, or may have, in mind.

Closer. Jesus is a Christ..... an anointed one. -In the line of (a descendant of) Mechizadek. Melchizadek is a Christ.

The lineage is from Christ to Christ, not from Melchizadek to Jesus.