Technische verwerking bevestigt geen inhoudelijke beoordeling of toestemming voor openbare publicatie.
Versie ecd6ae7b7053794d4d23714effb5e8733640030b961da054c247ff554c4195c7
{"author":null,"canonical_references":[],"database_sha256":"8cfbe7284c6936871d57c02dc6aa63ebbdfd4722422d539dd9f716e46e91112e","date_end":null,"date_start":null,"edition_year":null,"id":"sermonindex-ecf-6702","native_reference":{"book_number":650,"chapter_from":7,"chapter_to":7,"system":"MyBible module coordinates (mapping unverified)","verse_from":4,"verse_to":4},"public_import_allowed":false,"record_kind":"verse-keyed-module-record","review_required":["English edition and exact text","author/work attribution","dating","verse mapping and citation kind","reuse and attribution","split author quotations and deduplicate"],"review_status":"unreviewed","source_html":"<p><b>Ephrem the Syrian</b>: This Melchizedek is Shem, who became a king due to his greatness; he was the head of fourteen nations. In addition, he was a priest. He received this from Noah, his father, through the rights of succession. Shem lived not only to the time of Abraham, as Scripture says, but even to the time of Jacob and Esau, the grandsons of Abraham. It was to him that Rebekah went to ask and was told, \"Two nations are in your womb, and the elder shall serve the younger.\" Rebekah would not have bypassed her husband, who had been delivered at the high place, or her father-in-law, to whom revelations of the divinity came continually, and gone straight to ask Melchizedek unless she had learned of his greatness from Abraham or Abraham's son. Abraham would not have given him a tenth of everything unless he knew that Melchizedek was infinitely greater than himself. Would Rebekah have asked one of the Canaanites or one of the Sodomites? Would Abraham have given a tenth of his possessions to any one of these? One ought not even entertain such ideas.Because the length of Melchizedek's life extended to the time of Jacob and Esau, it has been stated, with much probability, that he was Shem. His father Noah was dwelling in the east, and Melchizedek was dwelling between two tribes, that is, between the sons of Ham and his own sons. Melchizedek was like a partition between the two, for he was afraid that the sons of Ham would turn his own sons to idolatry.<br/><i>— COMMENTARY ON Genesis 11.2.2-4</i></p><p><b>Eusebius of Caesarea</b>: So far, then, we have learned that they who are called \"Christs\" in the highest sense of the term are anointed by God, not by people, and anointed with the Holy Spirit, not with a prepared unguent.It is now time to see how the teaching of the Hebrews shows that the true Christ of God possesses a divine nature higher than humanity. Hear, therefore, David again, where he says that he knows an eternal priest of God and calls him his own Lord and confesses that he shares the throne of God Most High in the one hundred ninth psalm. … And note that David in this passage, being king of the whole Hebrew race and, in addition to his kingdom, adorned with the Holy Spirit, recognized that the being of whom he speaks, who was revealed to him in the Spirit, was so great and surpassingly glorious, that he called him his own Lord. He said, \"The Lord said to my Lord,\" for he knows him as eternal high priest, priest of the Most High God, and throned beside almighty God and his offspring. Now it was impossible for Jewish priests to be consecrated to the service of God without anointing, which is why it was usual to call them Christs. The Christ, then, mentioned in the psalm will also be a priest, for how could he have been witnessed to as priest unless he had previously been anointed? It is also said that he is made a priest forever. Now this would transcend human nature, for it is not in humanity to last forever, since our race is mortal and frail. Therefore, the priest of God described in this passage, who by the confirmation of an oath received a perpetual and limitless priesthood from God, was greater than human. \"For the Lord has sworn,\" he said, \"and will not change his mind, 'You are a priest after the order of Melchizedek.' \" … The object of the psalmist's prophecy, therefore, is presented distinctly as an eternal priest and Son of the Most High God, begotten by the Most High God and sharing the throne of his kingdom.…<br/>Thus I think I have clearly proved that the essential Christ was not man, but Son of God, honored with a seat on the right hand of his Father's Godhead, far greater not only than human and mortal nature, but greater also than every spiritual existence among things begotten.<br/><i>— PROOF OF THE GOSPEL 4.15</i></p><p><b>John Chrysostom</b>: \"Now consider\" (saith he) \"how great this man is to whom even the Patriarch Abraham gave the tenth of the spoils.\" Up to this point he has been applying the type: henceforward he boldly shows him Melchisedec to be more glorious than the Jewish realities. But if he who bears a type of Christ is so much better not merely than the priests, but even than the forefather himself of the priests, what should one say of the reality? Thou seest how super-abundantly he shows the superiority.</p><p>\"Now consider\" (he says) \"how great this man is to whom even the Patriarch Abraham gave a tenth out of the choice portions.\" Spoils taken in battle are called \"choice portions.\" And it cannot be said that he gave them to him as having a part in the war, because (he said) he met him \"returning from the slaughter of the kings,\" for he had staid at home (he means), yet Abraham gave him the first-fruits of his labors.<br/><i>— Homily on Hebrews 12</i></p><p><b>Oecumenius</b>: \"Consider how great this man was.\" Since he applied the type to the truth, he wishes to show that the type of Christ himself, namely Melchizedek, was greater than those priests among the Jews. And what do I say about the priests? He was indeed greater than the patriarch Abraham himself. If the type of Christ, he says, is greater than the patriarch himself, what then could anyone say about Christ? In one way, Abraham was greater than Melchizedek, but the type was the one who conquers. Thus, Cyril among the saints in the second book concerning On Adoration in Spirit and Truth…<br/>\"'to whom even the patriarch Abraham gave a tenth.' It is not to be said, he says, that he gave him tithes, as one who has shared in the war; (for this is why he said above, 'who met Abraham returning from the slaughter), but according to reverence and honor, just as giving first fruits. 'gave a tenth of the spoils.' From the loot and plunder. And if he is greater than the patriarch (and this is indicated by the giving of tithes), much more than those among the Jewish priests. For the patriarch is not brought forth without reason: but to show that if the patriarch, he says, has given, what is to be said about the priests?\"<br/><i>— The Pseudo-Oecumenian Catena on Hebrews</i></p>","source_html_sha256":"43e2ba4d8497b68f3c9618f8ffdee313e27e9d930c7de96dd7a92418f0c02a3b","source_module":"ECF","source_row_id":6702,"source_url":"https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/ecf/","text_sha256":"c9ed41d649db40a7f193226218ce10ca5dfb1bb8025460886f4ac2b35f6e7347","translator":null,"work":null}references: [] | work_id: | origin: existing-private-derived-record | source: https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/ecf/