Sunday
Sermon
On Psalm 110:4 (Part 1)
By John Gill (Edited by RPW Sr.)
4
The Lord sware, and will not repent, Thou art a Priest forever, after
the order of Melchizedek
I
have in a late discourse shown you that Levi's Urim and Thummim are
to be found with Christ, and I shall now endeavour to make it appear,
that notwithstanding that, he is not a priest of Levi's order, but of
the order of Melcbizedek; there was a weakness and an imperfection in
Levi's priesthood, therefore it was necessary that another priest
should arise, not after his order, but after the order of another,
who is here mentioned in these words. This Psalm was not wrote by
Melcbizedek, as a some of the Jewish Rabbies have imagined •, for
he was a greater person than Abraham, he blessed him, and received
tithes from him, and therefore could not call him Lord : nor by
Eleazar, as others b of them have thought: for though it is true he
might call him his Lord, but then he could not assign unto him
session at the right hand of God ; nor say of him, that he had an
everlasting priesthood after the order of Melcbizedek : nor is it a
composure c of David's concerning Abraham, and that victory which he
obtained over the kings, for the fame reasons as before : nor was it
wrote by David, or by any of the d singers in his time concerning
himself, for David had nothing to do with the priesthood. It is true
David was the penman of it, as is manifest from the inscription, A
psalm of David; but then he did not write it concerning himself, but
concerning one that was greater than he, even one whom he
acknowledges to be his Lord for.if God never said to an angel, Sit
thou at my right hand, and certainly he would never say so to a meer
man.
The
person who is the subject of this psalm is the Messiah, as is
acknowledged by many of the ancient Jewish Rabbies; for the first
verse is evidently referred to the Messiah by Christ himself, in
Matthew
22:42 -43. where he puts this question to the scribes and
Pharisees, What think ye of Christ ? whose son is he ? They fay unto
him, How then doth David in spirit call him Lord? saying-, The Lord
said unto my Lord, and now as they were not able to answer this
question, so neither do they charge him with a misapplication of the
text; which, no doubt, they would have done, had they not been
convicted in their own consciences that it was right.
It
is also applied unto him by the apostle Peter, in Acts
2:39. and there the words of my text, in all those places where
they are cited in the epistle to the Hebrews, are manifestly referred
unto Christ. The three first verses of this Psalm speak of the glory
of Christ's kingdom, in his being placed at the Father's right hand,
in the subjection of his enemies to him, and in the mighty conquests
of his grace over his own people; and in this fourth verse there is
an easy transition from his kingly to his priestly office; both which
offices were eminently conjoined in him, of whose order he is here
said to be.
Three
things are here said of Christ's priesthood;
1
- That it is after the order of Melchizedek.
2
- That it is an everlasting one
3
- That its stability and firmness is in the immutable and
unrepeatable oath of God. Each of these shall be considered in their
order
Number
One
Christ
is a priest after the order of Melchizedek: And in speaking to this,
it will be necessary, 1st, To give you some account, who and what
Melchizedek was; How Christ may be said to be a priest after the
order of Melchizedek: In treating of the former, I suppose that I
shall gratify the curiosity of some; and in considering the latter, I
hope to bring out something, for the edification of others.
Let
us consider who and what Melchizedek was. The first mention that is
made of him, is in Genesis
14:18. And Melchizedek king of Salem brought forth bread and
wine : and he was the priest of the most high God. His name, by
interpretation, is, King of righteousness; and it is very probable
that he was called so; because that he was a king who reigned in
righteousness, and executed justice in his realm; as he does, of whom
he was a glorious type. In, we find that there was a king in
Jerusalem, which is supposed to be the same with Salem, whose name
was Adonizedek ; which is, by interpretation, Lord of righteousness
a name of much the fame signification with this, and perhaps it was a
common name of the kings of this place. Even as Abimelech was a
common common name of the kings of Gerar, and Pbaraob of the kings of
Egypt. Now this inquiry of ours consists of two parts, firstly Who he
was and what he was.
Let
us consider then, who he was; there has been a variety of opinions
concerning him, which may be reduced to these two heads. First such
who have thought him to be more than a man and second, such who have
thought him to be but a mere man.
Now,
of those who have thought him to be more than a man, some have
imagined that he was an angel, which appeared in a human form to
Abraham: this was the opinion of Origen ; which, though not approved
of by a learned author, yet is preferred by him to that which Jerome,
and many others, both of the ancient and modern writers, have
embraced; of which hereafter. That angels have appeared in a human
form, is undeniable; those who appeared to Abraham in the plains of
Mamre, Genesis 27. and are there called men, are in Genesis 19 called
angels. However we never read of angels being priests, or of this
office being ascribed to them ; for every priest is taken from among
men, and not from among angels.
Some
have thought him to be of the posterity of Canaan, the son of Ham:
that he was a king in Salem, in the land of Canaan: that he was a man
of great piety and knowledge,, whom the Lord had remarkably raised up
in that corrupt generation, and endued with the knowledge of him and
his true worship: his name seems to make it manifest that he was a
Canaanite, it being usual with those people to interpose God in
compounded names, as in Adonizedek, Abimelek, &c. as also the
place of his kingdom, Salem, which was a city in the land of »
Canaan: and likewise he is said to have a descent different from the
Levites and their ancestors: and this seems well to agree with the
design of the author of the epistle to the Hebrews, to cut off all
boasting from the Jewish nation concerning the law of Moses, and
priesthood of Levi; as also to magnify the grace of Christ among the
Gentiles. Many, both ancient and later divines, have been of this
opinion.
And
still Others who think him to be a meer man, of whose genealogy the
scripture is silent, on purpose that he might be as fit a type of
Christ as the state of a meer man would allow of, not only think it
in vain, but sinful to inquire who he was; and I must confess, we
ought not to be too nice in our disquisitions, nor too positive in
our determinations in this affair; but I cannot feel that the last
opinion which I have mentioned breaks in upon this; which, at
present, I am most inclined to embrace.
Which
now brings us to another question upon which we may ponder and
speculate, that is to say, What he was? First we are told in Genesis
14:18. that he was king of Salem; which, according to some, is
the same place which afterwards was called Jerusalem : so all the
three Targums upon the place carry it: and we find that Jerusalem is
called by this name in David's time. Second in Salem also is his
tabernacle; though others think that it was Shalem, a city of the
Shechemites, in the Land of Canaan, mentioned in Genesis
33:18. which by another name was called Shechem, and afterwards
Salim; near to which John was baptizing, John
3:23. and here Jerome says, in his time, was shown the palace of
Melchizedek ; the magnificence of which was manifest by its ruins:
but this could not be true, for this city was beat down and sowed
with fah by Abimelek, Judges
9:45. and I am most inclined to think that it was Jerusalem of
which Melchizedek was king; who herein was a glorious type of Christ,
who was constituted king over Zion, and in this very city, as our
great high priest, offered up himself a sacrifice of a sweet smelling
savour to God.
He
is also said to be a priest of the most high God, (Genesis
14:19-20) one that was called by God to that office, was employed
in the service of God ; and by this tide distinguished from the
priests of idols What his sacrifices were, we are not told j but no
doubt they were such, which other priests offered who were so by
divine appointment: and certain it is, that the bread and wine which
he brought out to Abraham ; were not his sacrifice for he did not do
that as a priest, but as a king, out of his royal and princely
bounty, to refresh Abraham and his weary soldiers ; as will be
hereafter shown. So that Melchizedek was both a King and a Priest;
instances of which indeed we have among the heathens and perhaps they
borrowed or rather stole the practice from this instance: yet we find
this was not allowed among the Jews; the priesthood belonged to one
tribe, and the kingdom to another : neither David, nor any of his
posterity, were allowed the exercise of both offices, till the
Messiah came, who was prefigured herein by Melchizedek.
So
we may now answer the questions who and what, that is to say he was
endued by God with piety and knowledge, and was both king of Salem,
that is, Jerusalem, and priest of the most high God, and herein a
glorious type of Christ Jesus.