My God and My Country

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 

(see also Hebrews 7:26)

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.