Question on Abraham and Melchizedek

By BDP | February 6, 2009
I got this question from Kenneth B.
I wanted to ask for clarification on a couple of points, and
since I didn't print out a copy of your book I'll just wing it
and hope you can recall the page number. :-) 

1. When Abram returned after the slaughter of the five kings,
do you really think that he stole the plunder? It would appear
to me that it was simply that, plunder. It wasn't ill gotten
gain or theft but more in line with restitution and subjugation
of his enemies. I don't recall anywhere where the scripture
refers to the spoils as theft?

2. One other point; In the references to Melchizedek on about
page 46 or so, you maintain that the when the change of the Law
became necessary that it was between Melchizedek and Jesus, I
believe the change of the priesthood refers not to Melchizedek
but to Aaron the High Priest, who of course was under the Old
Law. Melchizedek wasn't under the Law, Aaron was. When Christ
became our Priest in the New Covenant, the law must then be
changed.
This entry was posted in Author Q & A and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.

One Comment

  1. BDP
    Posted February 6, 2009 at 3:03 AM | Permalink

    Kenneth,

    Thank you for your interest in the book and your kind words.

    I’ll try to answer your questions. I looked in three different English dictionaries and “plunder” was always defined using a form of the word “steal”. However, I see your point. I’m sorry if my particular choice of words tripped you up.

    The second question you have is harder to answer because I had not intended to convey that the priesthood that changed was the one of Melchizedek going to the one of Jesus. I re-read that chapter and I could not find where you might have gotten the wrong impression. Again, I apologize for the confusion. As I see it, we have 2 recorded changes in the priesthood. The first change was going from the priesthood of Melchizedek to the priesthood of Aaron. The second change was going from the priesthood of Aaron back to the priesthood of Melchizedek and of Jesus. I regard Jesus as being High Priest in the order of Melchizedek, so there cannot be a change from the priesthood of Melchizedek to the priesthood of Jesus. They are one and the same.

    I hope this clarifies things. If you give me more precise quotations, I’ll look again and see if a revision is necessary.

    Keep the faith, Spread the word!

    BDP