Gard Granerød, «Melchizedek in Hebrews 7», Vol. 90 (2009) 188-202
Hebrews has more to say about Melchizedek than what is said about him in LXX Ps 109,4 (perhaps also MT Ps 110,4) and Genesis 14. Heb 7,3 says that Melchizedek is “without father, without mother, without genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life” and that “he remains a priest forever”. I discuss where the author gets this information from. Methodologically, priority should be given to an explanation made on the basis of the hermeneutical techniques that the author uses elsewhere. I argue that the surplus information found in Heb 7,3.8 stems from arguments made from silence. The author explicitly makes arguments from silence in Heb 7,14.20.
Melchizedek in Hebrews 7 199
the literature from Qumran. In 4Q401 (Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice),
fragment 11, line 3 has been restored to read “[… Melchi]zedek, priest
in the assem[bly of God …]â€. Moreover, it is commonly assumed that
Melchizedek is present in 4Q543-548 (4QVisions of Amrama-f) as the
antithesis to Melchireshaâ€, “king of iniquityâ€, who appears as the spirit
of darkness in these very fragmentary texts (cf. 4Q544 2,3-5) (30).
Except for the Melchizedek references evidently found in 11QMelch
and possibly also in the Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice and 4QVisions
of Amrama-f, no other pre-Christian references to a figure called
Melchizedek are found — if we set aside Genesis 14 and Psalm 110, as
well as the Genesis Apocryphon, from Qumran (1QapGen), which I do
not comment upon here.
Palaeographically, 11QMelch is datable to the early first century
CE or more likely to the late first century BCE (31). The question
therefore arises: is the author of Hebrews somehow dependent upon
the Melchizedek document/ documents from Qumran? The
fragmentary nature of the Melchizedek document and the other texts of
course makes it difficult to analyse them. Nevertheless, in light of what
actually is possible to say about them — and in particular 11QMelch
— the most likely answer is in my view no.
The notion found in Hebrews that Melchizedek is “without father,
without mother, without genealogy, having neither beginning of days
nor end of life†(7,3) and that it is “testified that he lives†(7,8) does not
contradict what is actually said about Melchizedek in 11QMelch. But
although Melchizedek probably is a priest in the Qumran docu-
ments(32), the function of the Melchizedek of 11QMelch is quite
different from that of the Melchizedek found in Hebrews. In the
Melchizedek document from Qumran he has an eschatological, clearly
redemptive role. In contrast, in Hebrews he above all functions as the
antitype of Christ. In the latter text he has no independent significance
for salvation.
Therefore, it does not seem that the author of Hebrews makes any
clear allusions to the Melchizedek speculations evident in the Qumran
(30) Dated to the second century BCE, cf. KOBELSKI, Melchizedek and
Melchireπa¿, 25. — A figure called Mechiresha†also occurs in 4Q280 (Curses
against Melchiresha) 1,2, dated to the first half of the first century BCE, cf.
KOBELSKI, Melchizedek and Melchireπa¿, 37.
(31) KOBELSKI, Melchizedek and Melchireπa¿, 3.
(32) Despite the lack of such a characterization except for the restored one
found in 4Q401 11,3.