Welcome to EBible Fellowship’s Bible study in the Book of Genesis. Tonight, is study #28 of Genesis, chapter 14 and we are continuing to look at Melchisedec and in our search of the Bible regarding the things it says about Melchisedec, we saw that he was tied to the name “Son of God.” Let me read that again as we begin, which goes along with all the things we have been reading about Jesus being declared the Son of God through the resurrection from the dead and Jesus being the first begotten of the dead. Speaking of Melchisedec, it says in the second part of the verse in Hebrews 7:3:

…but made like unto the Son of God…

Just as we saw in Psalm 89, where it said, “I will make him my firstborn,” Hebrews 7, verse 3 says He was “made like unto the Son of God.” He was not always. It was something that changed from an earlier “point,” but, of course, we are speaking of eternity past and none of us can comprehend how events unfold in eternity without time. We think chronologically and something happens in one moment and then we move to the next and the next, but eternity has no time. God is from everlasting and at some point in that eternal past, the Lord Jesus Christ, the Word, took upon Himself the sins of all those that were predestinated to become saved because God worked out the entire salvation program in one “enormous thought.” He knew everything that would happen in the history of the world from the first day to the last and God chose certain individuals He would save. He knew all the sins they would ever commit and He cast those sins upon The Word and The Word died for them as a Lamb, in a figure, and He was sacrificed on behalf of these people. He died and then He rose from the dead and upon His resurrection He was declared to be the Son. It was just as the Father said in the Gospel accounts when Jesus came up out of the water (after being baptized): “Behold, my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.” There is a very tender declaration toward the Son because it was at that point in eternity that He was the firstborn (from the dead) Son of God. Likewise, Melchisedec was “made like unto the Son of God,” because Melchisedec is Jesus.

He has an eternal priesthood because when Jesus as the Lamb died at the foundation of the world in eternity past, Christ offered up Himself as the Lamb and He also performed the role of the High Priest and initiated the priesthood of Melchisedec with that offering of atonement for the sins of the elect. It established the priesthood of Melchisedec, so He was “made like unto the Son of God.”

Let us go back to Colossians, chapter 1 where we find a passage that is a wonder to behold. It contains enormous amounts of information regarding His Father/Son relationship with the Lord Jesus Christ within the Godhead. It said in Colossians 1:15-17:

Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: And he is before all things…

Who is “before all things?” The firstborn is before all things, the Lord Jesus Christ. That is what verse 15 says when it declares Him the “firstborn of every creature” or the “firstborn of all creation.” Again, we read in Colossians 1:17:

And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.

Then we read in Colossians 1:18:

And he is the head of the body, the church…

This would be the eternal church that He saved through His offering of Himself on their behalf.

Then it says in Colossians 1:18:

who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.

Do you see how there is a strong emphasis from verses 15 through 18: 1) firstborn of all creation; 2) by Him were all things created (they came after Him); 3) He is before all things; 4) He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead. Again, God is emphasizing that Christ is the firstborn from the dead before the world was and before He created anything; He was firstborn.

We have no problem with that, do we? Those that have received understanding, by God’s grace, understand that Christ was slain as the Lamb from the foundation of the world, which would be before anything existed of this world. All these statements fit with that understanding. Once we have a correct understanding, we can see how He is the beginning, the first born from the dead.

Some people try to “fit a square peg in a round hole.” If you tell him it does not fit, he will run over there and distract you and say, “Well, what about this verse?” You answer the problem, but the individual just cannot give it up. He had gone over to the right and now he goes over to the left: “What about this? Do you see that this teaches what I am comfortable with and not your idea?” Of course, he did not answer the initial problem with his view, but he has no difficulty fleeing the problem to the right and now he’s on the left, but he has no difficulty because he is convinced in his own mind, because most of the churches and commentaries teach it, that it must be right.

But what about the Bible? In this day of apostasy, who cares what the churches teach after they have been abandoned by God? Who cares what their theologians think? And who cares what theologians have written when we know they have understood a great many things wrongly? How can that comfort these people? How can they rely on it and think it is proof when the Bible teaches against what they are trying to say? It should be no comfort when someone says, “My position has been the position of the church for almost two millenniums. The churches understand things my way.”

Well, okay, but we could give a long list of errors that the churches have taught for many centuries and have passed down their falsehoods from generation to generation. They have doctrines that are lies and they have become “other gospels.” How can that be a comfort when there is a longstanding tradition of understanding things their way? Is that not what the Jews comforted themselves with as they fell back on their Jewish traditions and what their elders taught? Did not that become a “high place” for national Israel as they lifted up and exalted their traditions above the Word of God and above the true prophets of JEHOVAH found in the Old Testament? Did not the churches follow suit and do the same thing by exalting men of renown famous in the congregations that had doctorates and were professors and wrote their heady theological books? How could they be wrong? You see, that is what brought the wrath of God down upon the New Testament churches and congregations. We are not to find comfort or refuge in what the churches teach. We are not to find comfort in a doctrine just because it has been adhered to for many centuries – that does not prove anything. We are to prove all things by the bible.

When information came that God was no longer requiring the sign of circumcision and the keeping of the Law of Moses because the Messiah had come, what did the Bereans do? They could have just written it off and said, “Look, we have had the tradition of Moses and the elders for many centuries and it has served us well. We are not going to depart from it now. We do not want to hear what you have to say.” That is not what the Bereans did and that is not why the Lord commended them. He said they were more noble than the men of Thessalonica because they “searched the Scriptures daily, whether those things be so.” When we search the Scriptures to see if something is so, that is a positive way of going to the Bible: “Let me give this an honest opportunity and let me check the Bible to see if it is true.” Instead, most people just say, “I do not believe it, so let me go to the Bible to find fault and to prove it is wrong.” That is a negative approach to searching the Scriptures when someone has a preconceived intention and their desire is to find a certain conclusion. Oftentimes, God will permit them to find the conclusion they seek rather than the truth which God reveals to His people as He brings His people with a more positive and open mindset toward searching the Bible: “What does the Bible say? What does God say?” When we allow the Bible to teach us, we are allowing God to determine His own doctrine, the doctrine of Christ and not the doctrine of the churches. It is not the doctrine of Reformers or other theologians. It is not the doctrine of man, but it is the doctrine of Christ. And it belongs to Him, so if He wanted to seal something up for many centuries to reveal it at the time of the end, then, very well, it is His good pleasure to do. That is exactly what He has done.

Again, notice that it says next in Colossians 1:18:

…who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.

He must have the preeminence in all things. That is exactly what we have been saying when we understand that He was the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world. That was the “beginning” point and then creation came after that. The declaration of Him being made the Son came after that and everything followed that grand and glorious act by the Lord Jesus Christ at the foundation of the world when He died and rose again, the firstborn from the dead.

First, it is telling us He was dead, but He came “from” the dead and that means He resurrected and in this resurrection from death He received preeminence in all things.

What does the word “preeminence” mean? It is a Greek word, Strong’s #4409. I would pronounce it “prote-yoo-o” and it is only found in this verse. This is the only place “prote-yoo-o” is found in the Bible, but it is a word that comes from another Greek word, Strong’s #4413, and that I would pronounce that word “pro-tos” and “pro-tos” is used several times; it is the word that we get our English word “prototype” from and, as you know, a “prototype” is the original. It is the “first” one, whether it be the original car or the original computer, and so forth. It is the first of its kind. For instance, “pro-tos,” Strong’s #4413, is the word we read in 1Timothy 2:13:

For Adam was first formed, then Eve.

He was the first formed. Was there any other man created before Adam? No. He was the first one, was he not? He was the original man God created and placed upon the earth. Adam was first.

This same Greek word is also found in Revelation 1:11:

I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last…

This is Jesus speaking and He is the “first.” He is the “pro-tos” and that is what Colossians is saying as it calls Him the firstborn of all creation. He is before all things. He is the “beginning” and the firstborn from the dead and that is because in all things He must have the preeminence. Do you see how being the firstborn from the dead gives Jesus the preeminence in all things? The word “preeminence” essentially means to be first or chief or the “original one,” just as the related word “pro-tos” in relationship to Jesus being “Alpha and Omega,” the first and the last.

Let us look at one more verse where we find the word “pro-tos” in Acts 26:22-23:

Having therefore obtained help of God, I continue unto this day, witnessing both to small and great, saying none other things than those which the prophets and Moses did say should come: That Christ should suffer, and that he should be the first that should rise from the dead, and should shew light unto the people, and to the Gentiles.

The prophets and Moses said that Christ should suffer and be the first to rise from the dead, that He should be the “pro-tos” or prototype or the original one to do so.

Alright, so this is what this all comes down to and that is that Jesus was the firstborn from the dead (the beginning) that in all things He should have the preeminence. So, let us test that and apply our doctrinal question: Is it speaking of Jesus dying and rising from the dead to be the firstborn in 33AD? Is that when He became the “pro-tos” or the beginning of the firstborn from the dead? In order for Him to be the firstborn from the dead, we have to ask the question: “Had anyone else risen from the dead before 33AD?” And, yes, we find it is true.

We will not look at this question in this study, but, Lord willing, in our next study we will look at several individuals that died and rose from the dead before Christ went to the cross in 33AD. Then we will admit that there is a difference between their deaths and resurrection and what Christ did, but then we will give a Biblical precedent of an individual that died and rose from the dead and went to heaven in a similar way as Christ did. And there can be no question that this man died and resurrected before Jesus went to the cross and died and resurrected in 33AD. This is another problem that anyone who continues to willfully hold onto the wrong doctrine of Christ having made payment for sin at the cross must answer and it must be answered: how it is possible for Jesus to be the “prototype” or the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, if someone died and rose again before Jesus?