Details of Abraham’s encounter with Melchizedek are supplied in extra-biblical sources. Philo relates that Melchizedek and Abraham were already close friends, and that Melchizedek rejoiced in Abraham’s victory as if it had been Melchizedek’s own. [1]
According to the Conflict of Adam and Eve, Melchizedek “welcomed [Abraham] with joy. And Abraham, when he saw Melchizedek, made haste and bowed … and kissed him on his face.” [2]
Then, says the Book of the Bee, “Melchizedek embraced him and blessed him.” [3]
The Genesis Apocryphon tells that the bread and wine were but a part of the “food and drink” that Melchizedek provided. [4] Josephus adds that it was a veritable “feast” in which Melchizedek “hospitably entertained Abraham’s army, providing abundantly for all their needs.” [5] But the bread and wine apparently had more than nutritional value, for the Joseph Smith translation adds that Melchizedek actually “brake bread and blest it; and he blest the wine” (JST Gen. 14:17), a clear echo of which is found in the messianic or eschatological banquet celebrated at Qumran, [6] and indicating, according to Milton R. Hunter, that the meal Melchizedek provided may have actually been the ordinance of the sacrament. [7]
For the church fathers, Melchizedek’s meal was at least a type; according to the third-century bishop and martyr Cyprian of Carthage, “in the priest Melchizedek we see prefigured the sacrament of the sacrifice of … our Lord Jesus Christ, who offered … that very same thing which Melchizedek had offered, that is, bread and wine, to wit, His body and blood.” [8]
As with so much of Abraham’s life, then, this event held prophetic significance for the future, adumbrating in this case Christ’s very Atonement and the sacramental ordinance that would ever after commemorate it, along with the great future messianic banquet where Christ will “drink of the fruit of the vine … on the earth … with … Abraham” and all the righteous (D&C 27:5,10).
The rabbis taught that Melchizedek instructed Abraham in the laws of the priesthood and transmitted the priesthood to him. [9] Joseph Smith stated that Melchizedek taught Abraham about the priesthood and the coming of the Son of Man, [10] and ordained him to the priesthood [11] after the order of the Son of God (D&C 107:2-3), even “the last law, or a fulness of the law or priesthood, which constituted him a king and priest after the order of Melchizedek.” [12]
Abraham’s ordination and the accompanying ordinances showed “in what manner to look forward to [the] Son for redemption” (Alma 13:2). Jewish tradition adds that Abraham was also instructed by God Himself on that occasion. [13]
In other words, as indicated in the Book of Abraham, Abraham received the remaining temple ordinances from Melchizedek. [14] When Melchizedek “brings out” bread and wine, according to Claus Westermann, the Genesis text implies that he brings it out “from his city and temple.” [15] A midrash identifies Salem with a temple, [16] while Josephus expressly states that Melchizedek had a temple. [17]
Pseudo-Eupolemus tells that Abraham was actually ushered into a temple in Melchizedek’s city. [18] Jewish tradition tells of “a secret sign” that God “communicated to Abraham, the secret of the mystery of the Redeemer.” [19] Early Christian sources state that Melchizedek taught Abraham about “the holy mysteries” [20] and even “made him to participate in the Holy Mysteries … of redemption.” [21]
These mysteries, or ordinances of the Holy Priesthood after the Order of the Son of God, were – says a Book of Mormon passage speaking of Melchizedek – “given after this manner, that thereby the people might look forward on the Son of God, it being a type of his order, or it being his order, and this that they might look forward to him for a remission of their sins” (Alma 13:16). Abraham is a prototype, notes Nibley, for “every follower of Abraham must receive the signs and tokens.” [22]
Latter-day revelation adds that the power of the Melchizedek Priesthood includes “the privilege of receiving the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, to have the heavens opened,” and “to commune with the general assembly and church of the Firstborn” (D&C 107:19), which is the “church of Enoch” (D&C 76:67). Well did one modern writer observe that on this occasion, “mysteries, revelations, and visions of truth flooded over Abraham’s soul. He it was who looked for a city with foundations whose Builder and Maker is God … In spirit was [Abram] not now reveling in th[at] city?” [23]
Abraham’s relationship with Melchizedek was not confined to this one incident. The Genesis account of Abraham paying tithes seems to evidence, says one scholar, “a tradition about a city and a sanctuary to which tithes were brought in early times.” [24] According to the Joseph Smith Translation of the passage, Melchizedek received tithes from Abraham not just of the war booty, but “of all that he had, of all the riches which he possessed, which God had given him more than that which he had need,” inasmuch as Melchizedek was “the high priest, and the keeper of the storehouse of God; him whom God had appointed to receive tithes for the poor” (JST Gen. 14:37-39).
The passage shows not only that Abraham willingly lived the law of consecration, but also that the tithes he paid to Melchizedek – of all of Abraham’s substantial wealth – could hardly have been paid in this single encounter while returning from a hurried military rescue operation.
But this particular occasion must have been fraught with joy for Abraham as he now received what he had so long sought: the priesthood after the order of the Son of God, that order of priesthood that in times past allowed mortals to be translated to Enoch’s city of Zion.
And what joy must have been Abraham’s to learn that Melchizedek was seeking that very blessing of translation. According to the Joseph Smith Translation, Melchizedek and his people of Salem “sought for the city of Enoch, which God had before taken, separating it from the earth, having reserved it unto the latter days, or the end of the world” (JST Gen.
14:34). At that great event, at “the burning” that shall then take place, says a latter-day revelation, “he that is tithed shall not be burned” (D&C 64:23-24).
He that is tithed, in other words, shall qualify to see the Son of God when he comes in glory. The paradigm for these blessings is Abraham, who, not long after paying his tithing to Melchizedek, would avoid the great burning sent on a wicked and miserly people residing just miles away. And soon thereafter Abraham would be privileged to see and converse with the Son of God face to face.
Abraham was also blessed temporally. In the Joseph Smith Translation telling of Abraham’s payment of tithing on everything he possessed, this verse immediately follows:
And in came to pass that God blessed Abram, and gave unto him riches, and honor, and lands for an everlasting possession; according to the covenant which he had made, and according to the blessing wherewith Melchizedek had blessed him (JST Gen. 14:40).
Jewish tradition adds that God “did not withhold a single blessing from him. He blessed him with wisdom and understanding, knowledge and discernment, wealth and prosperity; gave him possession of heaven and earth, and made him [master] of the world.” [25]
Why did the Lord bless Abraham, as Genesis will later say, “in all things” (Gen. 24:1)? As a reward, says the Midrash, for Abraham’s paying tithing to Melchizedek. [26] As with so many other principles of righteousness, Abraham remains the great exemplar of the blessings of tithing, the blessings of Zion. “By this principle,” declared Joseph F. Smith, “it shall be known who is for the kingdom of God and who is against it. By this principle it shall be seen whose hearts are set on doing the will of God and keeping his commandments, thereby sanctifying the land of Zion unto God, and who are opposed to this principle and have cut themselves off from the blessings of Zion.” [27]
“Blessing” is in fact what this episode of Abraham and Melchizedek is all about, says the Zohar: the passage “teaches that … the righteous bring blessings to the world, and for their sake are all its inhabitants blessed.” [28]
Salem the Great and Melchizedek the Great
By his tithing, Abraham was sanctifying the land of Zion, not only the land where he resided but also Melchizedek’s Salem, referred to in a Samaritan source as “Salem the great.” [29] Where was that great city? It has been assumed by many that Salem was Jerusalem, based on a reading of the Psalms passage stating: “In Judah God is known: his name is great in Israel. In Salem also is his tabernacle, and his dwelling place in Zion” (Ps. 76:1-2).
But as Fred Horton has pointed out, the same passage if read as a chiasm would show just the opposite: that Zion is a city in Judah, while Salem is a city in Israel (north of Judah).
Horton explains why the rabbis would have wished to identify Salem with Jerusalem:
Since Melchizedek was the first priest of God [in the Bible], it would be natural to think of his place of priesthood as being Jerusalem, the one legitimate seat of sacrificial worship. [30]
However, continues Horton, identifying Salem with Jerusalem contradicts a very early identification of Salem as being near the city of Shechem, located some twenty-five miles north of Jerusalem at the foot of Mount Gerizim. [31] Most significantly, the one ancient source mentioning Abraham entering Melchizedek’s temple locates that temple and Melchizedek’s city at the foot of Mount Gerizim. [32] A number of modern scholars have identified Melchizedek’s Salem as being near Shechem. [33]
In the end, however, the important thing about Salem is not where it was but where it went. One source says that Melchizedek built his city on a place called Zion, [34] while a Jewish midrash makes the intriguing claim that “Salem is the celestial Jerusalem.” [35] In fact, we know from Joseph Smith’s translation of Genesis that Melchizedek and his city of Salem were eventually taken up to join the translated city of Enoch’s Zion, the very city they had been seeking (JST Gen. 14:34).
And assuming that Salem was translated in the same manner as was Enoch’s city – people, buildings, and all – then part of what ascended with Melchizedek had actually been built with Abraham’s substantial tithes. Abraham had thereby literally helped build what became a part of the Zion above. And thus was enacted, in Abraham’s day and with his preparation, the great event of pre-Flood times, the spectacular ascension of the earthly city of Zion to heavenly realms. Exactly when Salem was translated, how long after the momentous meeting between Abraham and Melchizedek, we are not told.
As for Melchizedek, he would be gone but not forgotten, for his name would become the name of the very order of the priesthood that he bore, even the Holy Priesthood after the Order of the Son of God. The change was made by “the church, in ancient days” (perhaps by Abraham himself [36] ) “out of respect or reverence to the name of the Supreme Being, to avoid the too frequent repetition of his name,” and “because Melchizedek was such a great high priest” (D&C 107:2-4).
So great, in fact, that the early Christians recognized in him a foreshadowing of someone even greater.
As the name “Melchizedek” means “King of Righteousness,” so is Christ the true King of Righteousness. And as the name “Salem,” where Melchizedek reigned, means “peace,” so Christ is the true King of Peace. Hence in traditional Christianity, as Jerome would say, “Melchizedek represents to us Christ, and the Church of Christ.” [37]
The symbolism is even richer in restored Christianity: the Joseph Smith Translation tells not only that Melchizedek was of the order of the Son of God, and not only that his people sought and obtained the heavenly city of Enoch, but that Melchizedek himself “was called the king of heaven by his people” and “was called the Prince of peace” (JST Gen. 14:33, 36). Both titles point to Christ, who, as foreshadowed by Melchizedek, leads His people to heaven, where He reigns in peace forever.
Melchizedek’s title “prince of peace” also has a distinct echo of Abraham, who from the time he had left Ur was seeking to be “a prince of peace” (Abr. 1:2). It was yet another irony of Abraham’s life that his dear friend Melchizedek, epitomizing what Abraham sought to be, would be taken to the heavenly city that Abraham sought – and thereby leave Abraham behind.
Abraham had indeed “looked for a city which hath foundations” but as yet had found it not, confessing that he was but a stranger and pilgrim on the earth (Heb. 11:10, 13). But Abraham now had all the authority of Melchizedek, who, having thus ordained and blessed the man appointed by God to bless the world, was ready to lead his city in ascending to the city of Enoch. It had to have been the most important ordination and blessing Melchizedek ever gave, his spiritual magnum opus, his great and final act before leaving this world for a higher realm.
No wonder ancient rabbinic tradition, commenting on the blessing Melchizedek gave to Abraham, insists that “when they heard this, heaven and earth and all Creation rejoiced and were glad.” [38] For the kingdom of God was now fully established in the person of Abraham, who now held all the priesthood and authority of his predecessors. When such a thing would be repeated in the person of Joseph Smith, it would again be a cause, as the Prophet Joseph would write, for heaven and earth and all creation to rejoice and be glad (D&C 128:23).
As for Abraham, having been “faithful unto the obtaining of [God’s] priesthoods” available to him and “the magnifying [his] calling,” he would yet experience, along with his wife, what latter-day revelation calls being “sanctified by the Spirit unto the renewing of their bodies” (D&C 84:33).
As we shall see, it was that very renewal that would make possible their having posterity, the very reason that Abraham would remain behind when Melchizedek would ascend. And for those among Abraham’s posterity who follow his example of obtaining and magnifying the Melchizedek priesthood, the same blessing of renewal is promised, whereupon they become in the ultimate sense “the seed of Abraham, and the church and the kingdom, and the elect of God.” Only then do they qualify to receive all the blessings of Abraham, meaning all that God the Father has (D&C 84:33-38).
1. On Abraham 40, in Philo VI, 115, 117.
2. Combat of Adam and Eve with Satan 4:1, in Malan, Conflict of Adam and Eve with Satan, 180.
3. The Book of the Bee 21, in Budge, Book of the Bee, 36.
4. 1QapGen 22.14-15, in Martinez and Tigchelaar, Dead Sea Scrolls Study Edition, 1:47.
5. Josephus, Jewish Antiquities 1.10.2, in Josephus 4, 89.
6. See 1Q28a.2.11-22, in Martinez and Tigchelaar, Dead Sea Scrolls Study Edition, 1:103; and see Dennis E. Smith’s treatment of the symbolism of the meal in his article “Meals” in Schiffman and VanderKam, Encyclopedia of the Dead Sea Scrolls, 1:531-32.
7. Hunter, Gospel Through the Ages, 238-39.
8. Epistles of Cyprian 62:4, in Ante-Nicene Fathers, 5:359.
9. See Kasher, Encyclopedia of Biblical Interpretation, 2:162-66; and Ginzberg, Legends of the Jews, 1:233.
10. Galbraith and Smith, Scriptural Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, 363.
11. See ibid.; and Doctrine and Covenants 84:14.
12. Ehat and Cook, Words of Joseph Smith, 246 (spelling and punctuation normalized).
13. Harris, Hebraic Literature, 47, quoting Avodath Hakkodesh, part 3, chapter 20.
14. Book of Abraham, Facsimile 2, explanation to figure 3.
15. Westermann, Genesis 12-36, 205.
16. Kasher, Encyclopedia of Biblical Interpretation, 2:162, citing Midrash T’hillim 76.
17. Josephus, The Jewish War 6.438, in Josephus 3, 503. Josephus maintains that Melchizedek and his temple were at the site of Jerusalem.
18. Eupolemus, as quoted by Eusebius, in Praeparatio Evangelica 9:17.5-6. See translations in Charlesworth, Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, 2:880; and Buchanan, To the Hebrews, 118.
19. Schwartz, Tree of Souls, 378.
20. Combat of Adam and Eve with Satan 4:1, in Malan, Conflict of Adam and Eve with Satan, 180.
21. Budge, Cave of Treasures, 148.
22. Nibley, Abraham’s Creation Drama, 4.
23. Lunden, Abraham and the Life of Faith, 31.
24. H. Jagersma, “The Tithes in the Old Testament,” in Albrektson et al., Remembering All the Way, 120.
26. Genesis Rabbah on Genesis 24:1, quoted in Miller, Abraham Friend of God, 42.
27. Widstoe, Gospel Doctrine, 225.
28. Kasher, Encyclopedia of Biblical Interpretation, 2:164, quoting Zohar 1, 87a.
29. “Shalem the great.” Asatir 7:17, in Gaster, Asatir, 258.
30. Horton, The Melchizedek Tradition, 159.
31. This early identification of Salem with Shechem was made in Jubilees 30:1 and in most of the early translations of Genesis 33:18-the Vulgate, the Syriac versions, and apparently the Septuagint. In fact, there is a village of Salim a few miles east of Nablus (modern site of the former Shechem. Horton, The Melchizedek Tradition, 48-50. George Wesley Buchanan points out that Eupolemus’s statement (reported by Eusebius) that Melchizedek admitted Abraham into a temple at the foot of Mount Gerizim supports the Septuagint of Genesis 33:18. Buchanan, To the Hebrews, 118. H. Jagersma also finds it “unlikely” that the Salem of Genesis 14 and Jerusalem were the same, and notes H. H. Rowley’s similar suggestions. H. Jagersma, “The Tithes in the Old Testament,” in Albrektson et al., Remembering All the Way, 120.
32. Eupolemus, as quoted by Eusebius, in Praeparatio Evangelica 9:17.5-6. See translations in Charlesworth, Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, 2:880, and Buchanan, To the Hebrews, 118.
33. See H. H. Rowley’s convenient list of citations and scholars who have identified Salem with Shechem or Mount Gerizim, including: C. Mackay, H. S. Nyberg, S. Landersdorfer, and A. P. Stanley. Rowley, Worship in Ancient Israel, 17-18 n. 4. Similarly, H. Jagersma acknowledges “that Salem was identified with Jerusalem at some stage of the tradition,” but finds it “unlikely that this identification existed from the very beginning.” H. Jagersma, “The Tithes in the Old Testament,” in Albrektson et al., Remembering All the Way, 120.
34. Baring-Gould, Legends of the Patriarchs, 207, quoting Suidas the Grammarian.
35. Midrash Haneelam Lech, in Kasher, Encyclopedia of Biblical Interpretation, 2:164.
36. It is at least as old as the Psalms (110:4), and seems likely to have been handed down by Abraham, the man with firsthand knowledge of the greatness of Melchizedek.
37. Quoted in Wordsworth, Holy Bible 1:72, discussing Hebrews 7 and citing a number of church fathers.
38. Kasher, Encyclopedia of Biblical Interpretation, 2:166, citing various midrashim.
