Here’s the million-dollar question on Christmas Eve – was the author of Hebrews serious in Heb 7:3 when he described Melchisidec, or was he making a typological argument from silence!?
Here is the text in question (I'm doing Heb 7:1-14, but my question is from vv.1-3):
"For this Melchisedec, king of Salem, priest of the most high God, who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings, and blessed him; To whom also Abraham gave a tenth part of all; first being by interpretation King of righteousness, and after that also King of Salem, which is, King of peace; Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God; abideth a priest continually," (Hebrews 7:1-3).
The main point at issue is whether the description of Melchisidec from v.3 is to be taken literally. Most commentators don't, because they fear to take the description literally would make Melchisidec rival Christ (cf. O'Brien, Letter to the Hebrews, PNTC, p. 247).
What do you guys think?