Genesis 14:18
Print Friendly, PDF & Email

18  And King Melchizedek of Shalem brought out bread and wine; he was a priest of Hashem Most High.

u-mal-kee TZE-dek ME-lekh sha-LAYM ho-TZEE LE-khem va-ya-YIN v’-HU kho-HAYN l’-AYL el-YON

יח  וּמַלְכִּי־צֶדֶק מֶלֶךְ שָׁלֵם הוֹצִיא לֶחֶם וָיָיִן וְהוּא כֹהֵן לְאֵל עֶלְיוֹן׃

 14:18   And King Melchizedek of Shalem

The Sages explain that Melchizedek, King of Shalem, is actually Shem, the son of Noach, and that Shalem is an early name for Yerushalayim. After Avraham emerges victorious from war, Melchizedek greets him with bread and wine and blesses him and the God who delivered him, thereby attributing Avraham’s success to divine justice. Even before knowledge of one God and His righteous ways had spread throughout the world, the concept of divine justice was present in Shalem, Israel’s future capital.

Old City of Jerusalem


Please login to get access to the quiz
Genesis 14
Genesis 15

Comments ( 15 )

The comments below do not necessarily reflect the beliefs and opinions of The Israel Bible™.

  • FYI –

    It's very interesting… I never knew.

  • Even before knowledge of one God and His righteous ways had spread throughout the world, the concept of Divine justice was inherent to Salem, Israel’s future capital.
    Yes indeed, Ameen! Therefore all the commotion about the Capital City of Erets Jisra'El!

  • Is the name the most high God not transliterated from El -Elyon. Which can also mean Baal. Was Salem not a pagan city at that time. And Why did God not make a covenant with Melchizedek . Why did he look for a man called Abraham to make a covenant instead.( Moon worshipper) ,If Melchizedek was already a righteous king and priest ?..
    Regarding the Tithe, was it the same tithe as Malachi tithe or spoils of war tithe. Christian say that Melchizedek was a type of Christ. And we must give ten percent of over income to the pastor, because tithing was before the law.

  • I can see why it would be accepted that Salem was an earlier name for Jerusalem. Wikipedia says the meaning of Salen is Peaceful and Complete, how appropriate for the name of the City of David.

  • Common reasoning would necessarily deduce that Shem, indeed, was Melchizedek. This King comes on the scene after the flood and there is no time for him to be born. There are only 8 people left on the earth after the flood. Shem is the blessed one to carry on the blood line. Within his line is Avram, who paid tithes to the King. Shem inherited Salem, which I must agree with the sages, is the future Yerushalyem. The priesthood came through Shem, with Shem being the beginning of that priestly order. I reference Ginsberg's "Legends of the Jews", p. 233 as authority.

  • I do not understand how this Melchizedek is Shem. Where does this idea come from? Is it possible that the sages could be wrong? Psalm 110:4 says that he Melchizedek will be a priest forever (that is certainly a lot longer than Shem will be alive) Is there any proof or documentation to uphold this statement other than a guess?
    Please reply to this questioning …. Thank you

    • The traditions indeed tell us that Noah’s son Shem would have had an involvement in the violent death of Nimrod, the hunter who came into conflict with YHWH Elohim. And also that Melchizedek actually was the patriarch Shem.
      All this would be confirmed by a comparison of the Gematria values (NV) of both men.
      Nimrod (נמרד) has NV: 50 + 40 + 200 + 4 = 294.
      The NV of Melchizedek (מלכי־צדק) is: 40 + 30 + 20 + 10 + 90 + 4 + 100 = (also) 294

      • Your comments don't make sense. What does the gematria of Nimrod have to do with Melchizekek? That reasoning wouldn't make sense with Shem either. Shem is a name that means "name". Melchizedek is a title which means "King of Righteousness". Even if the gematria of Shem would come out to 294, which I don't think it does, the comparison would be invalid. Any connection between Shem and Nimrod would be dubious because it IS tradition. Tradition is only valid if it can be backed up by Scripture, and then common sense if it doesn't detract from Scripture.

        • There is much war between King's, interesting they rebelled in the 13th year, 13 represents rebellion and is numerical for Satan.Archaeologists have unearthed many of these defeated cities and they have never been rebuilt, just as God said. A lot are in today's Jordan. Rockefeller, reading his Bible about the slime and tar pits, began the oil industry there. 14:14 shows how wealthy Abram was, having 318 servants & FAM, a lot to provide for. His 500 or so pursued 50,000-100,000 armies 120 miles and on to Demascus another 45 miles, showing Abram had trained them well. First mention of Melchizedek without any genealogy or background. Melchizedek greeting Abram with bread and wine, speaks of communion. Blessing Abram shows He's greater so Abram pays tithes. Melchizedek is not mentioned again until Psalm 110, the priestly tribe is Levi, The Lion of Judah is Jesus Christ, so Melchizedek preceding Levi speaks of a higher Priest and in Hebrews we begin to see how Jesus, being of the order of Melchizedek IS a higher Priest, meaning Jesus CAN be High Priest. So from Genesis to David speaking of Melchizedek and further explanation in Hebrews it all comes together leaving none other then Jesus himself, who is from the beginning. Jesus told the Pharisees that Abram rejoiced at Melchizedeks "coming".

    • However, a remark about Psalm 110.
      The Psalm DOES NOT state that Melchizedek himself will be a priest forever.
      What in verse 4 is prophesied, even sworn, by YHWH Elohim “You are a priest forever, after the order of Melchizedek” is said of the Messiah, David’s Lord as he mentions him in verse 1 :

      Of David; a psalm. Thus says YHWH to my Lord: “Sit at my right hand until I have your enemies put a footstool of your feet.”

      So, the Messiah would be a priest, that is a king-priest, “AFTER THE ORDER of Melchizedek”.
      To attain that position the Messiah, after his sacrificial death, would be resurrected by his Father YHWH Elohim. That way he could be seated at the right hand of Elohim, his Father.
      So, the Messiah would not be a priest after the manner of Aaron, based on Thorah principles. No, he would be king-priest within an entirely new order, not according to the order of Aaron and related to the Levitical priesthood, but after the manner of Melchizedek.

      The Pharisees of the First Century even refused to consider that possibility. They had shaped their own idea of the Messiah, and for themselves already established that Yeshua of Nazareth did not answer to that picture. However, they were wrong and only confirmed YHWH’s own observation about Israel’s majority:
      “I have looked at this people, and behold, it is a stiffnecked people”.
      (Exodus 32)

    • Psalms 110 is clearly a Messianic psalm. It talks about a priestly order of a different kind. It is a line that is a combination of King/Priest. The Messiah is prophesied to come from the lineage a David. He is a king of the tribe of Judah. The Levite priesthood began with Levi, the third son of Ya'acov. YHVH has clearly said THIS priesthood would last forever. Levi would never be a king, for, those come from David/Judah.
      Shem is the beginning of a priesthood that can only be better in one way. This Priest will also be a King, our Messiah Who comes from the House of David. That is HaShem's covenant with David. "No one will sit on your throne except as son of David".
      To this point, I THINK I agree with Yeshurun. However, from this point one, he goes completely astray from the true subject of Melchizedek. He would have you believe the Levite priesthood has been replaced by the Order of Melchizedek. That's an outright lie the christian community tries to palm off on unsuspecting persons, and has its roots in hasatan.
      Levi hasn't been replaced, and NEVER will be replaced. He will still be fulfilling his duties long after we're in the kingdom. Melchizedek is also an eternal priesthood. It's the Priesthood of the Messiah. I ask you, please don't fall for these lies of christianity.
      I would further say that Yeshurun derives his philosophy in this matter from the book of Hebrews in the Brit Hadashah (New Testament). This book was written by someone that had absolutely NO knowledge of Torah. There are mistakes a plenty within its pages. It's a book that isn't inspired by Elohim and should NEVER have been allowed into the Bible. In fact, if not for this book, there would be little to no basis for christianity. It's their basis for invalidating Torah and everything that goes with it. ALL other authors of the Hadashah, including the Messiah, strictly teach the Torah of Moshe.

      • I must have hit the wrong button or something. The above comment should have gone under Daystar's comment.

    • Daystar, please look under the second comment from Yeshurun for a comment I thought I was placing under your comment. DannyLee ben Israel

    • Daystar, please look under the second comment from Yeshurun for a comment I thought I was placing under your comment. DannyLee ben Israel

    • Please excuse my ignorance, but who are the 'sages'? and I thought it is written that the Messiah would be a priest after the order of Melchizedek?

Genesis 14:18

Skip to toolbar