UBtheNEWS: Melchizedek and the Dead Sea Scrolls Report

Melchizedek and the Dead Sea Scrolls Preface

The Hebrew language provides the soil for the etymological roots of Melchizedek, which means “(the/my) king of righteousness.”

Urantia signifies Earth. Etymologically, it means “Known in the heavens as (Uran) the “World of the Cross” (t, ia).” Consider the root origins of Uranus: first planet discovered that was not known in ancient times, named for the god of Heaven, husband of Gaia, the Earth, from Latin Uranus, from Greek Ouranos literally “heaven, the sky;” in Greek cosmology, the god who personifies the heavens, father of the titans.

Explaining the etymological roots of Urantia is not the usual way of introducing a UBtheNEWS report. But, in this case, the report has everything to do with understanding our place in the heavens. Specifically, The Urantia Book says that Melchizedek incarnated to foster the progressive evolutionary development of monotheism on this world and to better prepare humanity for the incarnation of Jesus, who would bring an even more advanced understanding of our Heavenly Father.

The Melchizedek mystery preceded Jesus. Though Jesus spoke of his own nature in an effort to clear up misunderstandings about himself, he never addressed the Melchizedek mystery. Maybe we should ask ourselves why? Maybe this is an extremely important and timely question.

Whatever reasons Jesus had for not clearing up the Melchizedek mystery, the authors of The Urantia Book clearly intend to set the record straight by extensively revealing and reviewing the history of Melchizedek. In fact, we even get a first name to distinguish the particular individual who appeared during the times of Abraham from the “order of Melchizedek.”

Melchizedek’s first name is Machiventa. I have prepared etymologies of coined Urantia Book terms and also shared the etymological work of others on UBannotated.com. But, as far as I know, no one has ever put anything together before on Machiventa. The research did not turn out to be straight forward in comparison to my previous efforts. So, it turned into both an Appendix for this report and a Topical Study in its own rite.

Additionally, I think it is best to explain from the beginning that this UBtheNEWS report departs significantly from the nature of other UBtheNEWS reports in a number of important ways:

1) Generally, UBtheNEWS reports are written without presuming upon the reader’s familiarity with the subject area pertaining to a new discovery or scientific advancement that supports The Urantia Book. For this report, readers need to have some familiarity with Melchizedek from Wikipedia or elsewhere; readers need have some appreciation for significance of the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls with respect to interpreting the Bible.

2) Usually, a new discovery or scientific advancement that supports The Urantia Book does not show up over an extended period of time that wraps around The Urantia Book’s 1955 publication date. The Dead Sea Scroll about Melchizedek (11Q13, also known as 11QMel or 11QMelch) was discovered in 1956. So, that part needs no further explanation. But most of the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered between November 1946 and February 1947. Some of the material in these scrolls relates to a Jubilee of Jubilees and associates this with a Messiah figure, which, in turn, bears upon interpretations regarding the nature and future role of Melchizedek.

Fortunately, even these Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered several years after the plates for printing The Urantia Book were commissioned. The Urantia Book provides about 45 pages of history and perspective directly focused on Melchizedek. This information is entwined with the cosmology presented in the rest of its 2097 pages. Numerous historical records are available to substantiate that this material was written and being prepared for typesetting well before the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Here is a document showing that arrangements were made in 1941 for publication of The Urantia Book.

3) A new discovery or scientific advance that supports The Urantia Book needs to be somewhat unpredictable or contrary to the predominant scholarly views held in 1955, if the information is to show up credible by comparison. Additionally, the strength of a corroboration is directly related to providing uncontested and objectively verifiable information. When the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered is sufficiently objective and verifiable. How to interpret fragments of letters is debatable. Interpreting and then translating what the Scrolls say is subjective and is often intertwined with deeply held religious convictions. So, in order to find something corroborative, special care needs to be taken and expectations need to be adjusted in comparison to other UBtheNEWS reports.

4) This UBtheNEWS report is thematically related to a series of study aids about prophecy and signs of the times. Of particular note is that two full solar eclipses, approximately seven years apart, have paths that intersect over the Bald Knob Cross of Peace. These eclipses occur on August 21, 2017 and April 8, 2024. The Urantia Book says that Jesus’ birthday is August 21 and that April 8 is date between crucifixion and resurrection. For additional perspective on how this relates to prophecy and Urantia Book teachings, see Eclipses Trump Prophecy Scholars, Prophecy and “signs of the times” and The Jewish Messiah is Melchizedek!?!

Drafting for this report began on December 21, 2020. Statements made in The Urantia Book indicate that 2021 is the 4000^th anniversary of when Machiventa Melchizedek incarnated and started to teach during the Abrahamic period. Please enjoy this report as a celebration of the 2020/2021 millennial transition!

Melchizedek and the Dead Sea Scrolls Summary

This report compares four groups of writings about Melchizedek that have two different chronologies to consider—when they were written and when they came to the attention of the modern world.

The chronology for when they were written goes:

1. Old Testament
2. Dead Sea Scrolls
3. New Testament
4. Urantia Book

The chronology for modern world awareness goes:

1. Old Testament
2. New Testament
3. Urantia Book
4. Dead Sea Scrolls

The limited amount of information in the Old and New Testaments leads to differing interpretations about the nature of Melchizedek. This report focuses on two of the questions that get raised:

1. Did Melchizedek have a purely human origin vs. being some type of incarnate angel or pre incarnation of Jesus?
2. Is Melchizedek due to come back in connection with a Judgment Day and/or Jubilee of Jubilees? (See also Topical Study: Is there an impending judgment of the living?)

The Urantia Book offers about fifty pages directly focused on clearing up the Melchizedek mystery. These teachings include:

• During the times of Abraham, a member of an order of celestial beings, said to serve during times of crisis or planetary emergency, incarnated for 94 years and became known as Melchizedek. (Melchizedek refers to the order of celestial beings; Machiventa is the name of the specific being who incarnated.)
• Machiventa Melchizedek incarnated to promote monotheism, in general, and to help prepare humanity for the arrival of Jesus. And the incarnation of Jesus was planned with respect to where monotheistic culture was developing the best and how well it could spread from a given location.
• Machiventa continued to work with prophets and seers after his 94-year incarnation, though The Urantia Book does not explain how this was done exactly.
• Old Testament prophecies relate to both the advent of a Teacher-Messiah (Jesus) and the advent of a Ruler-Messiah—the return of Machiventa Melchizedek. His return will mark a more complete restoration of the celestial administration for our planet, plans that were interrupted by the Lucifer rebellion. (This relates to Old Testament teachings about a Judgment Day and a Jubilee of Jubilees.)
• What are portrayed as conversations between God and Abraham are actually an account of Melchizedek’s relationship to Abraham. But, in an effort to promote Jewish nationalism, Jewish leaders engaged a process of editing out references to Melchizedek, thus leading to so much of the confusion we have today on this subject.

The material about Melchizedek in the Dead Sea Scrolls supports interpretations that are generally consistent with what The Urantia Book teaches. And they go beyond what is offered in the New Testament, which still leaves room for scholars to speculate about the origin, nature, and destiny of Machiventa Melchizedek.

Interestingly enough, the Dead Sea Scroll that especially broadens the perspective on Melchizedek (11Q13 or 11QMelch) does not reference the passages about him in Genesis and Psalms. Rather, it references Isaiah and Daniel and supports viewing him as a Messianic being associated with a Judgment Day and a Jubilee of Jubilees. By doing so, 11Q13 shows up as generally consistent with The Urantia Book’s portrayal of Melchizedek and supports the idea that he continued to work with prophets and seers.

Given the statements in the Old and New Testaments about Melchizedek and the depth of scholarship on the varieties of Jewish thought that existed in the centuries before the advent of Christianity, the authors of The Urantia Book did not take much of a credibility risk with their depiction of Machiventa Melchizedek. Nonetheless, the Dead Sea Scrolls (theoretically and hypothetically) could have provided a perspective that is contrary to what The Urantia Book teaches. So, even if there is not a credibility angle to this on the order of magnitude associated with other UBtheNEWS reports, nonetheless, the Dead Sea Scrolls show up after The Urantia Book was published with information about Melchizedek that supports the Urantia Book account.

Jesus is said to have said, “[W]hen the world has passed through the long winter of material-mindedness and you discern the coming of the spiritual springtime of a new dispensation, should you know that the summertime of a new visitation draws near.” (176:2.6) And regarding material-mindedness, The Urantia Book teaches, “At the time of this writing [which probably refers the mid 1930’s time of “indictment”, not its 1955 publication date] the worst of the materialistic age is over; the day of a better understanding is already beginning to dawn.” (195:6.4) Perhaps we should take note of the fact almost immediately after The Urantia Book’s publication, a discovery was made of extraordinary historical and religious significance that especially relates to the understanding of The Urantia Book’s cosmology and teachings about the future, even the period we are in right now.

Melchizedek and the Dead Sea Scrolls Review

The review starts with a selection of passages from The Urantia Book about Melchizedek. They will create the context for reviewing material in the Bible and Dead Sea Scrolls. This is followed by a discussion section that incorporates how other scholars frame the issues and draw their conclusions.

From The Urantia Book

Along with four Papers (Chapters) that directly focus on him, references to Melchizedek occur throughout The Urantia Book. Naturally, a sequential reading of the Papers provides a solid foundation for the Urantia Book perspective. The Melchizedek Papers are about 45 pages in total. The first one—Paper 93: Machiventa Melchizedek—is the most important one, relative to this report. Along with explaining Melchizedek’s relationship to Abraham, it also reviews his current status and considers future possibilities about his seemingly inevitable return. The other three Papers are:

Paper 94: The Melchizeek Teachings in the Orient,
Paper 95: The Melchizedek Teachings in the Levant,
Paper 98: The Melchizedek Teachings in the Occident.

Here are some select references to encapsulate the topic. The passages from outside the four Melchizedek Papers provide some guidance for where to start if you want to broaden your study:

(93:10.11)  This is the story of Machiventa Melchizedek, one of the most unique of all characters ever to become connected with the history of Urantia and a personality who may be destined to play an important role in the future experience of your irregular and unusual world.

(93:10.3)  Machiventa Melchizedek continued to take a great interest in the affairs of the descendants of those men who had believed in his teachings when he was in the flesh. But the progeny of Abraham through Isaac as intermarried with the Kenites were the only line which long continued to nourish any clear concept of the Salem teachings.

(93:10.4)  This same Melchizedek continued to collaborate throughout the nineteen succeeding centuries with the many prophets and seers, thus endeavoring to keep alive the truths of Salem until the fullness of the time for Michael’s appearance on earth.

(94:6.1)  About six hundred years before the arrival of Michael [Jesus], it seemed to Melchizedek, long since departed from the flesh, that the purity of his teaching on earth was being unduly jeopardized by general absorption into the older Urantia beliefs. It appeared for a time that his mission as a forerunner of Michael might be in danger of failing. And in the sixth century before Christ, through an unusual co-ordination of spiritual agencies, not all of which are understood even by the planetary supervisors, Urantia witnessed a most unusual presentation of manifold religious truth. Through the agency of several human teachers the Salem gospel was restated and revitalized, and as it was then presented, much has persisted to the times of this writing.

(135:5.2)  About one hundred years before the days of Jesus and John a new school of religious teachers arose in Palestine, the apocalyptists. These new teachers evolved a system of belief that accounted for the sufferings and humiliation of the Jews on the ground that they were paying the penalty for the nation’s sins. They fell back onto the well-known reasons assigned to explain the Babylonian and other captivities of former times. But, so taught the apocalyptists, Israel should take heart; the days of their affliction were almost over; the discipline of God’s chosen people was about finished; God’s patience with the gentile foreigners was about exhausted. The end of Roman rule was synonymous with the end of the age and, in a certain sense, with the end of the world. These new teachers leaned heavily on the predictions of Daniel, and they consistently taught that creation was about to pass into its final stage; the kingdoms of this world were about to become the kingdom of God. To the Jewish mind of that day this was the meaning of that phrase—the kingdom of heaven—which runs throughout the teachings of both John and Jesus. To the Jews of Palestine the phrase “kingdom of heaven” had but one meaning: an absolutely righteous state in which God (the Messiah) would rule the nations of earth in perfection of power just as he ruled in heaven—”Your will be done on earth as in heaven.”

(55:7.3)  When such an era is attained on your world, no doubt Machiventa Melchizedek, now the vicegerent Planetary Prince of Urantia, will occupy the seat of the Planetary Sovereign; and it has long been conjectured … that he will be accompanied by a son and daughter of the Urantia Adam and Eve … These children of Adam might so serve on Urantia in association with the Melchizedek-Sovereign since they were deprived of procreative powers almost 37,000 years ago at the time they gave up their material bodies on Urantia … [Emphasis added.]

(93:10.8)  … It is altogether possible that, in some future age when Urantia is approaching the era of light and life, after the affairs of the Lucifer rebellion … have been finally adjudicated, we may witness the presence on Urantia, simultaneously, of Machiventa, Adam, Eve, and Christ Michael [Jesus] …

(114:1.2)  Vicegerent authority to act for Michael as Planetary Prince has been recently vested in Machiventa Melchizedek, but this Son of the local universe has made not the slightest move toward modifying the present planetary regime of the successive administrations of the resident governors general.

(114:1.3)  There is little likelihood that any marked change will be made in the government of Urantia during the present dispensation unless the vicegerent Planetary Prince should arrive to assume his titular responsibilities. It appears to certain of our associates that at some time in the near future the plan of sending one of the twenty-four counselors to Urantia to act as governor general will be superseded by the formal arrival of Machiventa Melchizedek with the vicegerent mandate of the sovereignty of Urantia. As acting Planetary Prince he would undoubtedly continue in charge of the planet until the final adjudication of the Lucifer rebellion and probably on into the distant future of planetary settlement in light and life.

(114:1.4)  Some believe that Machiventa will not come to take personal direction of Urantian affairs until the end of the current dispensation. Others hold that the vicegerent Prince may not come, as such, until Michael sometime returns to Urantia as he promised when still in the flesh. Still others, including this narrator, look for Melchizedek’s appearance any day or hour.

From the Old Testament

These are Old Testament references to Melchizedek, along with a selection of associated passages:

Genesis 14:
¹⁴ And when Abram heard that his brother was taken captive, he armed his trained servants, born in his own house, three hundred and eighteen, and pursued them unto Dan.

¹⁵ And he divided himself against them, he and his servants, by night, and smote them, and pursued them unto Hobah, which is on the left hand of Damascus.

¹⁶ And he brought back all the goods, and also brought again his brother Lot, and his goods, and the women also, and the people.

¹⁷ And the king of Sodom went out to meet him after his return from the slaughter of Chedorlaomer, and of the kings that were with him, at the valley of Shaveh, which is the king’s dale.

¹⁸ And Melchizedek king of Salem brought forth bread and wine: and he was the priest of the most high God.

¹⁹ And he blessed him, and said, Blessed be Abram of the most high God, possessor of heaven and earth:

²⁰ And blessed be the most high God, which hath delivered thine enemies into thy hand. And he gave him tithes of all.

²¹ And the king of Sodom said unto Abram, Give me the persons, and take the goods to thyself.

Psalm 110:
¹The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.

² The Lord shall send the rod of thy strength out of Zion: rule thou in the midst of thine enemies.

³ Thy people shall be willing in the day of thy power, in the beauties of holiness from the womb of the morning: thou hast the dew of thy youth.

⁴ The Lord hath sworn, and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek.

⁵ The Lord at thy right hand shall strike through kings in the day of his wrath.

⁶ He shall judge among the heathen, he shall fill the places with the dead bodies; he shall wound the heads over many countries.

From the New Testament

These are the primary passages from the New Testament, which add new information about Melchizedek:

Hebrews 5:
⁵ So also Christ glorified not himself to be made an high priest; but he that said unto him, Thou art my Son, today have I begotten thee.

⁶ As he saith also in another place, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek.

⁷ Who in the days of his flesh, when he had offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears unto him that was able to save him from death, and was heard in that he feared;

⁸ Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered;

⁹ And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;

¹⁰ Called of God a high priest after the order of Melchizedek.

¹¹ Of whom we have many things to say, and hard to be uttered, seeing ye are dull of hearing.

Hebrews 6:
¹⁹ Which hope we have as an anchor of the soul, both sure and steadfast, and which entereth into that within the veil;

²⁰ Whither the forerunner is for us entered, even Jesus, made a high priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek.

Hebrews 7:
The Priestly Order of Melchizedek
7 This “King Melchizedek of Salem, priest of the Most High God, met Abraham as he was returning from defeating the kings and blessed him”; ² and to him Abraham apportioned “one-tenth of everything.” His name, in the first place, means “king of righteousness”; next he is also king of Salem, that is, “king of peace.” ³ Without father, without mother, without genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life, but resembling the Son of God, he remains a priest forever.

⁴ See how great he is! Even Abraham the patriarch gave him a tenth of the spoils. ⁵ And those descendants of Levi who receive the priestly office have a commandment in the law to collect tithes from the people, that is, from their kindred, though these also are descended from Abraham. ⁶ But this man, who does not belong to their ancestry, collected tithes from Abraham and blessed him who had received the promises. ⁷ It is beyond dispute that the inferior is blessed by the superior. ⁸ In the one case, tithes are received by those who are mortal; in the other, by one of whom it is testified that he lives. ⁹ One might even say that Levi himself, who receives tithes, paid tithes through Abraham, ¹⁰ for he was still in the loins of his ancestor when Melchizedek met him.

Another Priest, Like Melchizedek

¹¹ Now if perfection had been attainable through the levitical priesthood—for the people received the law under this priesthood—what further need would there have been to speak of another priest arising according to the order of Melchizedek, rather than one according to the order of Aaron? ¹² For when there is a change in the priesthood, there is necessarily a change in the law as well. ¹³ Now the one of whom these things are spoken belonged to another tribe, from which no one has ever served at the altar. ¹⁴ For it is evident that our Lord was descended from Judah, and in connection with that tribe Moses said nothing about priests.

¹⁵ It is even more obvious when another priest arises, resembling Melchizedek, ¹⁶ one who has become a priest, not through a legal requirement concerning physical descent, but through the power of an indestructible life. ¹⁷ For it is attested of him,

“You are a priest forever,
according to the order of Melchizedek.”

¹⁸ There is, on the one hand, the abrogation of an earlier commandment because it was weak and ineffectual ¹⁹ (for the law made nothing perfect); there is, on the other hand, the introduction of a better hope, through which we approach God.

²⁰ This was confirmed with an oath; for others who became priests took their office without an oath, ²¹ but this one became a priest with an oath, because of the one who said to him,

“The Lord has sworn
and will not change his mind,
‘You are a priest forever’”—

²² accordingly Jesus has also become the guarantee of a better covenant.

²³ Furthermore, the former priests were many in number, because they were prevented by death from continuing in office; ²⁴ but he holds his priesthood permanently, because he continues forever. ²⁵ Consequently he is able for all time to save those who approach God through him, since he always lives to make intercession for them.

²⁶ For it was fitting that we should have such a high priest, holy, blameless, undefiled, separated from sinners, and exalted above the heavens. ²⁷ Unlike the other high priests, he has no need to offer sacrifices day after day, first for his own sins, and then for those of the people; this he did once for all when he offered himself. ²⁸ For the law appoints as high priests those who are subject to weakness, but the word of the oath, which came later than the law, appoints a Son who has been made perfect forever.

From the Dead Sea Scroll 11Q13

The translation below of Dead Sea Scroll 11Q13 comes from virtualreligion.net. The explanatory note reads in part, “Wording that is decipherable, printed in boldface, though often lacking coherence, offers important points of comparison with messianic passages in the NT. So it is presented here, despite the difficult reading caused by the frequent sizeable lacunae (?…?), which prevent a complete and exact reconstruction. The conjectural portions of the translation (text in parentheses), follow the readings suggested by M. deJonge and A.S. vander Woude (NTS 12, 1965-66) or G. Martinez and E.J.C. Tigchelaar (Dead Sea Scrolls, 2008)”:

(And con)cerning his saying (Lev 25:13):
—“In this year of ju(bilee you shall restore a man to his inheritance”):
(Unraveled, this is…?)
(And concerning his saying (Deut 15:2):)
—“Every master [ba’al] (shall relea)se his hand concerning his claim (upon his neighbor; he shall not exact it of his neighbor and his brother, because he has declared the) release for G(od.“)
(Unraveled, this is for the en)d of days.
(It is) about the captives which (?…Belial) bound
(?…?) and from the inheritance of Melchizedek fo(r…)
and they are the inherit(ance of Melchize)dek, who will restore them;
and he will declare freedom [deror]* for them
to release them (and to atone) for their sins
and (?…?) this word, in the la(s)t year of jubilee (?…?)
(?…?) the (t)enth (ju)bilee (?…?),
in which to atone for all the sons (of light)
(and the) men of the (l)ot of Mel(chi)zedek
(?…?) over (th)em (?…?) because that is the end [qe^tz]**
to the acceptable year of Melchize(dek…?)
(?…?) and the holy ones of God to the realm of judgment;
as it is written about him in the Songs of David, who says (Ps 82:1):
–“God [Elohim] (stand)s in the coun(cil of God [El]);
in the midst of the gods [elohim] he judges.”
And (David) says about him (Ps 7:7f):
— “Return to the height (a)bove them.
God [El]*** will judge the peoples.”
And as he sa(ys; Ps 82:2):
—“(How long will) you judge falsely
and li(ft up) the face of the wick(ed? Se)lah.”
Unraveled [pishru], this is about Belial and his lot of spir(it)s,
who (?…?). And Melchizedek will exact
the ven(ge)ance of the judg(me)nts of G(od);
(?…from the hand of Be)lial and the hand of all the (spirits of his lot).
And in his aid are the gods [eli(m)] (on high).
He (?…al)l the sons of Mi(gh)t and the (?…?) this.
That is the day of (destruction).
(And wh)at is written (for the end of days by Isai)ah the prophet,
who say(s) (Isa 52:7):
—“(How) beautiful upon the mountains
are the feet of him who bears good n(ews),
(he who) proclaims peace, who be(ars good news of good),
(he who proclaims salva)tion,
who says to Zion: Your God (is king [melek])****”
This is unraveled:
—“the mountain(s“: these are…?) for all (?…?).
—“he who bears good news”: h(e is the one an)ointed by the Spir(it);
of him Dan(iel) says (Dan 9:25):
(“Until an anointed prince, it is seven weeks.”)
—“(…who bears good news of) good, he who proclai(ms salvation).”
That is what is w(ritt)en about him, where he (says):
–“(?…?) to com(fort all who mourn” Isa 61:2).*****
(?…?) he will make them wise in all the times (of wrath)
(?…in) truth (?…?)
(?…she) turns away from Belial and (?…?)
(?…?) by the judgment(s) of God,
as it is written about him (Isa 52:7):
—“(He who says to Zi)on: Your God is king!”
(“Zi)on”: th(at is…?)
(?…those) who establish the covenant,
those who turned away from walking (in the w)ay of the peoples.
“Your G(o)d”: that is (?…from) Belial.
And where he says (Lev 25:9):
—“You shall direct the trump(et to sound in) all (the la)nd…”

* deror: or “pardon.”
** qe^tz: or “time.” Hebrew word has same connotations of English “term.”
*** El: ms. varies from Massoretic text, which has here: YHWH (“Lord”).
**** lit: “Melek is your God.” While this verse is clearly the source of the author’s identification of Melchizedek with passages in the Psalms referring to “God,” it is unclear whether he read it as a proclamation that God is king or that Melchizedek is divine.
***** Isa 61:2: com(fort all who mourn) is this translator’s tentative reconstruction, made likely by the fact that the author has just identified the herald of Isa 52:7 was “anointed by the Spirit,” a characteristic not mentioned in that passage but invoked in Isa 61:1.

Discussion section

The discussion section works with the research of two scholars, Tyler Journeaux-Graham and Paul Sumner. The Journeaux-Graham wrote a 15-page paper with a scope that closely parallels this report, excepting for integration of The Urantia Book, of course. Additionally, he developed his thesis by reviewing the work of other scholars. This made it more convenient and informative than Somner’s writings for the purposes of this review. However, Somner’s efforts in this area are extensive; he has a website that presents the breadth of his work.  

In summarizing the topic, Tyler Journeaux-Graham points out that the author of  11Q13 seems to presume upon the readers general appreciation of the topic as well as the specific …

… tradition surrounding Melchizedek which links him to passages in Isaiah and Daniel. Not only does the scroll fail to refer or allude to Genesis 14, but it also avoids any explicit reference to Psalm 110, which is “the most frequently quoted or referenced psalm in the New Testament.

He goes on to acknowledge the importance of looking at this topic separate from a connection to Hebrews, which, of course, is something that is also important for the purposes of this report:

In the past I wanted to publish a short paper arguing that regardless of the exact authorship of the epistle, one could establish both that the author was part of a Pauline community, and also that the audience consisted of Jewish converts from Qumran, since nowhere but at Qumran do we find emphasis on a Melchizedek-Messiah. However, what this research allowed me to do was to loosen myself of so narrow a vision of the audience of that epistle by recognizing that perhaps some of the messianic texts at Qumran represent streams of messianic thought which were more widely recognized. …

[B]y taking inventory of the textual and traditional precursors, which plausibly act as sources from which the author of 11Q13 draws, []I will … illustrate the significance of 11Q13 according to a wider messianic-typological tradition to which I will argue Melchizedek- traditions belong.

The following excerpts present the main points of Journeaux-Graham’s thesis:

The author of Jubilees “wrote sometime during the reigns of Jonathan, Simeon, and John Hyrcanus” and that this Hasmonean exegetical tendency to use Melchizedek as an image for their reign was in use outside of Jubilees is evidenced even in the Bible in 1 Maccabees. This appropriation of Melchizedek by the supporters of the Hasmonean rulers is also evidenced in the Qumran copy of Jubilees which omits, for apparent ideological reasons, the reference to Melchizedek in Jubilees. The Pharisaic “materials treat Melchizedek in three ways;” first as Shem [son of Noah], second as an eschatological ‘workman’ counted alongside Elijah and the Messiah, and finally as “an irreverent priest who relinquished the rights of his office to Abraham.” There is some controversy about whether this Pharisaic disparagement of Melchizedek was in response to the Sadducean view, or else in response to the Christian use of Melchizedek …

Philo of Alexandria, who represents a very uniquely interesting exegetical tradition, refers to Melchizedek three times in those writings of his which have survived to our day, wherein Philo makes Melchizedek out to be “the eternal Logos.” This view, it has been argued, may have been “fairly widespread. Josephus also makes brief reference to Melchizedek as a Canaanite who became a priest of “Israel’s God” and who built the first temple in Jerusalem.  …

Rick Van De Water in an article published in 2006 called Michael or Yhwh? Toward Identifying Melchizedek in 11Q13 has argued impressively that Melchizedek, popular to the common opinion that he represents an angelic figure, actually represents YHWH himself. Van De Water turns first to other scholars, such as F. Manzi, who have come to the same conclusion in order to furnish plausibility for his thesis. However, Water sets out with the purpose of arguing “that the identification of Melchizedek as an intermediary can be reconciled with Manzi’s thesis that ‘Melchizedek’ is a divine title.” Interestingly Water goes as far as to propose that the figure Melchizedek can be identified in other enigmatic figures in the Dead Sea Scrolls, such as the ‘son of God’ of 4Q246. The figure of Melchizedek, he proposes, can be recognized as at once a mediator of God, and also as God himself, by appealing to the early rabbinic idea that “God has a divine mediator who shares his throne.”   …  Moreover, turning to the etymology of Melchizedek’s name, he proposes that the “rendering” of it as “‘King of Righteousness’… is not the only possibility.” He suggests instead that the name might be translated as “My king is righteousness” and is actually “God’s designation of him.” Thus, Water argues that there is a clear distinction between Melchizedek and God, but argues that this distinction “need not overrule Manzi’s case.” Pointing to the evidence presented in 11QMelchizedek’s treatment of the character, Water proposes that Melchizedek often plays roles traditionally ascribed to Ywhw, such as when 11Q13, when using Isaiah 61:2, exchanges Melchizedek’s name for Ywhw.  …

Next I will turn to John J. Collins …  [H]e clearly argues that messianic expectation at Qumran was characterized by the anticipation for more than a single Messianic figure. He explains: “that we may speak of a common Jewish hope for a royal messiah from the Davidic line and of a distinctive sectarian hope in the Dead Sea Scrolls for a priestly messiah” who differed from the anticipated king.  …  [H]e goes on to argue for a seminal and typological distinction between a Davidic Messiah and a Priestly Messiah. Turning to the shocking passage in 1QS9:11, which says that the community awaits “until there come the Prophet and the Messiahs of Aaron and Israel.” This plural form of Messiah is one which Collins strongly argues evidences an underlying tradition at Qumran of deutero-Messianism.  …  Unfortunately, although Collins is a prolific writer and something of an authority in the matter of Qumran Messianism, his rash exclusion of any discussion of Melchizedek in terms of Messianism in the scrolls leaves much to be desired for my purposes. However, it also more clearly spotlights the platform from which my contribution might be made.  …

Thus we have seen that the work of previous scholars has focused on a wide range of related areas, but none have provided a comprehensive outline of any clear stream of typological exegetical tradition of Melchizedek related to the wider typological category of Messianic anticipation. I propose not only to situate 11Q13 and Hebrews in the same exegetical tradition, but to argue that the typology at play in 11Q13 is distinctively messianic, and this can allow one to use 11Q13 as a lens through which to understand Messianism generally at Qumran. Against John Collins, I would argue both that the category of Messianism was alive and well during the period of Late Judaism, and also that the Qumran exegesis operated not on the presumption of deutero-messianism, but on the presumption of a messianic deutero-typology. I would argue ultimately that the plural form of ‘Messiahs’ in 1QS9:11 evidences that the tradition of messianic typology evolved to a stage at Qumran where previously disparate types of Messiah, priestly and kingly, were being anticipated in a single Messianic figure, for whom the paradigmatic representative figure became Melchizedek, the priest-king.

Going beyond 11Q13, Paul Sumner provides perspective with the integration of material from other Dead Sea Scrolls:

In the mystical Qumran documents known as “Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice” (originally called “The Angelic Liturgy”), Melchizedek appears to be a superior angel. The texts are broken up too badly to be sure of this identification (4Q401 11:3; 22:3).

But what is certain is that the “Songs” depict a hierarchy of angelic priests who serve in the heavenly temple. They are surrounded by other divine beings known as elim or elohim (gods, divine beings) or holy ones, spirits, princes, and ministers. And Melchizedek seems to be a leader of this assembly of servants.

In the so-called “War Scroll” (1QM 13:10; 16:6-8; 17:7), Melchizedek appears to be the archangel Michael, who is “the prince of light” (1QM 13:10-11; cf. 1QS 2:20-22; CD 5:17-19) and “the angel of [God’s] truth” (1QS 3:24). Scrolls scholar Carol Newsom says, “it would seem most plausible that Melchizedek is to be identified with the seventh and highest of the chief princes, as Michael is customarily identified with the highest of the archangels.”

The association of Melchizedek, the Messiah (as Jesus), and Michael is also made in The Urantia Book. As a reference to the divine and pre-existent nature of Jesus, it uses the designation Michael hundreds of times and Christ Michael appears in 35 paragraphs.

From a Urantia Book perspective, the timing of the Dead Sea Scrolls is fortuitous because it allows us to consider it as a text that was not influenced by the Dead Sea Scrolls. The Dead Sea Scroll most relevant to Melchizedek, 11Q13, was discovered immediately after publication of The Urantia Book and the rest of them, though discovered prior to publication, did not show up until after work on the creation of printing plates had begun.

In general, the material relevant to the Melchizedek mystery found in the Dead Sea Scrolls takes the conversation by Biblical scholars directly in the direction of Urantia Book teachings about Machiventa Melchizedek from a cosmological perspective. As well, the Dead Sea Scrolls support the assertion from a faith-based historical perspective that Machiventa continued to work with seers and prophets. But this still leaves us with two obvious questions. Why have these efforts over the last two thousand years not done more to clear up the Melchizedek mystery? And again, why is it that the New Testament record does not include an explanation from Jesus?

As intriguing as those questions might be, perhaps, they are not nearly so timely and important as the question that faces us right now. Why is it timely for The Urantia Book to solve the Machiventa Melchizedek mystery?

Appendixes

Appendix 1: Machiventa etymology.

Appendix 2: Additional links.

Tyler Journeaux-Graham: On the way towards identifying a Typologically-Melchizedekian exegetical tradition in the period of Late Judaism.
Paul Sumner/Hebrew-Streams: Site Map.
Paul Sumner/Hebrew-Streams: About the Author-Editor
Paul Sumner/Hebrew-Streams: Dead Sea Scrolls
Paul Sumner/Hebrew-Streams: “Messianic” Texts at Qumran
Paul Sumner/Hebrew-Streams: Melchizedek: Angel, Man or Messiah?
Paul Sumner/Hebrew-Streams: The Heavenly Council in the Hebrew Bible and New Testament
CatholicGnosis: Philo — On Melchizedek
VirtualReligion: Timetable of Discovery Dates

11Q13 Translations:
Gnostic Society Library
Old Testament Story
Virtual Religion
Wikipedia