36) Melchizedeks = God’s Covenanted Heirs Of Creation

Guy Ritchie’s The Covenant is a 2023 American action drama film. John Kinley, a U.S. Army Green Beret Master Sergeant and Ahmed, his Afghan interpreter, are the only survivors of their unit after it was ambushed by the Taliban. In an unspoken covenant to “have each other’s back” when it was just the two of them fighting their way through enemy territory, after suffering severe wounds during a hazardous trek through enemy-held mountains, John only survives through Ahmed’s selfless actions.

A covenant contrasts with a contract which is based on mutual responsibility and wiggle room “if this then that” transactions. Ahmed did not contract with John to risk his own life to save John’s IF John agreed to compensate him in some way.

A covenant remains fully intact for each party regardless of either party’s 1) ability to participate, or 2) breaking any part of it. Accordingly, penalties are often built into covenants to protect from exploitation.

Covenants are frequently found in real estate for the purpose of keeping the peace among neighbors in the community. There is no bargaining or options – you follow the rules for color schemes, fencing options, yard maintenance, pet restrictions, etc. – or you’re out. 

The English term ‘covenant’ originates from the Latin word ‘con-venire’, which means ‘together-come’. This is not in the sense of an attorney offering a plea bargain, but in the faulty party rethinking his behavior and choosing to abide by the terms of the covenant.

“Brethren, I speak after the manner of men; Though it be but a man’s covenant, yet if it be confirmed, no man disannulleth, or addeth thereto.“ (Galatians 3:15)

“I have nourished and brought up children, and they have rebelled against me…Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD…

  1. If ye be willing and obedient, ye shall eat the good of the land:
  2. But if ye refuse and rebel, ye shall be devoured with the sword:

for the mouth of the LORD hath spoken it.” (Isaiah 1)

When Isaiah recorded “for the mouth of the LORD hath spoken it” ~700 BC he is clearly not suggesting timing of the LORD just then losing patience and lashing out in frustration, as established by the documented rebellions of YHVH’s people against an existing covenant spoken into existence by the mouth of the LORD.

As in the agreement between Ahmed and John, the word “covenant” does not have to be in writing in Genesis chapter 1 any more than all the other aspects of reality in order for it to be there. We find every element of a covenant proving that this is one of the new realities called into being through “Let be…” throughout Creation and thereafter when the Singularity e=mc2, God of his own volition, without consulting the other party in this fiat, said:

  • Let us
    • make humanity in all our dimensions of e=mc2,
      • in contrast to hyperdimensional sons of God cloned only from pure energy without mass
    • identify ourself as anthropomorphic, stated in scripture as “His dear son…the image of the invisible God” (Colossians 1:15)
      • in contrast to hyperdimensional sons of God in a multitude of images
    • endow man with our likeness / characteristics of merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abundant in goodness and truth, Keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin,” (Exodus 34:6-7)
      • in contrast to hyperdimensional sons of God who don’t have these characteristics, “which things the angels desire to look into.” (I Peter 11:13)
  • and let them have dominion.

It should be clear that mankind was made for the purpose of taking dominion. To make this point absolutely clear, the Bible states that:

  1. “O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.” (John 17:5)
  2. we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory:” (I Corinthians 2:7)
  3. “God, Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began,” (2 Timothy 1:8-90
  4. “eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began;” (Titus1:2)

The Genesis 1 covenant of dominion is sacred kingship – combined religious and political rule by humans acting as the incarnation / intermediary between God his people. Known as a sacred / sacral king, it is his responsibility to ensure that the kingdom’s subjects keep the peace with each other and most of all, obey God’s laws to avoid divine wrath coming down upon them. 

There was no secular kingship in any ancient culture because they all acknowledged the over-rule of the spirit domain. For example, the king of Egypt was commonly addressed by the chief god as “my living image on earth”. 

Two characteristics in the modern coronations of kings and emperors demonstrate most clearly the continuing sacral character of the kingdom.

  1. Through ascent to the throne, the king is placed higher than other men, connected instead with heavenly,  supernatural powers.
  2. The coronation which places “a colored circle often seen around and close to a luminous body (such as the sun or moon)” is viewed as a cosmic new beginning.

The throne, crown, headdress, garment (as sign of dignity), and sceptre (the staff through which the rule is carried out) were originally believed to contain the power through which the king ruled.

The essential nature of a national god invariably including the religious is demonstrated by the still-existing requirement its ruler to adhere to the national faith., and for governmental authorization of any non-national religion in most countries, America’s essential identity is as a Christian nation, with freedom of alternate religious worship specifically allowed in the Constitution, and Presidents must present themselves as Christians in order to have favor with America’s overwhelmingly Christian constituency.

England’s king or queen must be Anglican, and has religious responsibilities in addition to secular ones as “Defender of the Faith” and “Supreme Governor of the Church of England”. He is the highest religious authority, even over the Archbishop of Canterbury.

Athough paganism was officially eliminated from Christianized politics in the Western nations by Constantine in the 4th century, yet Western rulers still openly claim descent from a god. 

Many people take this very seriously.

Prince Charles of England claims descent from Vlad the Impaler, ruler of Transylvania in what is now called Roman-ia, reflecting its history as a Roman province. Vlad the Impaler was the inspiration for Bram Stoker’s “Dracula”, derived from Vlad’s family name of  Dracul, which means “dragon”.  In other words, Vlad the son of the dragon.

For the first time in more than 10 centuries, thousands of Icelanders soon will be able to worship Thor, Odin, Frigg and others at a temple on which construction begins this month…According to statistics kept by the Icelandic government, membership in the Asatru Association has exploded.

In search of a national culture and identity away from the Catholic religion imposed by Spain during its colonisation of the Philippines, those who instigated the Philippine Revolution proposed to revive indigenous Philippine folk religions and make them the national religion of the entire country. After the revival of the Katipunan during the Spanish–American War, an idealized form of the folk religions was proposed by some, with the worship of God under the ancient name Bathala, which applies to all supreme deities under the many ethnic pantheons across the country.

The basic functions of the sacred king are to channel the source of cosmic power, order, and control. Many titles are granted to a ruler detailing the many aspects and relationships of that one person. 

  1. Because he has a supernatural power over the life and welfare of the tribe, the usual function of a sacred king is to bring blessings to his people and area of control as in the fertility of the soil, cattle, and human beings but mostly the coming of rain. He has power over the forces of nature and against evil of all sorts.
  2. In Mesopotamia the description of the king as a shepherd was quite frequent. This expresses the most important functions of the king—he provides his people with food; he leads them and protects them from dangers and, at the same time, shows his superiority over them.
  3. As the judge the sacral king personified the protection that the community provided for the individual by providing for a balance of power in the community, mediating quarrels, and protecting individual rights. He was the lawgiver and the highest administrator for all community affairs.
  4. As the protector of his people from enemies he was the chief warlord. He alone was regarded as the one who triumphed over the enemy. On the other hand, there was the concept that the king, because of his sacral character, should not personally take part in war.
  5. Chief priest, prophet and seer even after a division of functions evolved into many cult functionaries.

Naturally the merging of a mortal human’s identity with a hyperdimensional being requires defining the new identity with a new name indicating his new attributes or shared spirit of an ancestor or divinity.

In Egypt five throne names comprise the whole king theology:

  1. birth name
  2. royal name
  3. hawk name
  4. serpent name
  5. and a name signifying the power of the gods of the stars.

“unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.” (Isaiah 9:6-7)

Even as the incarnation / physical embodiment of supernatural power, the mortal king defined him as remaining separate from the god. Accordingly, he also remained subordinate to him as the servant, his executive agent, mediator between the gods and man.

“when he / Jesus the Christ shall have put down all rule and all authority and power…put all enemies under his feet…Then…he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father;.” (I Corinthians 15:24-25)

But the writer of the book of Hebrews makes this obviously exasperated remark that believers in the YHVH’s Savior Messiah of Israel really didn’t understand the concept of Melchizedek as The Most High God’s Representative Priest-King over All Creation.

“Christ / Messiah / Anointed / Chosen One glorified not himself…but he that said unto him,

  1. Thou art my Son –declared submissive to me through living out my commands instead of your wishes: “Father, if thou be willing, remove this cup from me: nevertheless not my will, but thine, be done.” (Luke 22:42)
  2. to day have I begotten thee – declared thee my heir on a certain date with a confirming event: “his soul was not left in hell,” (Acts 2:31)
  3. Thou art a priest / intermediary forever – died as a mortal but “neither his flesh did see corruption. This Jesus hath God raised up” immortal (Acts 2:31-32) 
  4. after the order of Melchi-sedec – “this Melchi-sedec, priest of the most high God…first being by interpretation King of righteousness, and after that also [resulting in] King of Salem, which is, King of peace; (Hebrews 7:1-2) 

Of whom we have many things to say, and hard to be uttered, seeing ye are dull of hearing. For…ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God.” (Hebrews 5)

So let’s go back to the first principles.

  • “God…Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son
    • contrast and compare with the first oracles of God to his first Son Adam
  • whom he hath appointed heir of all things…being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person
    • just like Adam was at the first
  • Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they
    • again, this was Adam
  • when he bringeth in the firstbegotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him
    • again, this was Adam
  • unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever:

In Guy Ritchie’s The Covenant, after Ahmed got John Kinley safely back to an American base where he was flown home for medical care, the American military took no responsibility for fulfilling John’s covenant to have Ahmed’s back, leaving Ahmed in jeopardy from the Taliban’s relentless search to take reprisal on his aid to their enemy.

While John pulling an army pension while sitting at home drinking beer and eating snacks while watching TV to pass the time is a more realistic portrayal of human nature, it wouldn’t make a heroic movie, would it? It would be disgusting.

The true plot of the story is John’s recognition that he entered into a covenant relationship with Ahmed, and must now engage in life-saving behavior himself. When John’s efforts to convince the American military to save Ahmed’s life on his behalf failed, John lived up to the covenant, personally returning to Afghanistan to search and rescue Ahmed. 

This is a reflection of even unregenerate humanity’s gut instinct towards the ultimate Covenant of Dominion over the earth. It’s still a battle against forces of destruction.

And it is a disgusting reflection of Christianity’s failure to live up to the covenantal terms to take spiritual dominion over the forces of evil.

 

Unknown's avatar

Published by kingdomcome777

A grandmother who loves to study the Bible and bases life on "know the truth, and the truth shall make you free."

Leave a comment