Types Not Found In the Melchizedec Priesthood
Some argue that the types of Christ’s priestly ministry are to be found not in the Levitical priesthood but in the Melchizedec priesthood. But we inquire, Where is the record of Melchizedec’s priestly ministry? What kind of sacrifices did he offer? What was the order of the services performed? If the types are to be found in his priestly service, it is important that we understand them, in order that we may also understand the work of Christ, the antitype. But we find no record of the priestly ministry of Melchizedec. We find no shedding of blood, no offering of sacrifices, no work of atonement. But we do find all this set forth in the work of the Levitical priests. In their ministry every detail of the work of Christ in the heavenly sanctuary is clearly taught. If we reject the Levitical priesthood, we are left entirely without a typical ministration. If we accept it, we have a typical service which teaches every principle essential to the plan of redemption.DOF 278.1
We are left in no uncertainty on this important point. In speaking of Christ, Paul declares: “If He were on earth, He should not be a priest, seeing that there are priests that offer gifts according to the law: who serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things.” Hebrews 8:4, 5. Thus it is the service of the priests who served under the law that is to be taken as an example of the work of Christ in heaven. These were the Levites. They were designated as priests by the law of Moses. Their gifts were offered according to the law that governed the ceremonial service, and here Paul definitely declares their service to be “the example and shadow of heavenly things.” The types of Christ in His priestly service are found only in them.DOF 278.2
But in what respect, then, was Christ a priest after the order of Melchizedec? (Hebrews 7:21.) Just this: Melchizedec was not a priest under the law of Moses. He did not become a priest by inheritance. He was “without father, without mother, and without descent” (margin, pedigree) (Hebrews 7:3); that is, he could not trace his genealogy to the tribe of Levi, and thus prove that he was a priest by inheritance. The sons of Aaron were priests because their father was priest. It was an inheritance. But Melchizedec became a priest in another way. Just so it was with Christ. He was not of the tribe of Levi but sprang out of Judah. By the law He had no inheritance in the priestly ministry. He was without priestly parentage or pedigree.DOF 279.1
“He of whom these things are spoken pertains to another tribe, of which no man gave attendance at the altar. For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Judah; of which tribe Moses spoke nothing concerning priesthood. And it is yet far more evident: for that after the similitude of Melchisedec there arises another Priest, who is made, not after the law of a carnal commandment, but after the power of an endless life.” Hebrews 7:13-16.DOF 279.2
Jesus was made a priest by an oath of God, for. the Scripture says, “Not without an oath He was made priest.” Hebrews 7:20. It was this change that made necessary a change of the law which designated that the Levites should be the priests; “for the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law”; “for the law makes men high priests which have infirmity; but the word of the oath, which was since the law, makes the Son, who is consecrated for evermore.” Hebrews 7:12, 28. In this respect therefore Christ was a priest after the order of Melchizedec, but the types of Christ’s ministration in His capacity as High Priest are found only in the Levitical service.DOF 279.3
In view of these considerations we must therefore urge again that since the earthly priest performed his first service in the first apartment of the sanctuary, which consumed the greater part of his time and labor, so must Christ begin His ministry in the first apartment of the heavenly sanctuary, and continue there a much longer period than that required for His service in the second. And since the service of the earthly priests in the most holy place came at the end of the yearly round, so must Christ’s work in the second apartment come at the close of His priestly ministry, and not at the beginning. He could not therefore, upon His ascension to heaven, have entered immediately upon His work in the most holy place, for His work in the first apartment had not yet been performed.DOF 280.1