If we ignore what we want to be true and focus on what we may actually discern from the text, The righteousness in King of Righteousness is most likely simply the overall concept, rather than a reference to any specific deity. It is similar to saying King of Truth, or King of Honesty. That later authors chose to interpret the name differently and even apply it to Jesus, is not evidence that their preference is valid. There is even a theory that the name, in its original form, meant 'my king is Zedek' where Zedek was a Canaanite god. This doesn't fit with how later biblical authors used the name Melchizedek but we cannot be sure if they too reinterpreted from it's initial form for their own purposes.
![Fall Asleep Listening to Genesis: Bedtime Scripture for Deep Sleep [Holy Bible Audio]](/img/1.gif)
Abram did NOT give Melchizedec any of the spoils of war because Abram DID NOT take any spoils of war.
If we ignore what we want to be true and focus on what we may actually discern from the text, The righteousness in King of Righteousness is most likely simply the overall concept, rather than a reference to any specific deity. It is similar to saying King of Truth, or King of Honesty. That later authors chose to interpret the name differently and even apply it to Jesus, is not evidence that their preference is valid.
There is even a theory that the name, in its original form, meant 'my king is Zedek' where Zedek was a Canaanite god. This doesn't fit with how later biblical authors used the name Melchizedek but we cannot be sure if they too reinterpreted from it's initial form for their own purposes.