Hebrews then makes the connection explicit and central. Hebrews 5–7 applies Psalm 110 to Jesus and retells Genesis 14 in detail: Melchizedek’s name, his kingship, his priesthood, his blessing of Abraham, and Abraham’s tenth. Hebrews’ argument is that Christ’s priesthood is not dependent on descent from Levi but belongs to the higher and enduring order Scripture associated with Melchizedek.

Hebrews also reasons from what Genesis does not record: Melchizedek appears in the narrative without recorded father, mother, genealogy, birth, or death. Hebrews uses that literary presentation to make him “like unto the Son of God.” That literary observation should not be turned into certainty that Melchizedek literally had no parents or was necessarily a pre-incarnate appearance of Christ. Those are interpretive theories; Hebrews presents resemblance and priestly pattern.

The bread and wine are also worth noticing, but Scripture never explicitly connects Melchizedek’s bread and wine with the Last Supper. That traditional Christian comparison belongs in a devotional or historical-interpretation layer, not in the same evidence category as Psalm 110 and Hebrews.

The integrated story is: mysterious priest-king in Genesis → Psalm 110 announces an everlasting priest “after the order of Melchizedek” → Hebrews identifies Jesus as that promised priest → Christ’s priesthood is presented as superior to and prior in pattern to the Levitical order. Here the New Testament truly does reveal the larger significance hidden in the brief Genesis scene.

Who Jesus is — Melchizedek points forward to Christ’s priesthood because Hebrews explicitly makes that comparison. Test the tradition carefully: Hebrews says Melchizedek was “made like unto the Son of God,” language that favors resemblance rather than the claim that Melchizedek literally was Jesus.