Hebrews 7:3

He then adds another distinction, "Without father, without mother, without genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life, but made like unto the Son of God, abideth a Priest continually." Since then there lay in his way as an objection the words "Thou art a Priest for ever, after the order of Melchisedec," whereas he Melchisedec was dead, and was not "Priest for ever," see how he explained it mystically. "And who can say this concerning a man?" I do not assert this in fact (he says); the meaning is, we do not know when or what father he had, nor what mother, nor when he received his beginning, nor when he died. And what of this (one says)? For does it follow, because we do not know it, that he did not die, or had no parents? Thou sayest well: he both died and had parents. How then was he "without father, without mother"? How "having neither beginning of days nor end of life"? How? Why from its not being expressed. And what of this? That as this man is so, from his genealogy not being given, so is Christ from the very nature of the reality. See the "without beginning"; see the "without end." As in case of this man, we know not either "beginning of days," or "end of life," because they have not been written; so we know them not in the case of Jesus, not because they have not been written, but because they do not exist. For that indeed is a type, and therefore we say "because it is not written," but this is the reality, and therefore we say "because it does not exist." For as in regard to the names also (for there "King of Righteousness" and "of Peace" are appellations, but here the reality) so these too are appellations in that case, in this the reality. How then hath He a beginning? Thou seest that the Son is "without beginning," not in respect of His not having a cause; (for this is impossible: for He has a Father, otherwise how is He Son?) but in respect of His "not having beginning or end of life." "But made like unto the Son of God." Where is the likeness? That we know not of the one or of the other either the end or the beginning. Of the one because they are not written; of the other, because they do not exist. Here is the likeness. But if the likeness were to exist in all respects, there would no longer be type and reality; but both would be type. Here then just as in representations by painting or drawing, there is somewhat that is like and somewhat that is unlike. By means of the lines indeed there is a likeness of features, but when the colors are put on, then the difference is plainly shown, both the likeness and the unlikeness.