Bible Options Bible Study Software
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Levitical Marriage?
#1
Lev.21:14 required Levitical Priests to take a woman "of his own people" (H#'s 4480 and 5971-'am). Is this requiring that the priests take from 9the tribes of) Israel in general or from the spacific tribe of Levi (or maybe the house of Judah)? I see All of Isreal told not to marry outside of the people of Israel (Deut.7:3-4) in a seperate context so when it comes to the Lev. Priests would this need to be repeated in context just in relation to them, or is something more detailed being said?
I'm not the best at Hebrew but I see a few terms that are used to mention "tribe": 'am (#5971), shebet (#7626), Matteh (H#4294- "figurative").
Num.1:47 But the Levites after the tribe of their fathers were not numbered among "them" (Israel). Mentions Levi in relation to "tribe"/branch of their fathers but goes on to say they are not to be counted among "them" (Ben- the sons/ tribes of Israel) IN RELATION TO Inheritance/ Territories (Deut.18:1-2) of Levi. So when it says they are required to take a wife of their own "people" what is being said? Is the "tribe" of Levi its "own" distinct "people"? Or in this case Is Israel the "people" being mentioned?

Why do I care about this in modern times?
I have heard it said that a Levitical Priest had to marry a Levite woman and just looking for the documentational support. The reason I have interest in this is cause of how I have heard some relate it to Yeshua:
If Elizebeth was the "cousin" of Mary in the western sense of the word cousin, then this would make Mary (Mother of Yeshua) hafe Levi (priest line/ through her Mother) and hafe Judah (king line) since Elizebeth was the wife of a Levitical Priest (Zacharias) and Mary's Father was Heli (Of Judah). So If all of this was truth then Yeshua could be called King of kings and Lord of lords in the physical/ literal sense as well as the spiritual, fulfilling the purpose of (Levi)Priest and (Judah)King for all times in Mashiach.

I recall Brown debateing an orthadox Rabbi about Yeshua being Mashicah and the rabbi said the Messiah would have to relate to both Levi and Judah and I immediately thought of what i had heard of Luke 1.
So I'm basically interested in any feedback on the subject.
#2
(11-22-2012, 11:35 PM)Refugee Wrote: Lev.21:14 required Levitical Priests to take a woman "of his own people" (H#'s 4480 and 5971-'am). Is this requiring that the priests take from 9the tribes of) Israel in general or from the spacific tribe of Levi (or maybe the house of Judah)? I see All of Isreal told not to marry outside of the people of Israel (Deut.7:3-4) in a seperate context so when it comes to the Lev. Priests would this need to be repeated in context just in relation to them, or is something more detailed being said?
Why do I care about this in modern times?
I have heard it said that a Levitical Priest had to marry a Levite woman and just looking for the documentational support. The reason I have interest in this is cause of how I have heard some relate it to Yeshua:
If Elizebeth was the "cousin" of Mary in the western sense of the word cousin, then this would make Mary (Mother of Yeshua) hafe Levi (priest line/ through her Mother) and hafe Judah (king line) since Elizebeth was the wife of a Levitical Priest (Zacharias) and Mary's Father was Heli (Of Judah). So If all of this was truth then Yeshua could be called King of kings and Lord of lords in the physical/ literal sense as well as the spiritual, fulfilling the purpose of (Levi)Priest and (Judah)King for all times in Mashiach.

I recall Brown debateing an orthadox Rabbi about Yeshua being Mashicah and the rabbi said the Messiah would have to relate to both Levi and Judah and I immediately thought of what i had heard of Luke 1.
So I'm basically interested in any feedback on the subject.

I believe they would have to marry within their own tribe.

Numbers 36:7
So shall not the inheritance of the children of Israel remove from tribe to tribe: for every one of the children of Israel shall keep himself to the inheritance of the tribe of his fathers.

Numbers 36:8
And every daughter, that possesses an inheritance in any tribe of the children of Israel, shall be wife to one of the family of the tribe of her father, that the children of Israel may enjoy every man the inheritance of his fathers.

Numbers 36:9
Neither shall the inheritance remove from one tribe to another tribe; but every one of the tribes of the children of Israel shall keep himself to his own inheritance.

(11-22-2012, 11:35 PM)Refugee Wrote: "and the rabbi said the Messiah would have to relate to both Levi and Judah"

That is an interesting opinion, and an interesting opinion is all it may be, because I can't locate where he would get this idea when reading the Tanach.

Did he mention where he was reading this?
#3
Thanks MessianicJew,
after locating the discussion between Michael Brown and Shmuley Boteach ("Is Jesus the Jewish Messiah"-youtube) It was Brown that said the Tanach says Messiah would be a priest (Zec.6:13) and it was Shmuley Boteach that said "When Brown said Messiah would be a priest, Messiah Must be of the house of David, a priest is of the house of Levi, and David is of the house of Judah" (Is.9:7/ Gen.49:10)...... So I think there is support for messiah needing to relate to both Levi and Judah amoung both of these Jews in knowledge of the scriptures (Zec.6:13 "both offices"/ Ps.110) and I found the area of numbers in which you shared very interesting. ^1
#4
(11-26-2012, 10:39 PM)Refugee Wrote: Thanks MessianicJew,
after locating the discussion between Michael Brown and Shmuley Boteach ("Is Jesus the Jewish Messiah"-youtube) It was Brown that said the Tanach says Messiah would be a priest (Zec.6:13) and it was Shmuley Boteach that said "When Brown said Messiah would be a priest, Messiah Must be of the house of David, a priest is of the house of Levi, and David is of the house of Judah" (Is.9:7/ Gen.49:10)......

You mentioned (Zec.6:13 "both offices"/ Ps.110) What translation do you use for Zechariah 6:13? I don't see 'both offices' in mine. Also, in Isaiah 9 and Genesis 49, I don't see a mention of the tribe of Levi, just Judah.

(11-26-2012, 10:39 PM)Refugee Wrote: So I think there is support for messiah needing to relate to both Levi and Judah amoung both of these Jews in knowledge of the scriptures (Zec.6:13 "both offices"/ Ps.110) and I found the area of numbers in which you shared very interesting. ^1

Would you believe Apostle Paul?

For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Judah; of which tribe Moses spoke nothing concerning priesthood.
~Hebrews 7:14~

If Jesus sprung from more than one tribe, both would have been mentioned.
#5
(11-29-2012, 01:25 PM)MessianicJew Wrote:
(11-26-2012, 10:39 PM)Refugee Wrote: Thanks MessianicJew,
after locating the discussion between Michael Brown and Shmuley Boteach ("Is Jesus the Jewish Messiah"-youtube) It was Brown that said the Tanach says Messiah would be a priest (Zec.6:13) and it was Shmuley Boteach that said "When Brown said Messiah would be a priest, Messiah Must be of the house of David, a priest is of the house of Levi, and David is of the house of Judah" (Is.9:7/ Gen.49:10)......

You mentioned (Zec.6:13 "both offices"/ Ps.110) What translation do you use for Zechariah 6:13? I don't see 'both offices' in mine. Also, in Isaiah 9 and Genesis 49, I don't see a mention of the tribe of Levi, just Judah.

(11-26-2012, 10:39 PM)Refugee Wrote: So I think there is support for messiah needing to relate to both Levi and Judah amoung both of these Jews in knowledge of the scriptures (Zec.6:13 "both offices"/ Ps.110) and I found the area of numbers in which you shared very interesting. ^1

Would you believe Apostle Paul?

For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Judah; of which tribe Moses spoke nothing concerning priesthood.
~Hebrews 7:14~

If Jesus sprung from more than one tribe, both would have been mentioned.

hi MessianicJew,
Good area of consideration! ty
#6
Hi, there, Refugee and MessianicJew. I just wanted to offer a verse to answer an earlier question. Refugee asked whether or not Levites could marry outside the tribe. The discussion in Numbers 36 was regarding that specific instance. The sons of Menashe were concerned, lest these girls marry outside the tribe, and thus, when the Land was apportioned, lessen the total Land share of Menashe. Therefore, Moses commanded them to marry only within the tribe.

It is clear that this was a one-time rule. In Judges 21 we see that the people had sworn to not let their daughters marry a man from Benjamin. Why enact such a rule if one already existed? Thus, tribes could intermarry.
#7
Messianic my post wasnt claiming that those verses said Messiah would be identified as being of two tribes. I was pointing out that Messiah is a priest and of the king (which are the roles of two tribes).One cant be of two tribes (as far as inheritance). (To be physically considered of the congregation at birth, ones Mother must be a descendant of Jacob, However tribal identification is made through the Father. So while its evident to me that Mary would have related to both Levi and Judah her and her seed's tribal identification is that of Judah.) Thanks again for highlighting Heb.7:14 in relation to the subject!
#8
(03-11-2013, 10:57 AM)benyosef Wrote: The discussion in Numbers 36 was regarding that specific instance.
It is clear that this was a one-time rule. Thus, tribes could intermarry.

This is simply not true. Let's read verbatim, not opinion:

Numbers 36:7
So shall not the inheritance of the children of Israel remove from tribe to tribe: for every one of the children of Israel shall keep himself to the inheritance of the tribe of his fathers.

The claim this was only a one time instance is clearly refuted by the below:

Joshua 11:23
So Joshua took the whole land, according to all that the LORD said to Moses; and Joshua gave it for an inheritance to Israel according to their divisions by their tribes. And the land rested from war.

Ezekiel 48:29
This is the land which you shall divide by lot to the tribes of Israel for inheritance, and these are their portions, says the Lord GOD.

You cannot have inheritance of tribes if they're moving from tribe to tribe.

You cannot marry outside your tribe, and this is one more reason Jews today live in sin. This is one more reason you need a High Priest to forgive you. The system has been fractured and is broken, the Jews have sinned, and now they try to keep laws they cannot.
#9
MessianicJew, you say tribes cannot intermarry, yet you start at Numbers 36:7. Why not start from verse 1?

“And the chief fathers of the families of the children of Gilead, the son of Machir, the son of Manasseh, of the families of the sons of Joseph, came near, and spake before Moses, and before the princes, the chief fathers of the children of Israel: And they said, The L-RD commanded my lord to give the land for an inheritance by lot to the children of Israel: and my lord was commanded by the L-RD to give the inheritance of Zelophehad our brother unto his daughters. And if they be married to any of the sons of the other tribes of the children of Israel, then shall their inheritance be taken from the inheritance of our fathers, and shall be put to the inheritance of the tribe whereunto they are received: so shall it be taken from the lot of our inheritance.” (36:1-3)

Clearly, the nation was permitted to marry from whichever tribe they chose. What was the problem here? If the girls marry from other tribes, Menashe’s allotment would diminish. Although any land sold would be returned to its rightful tribe in the 50th year (Leviticus 25:10), these borders would be based on Joshua’s division of the land. If the girls married into other tribes, the portion of Menashe would be forever shrunk. We see this is clearly a one-time rule, and Joshua 11 was putting into practice the rule set forth by Moses.

If we can’t marry outside our tribe, why did the men in Judges 21 make a specific rule that none of them would give their daughters to the men of Benjamin?
#10
Since you're speaking of verse 1, read the whole chapter. See Numbers 36:11 & 12

11. Mahlah, Tirzah, Hoglah, Milcah, and Noah married their cousins.

12. They married into the families of the sons of Manasseh the son of Joseph, and their inheritance remained with the tribe of their father's family.

See Numbers 36:11 & 12

11. Mahlah, Tirzah, Hoglah, Milcah, and Noah married their cousins.

12. They married into the families of the sons of Manasseh the son of Joseph, and their inheritance remained with the tribe of their father's family.

You stop short for some odd reason, I think this is what is meant by taking scripture out of "context".

6 This is the thing which the Lord does command concerning the daughters of Zelophehad, saying, Let them marry to whom they think best; only to the family of the tribe of their father shall they marry.

7 So shall not the inheritance of the children of Israel remove from tribe to tribe: for every one of the children of Israel shall keep himself to the inheritance of the tribe of his fathers.


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)