Jesus Levite?

by peacefulpete 10 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • peacefulpete
    peacefulpete

    Mary is made by Luke to be Elizebeth's 'relative', Elizebeth (JtB mom) being called a daughter of Aaron hence of the tribe of Levi. The WTS and others then proceed to insist this legitimizes Jesus as a Levite and a Judahite and therefore qualified to be priest and King. To keep my comment short I'll just cut to he chase; the Epistle to the Hebrews (Hebrews) chapter 7 specifically argues against Jesus having been of the tribe of Levi.

    11 If indeed, then, perfection were through the Levitical priesthood -- for the people under it had received law -- what further need, according to the order of Melchisedek, for another priest to arise, and not to be called according to the order of Aaron?

    12 for the priesthood being changed, of necessity also, of the law a change doth come,

    13 for he of whom these things are said in another tribe hath had part, of whom no one gave attendance at the altar,

    14 for [it is] evident that out of Judah hath arisen our Lord, in regard to which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood.

    15 And it is yet more abundantly most evident, if according to the similitude of Melchisedek there doth arise another priest.......

    The force of the author's creative argument for the necessity of a priest in the order of Melchizedek hinges upon Jesus being understood as not of the tribe of Levi.

  • Narkissos
    Narkissos
    The WTS and others then proceed to insist this legitimizes Jesus as a Levite...

    As far as I can remember I never heard or read this argument from the WT.

    Otoh some historical Jesus theories (e.g. CB Amphoux) make him a member of the temple aristocracy (but then not a Galilean at all). This, fwiw, can also be connected to the priestly character of James the Just.

  • peacefulpete
    peacefulpete

    really? I used to say it. Maybe I picked it up elsewhere.

  • myelaine
    myelaine

    I'm not totally clued in about the geneology...but if Mary and Elizabeth we sisters from the tribe of Levi and Mary wed a man from the tribe of Judah, that would combine the priestly and the royal lines...the order of Melchizedek...of which our Lord Jesus is a Priest forever...the Prince of Peace...

    right?

    love michelle

  • peacefulpete
    peacefulpete

    Well thats about how I thought the WT understood it. However I may be wrong about where I got that idea. Anyway the book of Hebrews would explicitly contradict that. There the writer pulls in the Melchizedek idea as reason Jesus could be a priest while not being a Levite. There were many notions and expectations surrounding the cryptic character Mel and the author accepts as fact details of Mel's story not in the OT. The author of Hebrews (possibly writing to Samaritan Christian converts) is exploiting a creative angle, Mel. came before Levi in the story therefore its possible to be a priest and not a descendant of Levi. Its not certain but it also appears that he's drawing parallel between Jesus and Mel in "having no genealogy". If so then apparently he doesn't know about Matt and Luke's attempt to create a genealogy for Jesus.

  • mustang
    mustang

    It's probably 'too new' to be where you came by this line of thought, but "Messianic Legacy" makes this claim. They go into considerable detail, I might add. ML is the sequel to "Holy Blood, Holy Grail". And that is what got the "Da Vinci Code" ruckus started.

    Mustang

    PS: For my 2 cents worth, ML is a better read than HBHG.

  • aniron
    aniron

    Jesus lineage through Mary given at Matthew 1. His lineage through Joseph given in Like 3.

    No connection with Levites.

    But both lead to King David. Which would give Jesus right to say he was decendant of David and entitled to sit on the throne of David as King.

  • Narkissos
    Narkissos
    Jesus lineage through Mary given at Matthew 1. His lineage through Joseph given in Like 3.

    If I remember correctly the WT has it the other way round. Anyway it's a classical attempt at reconciling the two different genealogies, but it lacks scriptural support: both Matthew (1:16) and Luke (3:23) explicitly present their genealogy as being Joseph's.

  • lovelylil
    lovelylil

    I never heard that either pete, but I agree with Narkissos that both lines are thru Joseph. The one in Luke is in reverse order. Where did the WT get the idea that one was Mary's geneology. Does anyone know? Lilly

  • lovelylil
    lovelylil

    one more thing. In the geneologies they are almost the same but from David they differ. Some think because Luke traces the blood line of Christ and Matthew the legal heirs to the throne of David. Lilly

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit