Age to be a Jewish priest?

dysert · Nov 16, 2012

Apologies if this question is inappropriate for this forum, but it seemed the best place to start. Is there anywhere in Jewish literature or tradition that indicates there was/is a certain age requirement to be a priest? I had always thought that you were anointed as a priest whenever your "mentor" said you were ready, but I was asked today if you were granted priesthood at a specific age. Does anyone know? Thanks.

GuardianShua · Nov 16, 2012

dysert said:
Apologies if this question is inappropriate for this forum, but it seemed the best place to start. Is there anywhere in Jewish literature or tradition that indicates there was/is a certain age requirement to be a priest? I had always thought that you were anointed as a priest whenever your "mentor" said you were ready, but I was asked today if you were granted priesthood at a specific age. Does anyone know? Thanks.

An Orthodox Jew may know the answer to that question. Yahshua waited to start his ministry at age 30.

ChavaK · Nov 16, 2012

I think you might be asking two different questions.
A Jewish "priest", a kohane, is a priest from birth. If a Jew has a Jewish mother
and a father who is a kohane, then "priesthood" is automatically conferred upon him.

If you are asking what age the kohane began to serve in the Temple, I think it was age 20. I could be wrong though, I would have to check after shabbos to verify it.

BTW, I am assuming you are using "priest" as in " kohane", and not using it in reference to a "rabbi".

Lulav · Nov 16, 2012

dysert said:
Apologies if this question is inappropriate for this forum, but it seemed the best place to start. Is there anywhere in Jewish literature or tradition that indicates there was/is a certain age requirement to be a priest? I had always thought that you were anointed as a priest whenever your "mentor" said you were ready, but I was asked today if you were granted priesthood at a specific age. Does anyone know? Thanks.

Not inappropriate at all.

The priesthood is a genetic occupation. You are born into it, as Chavak said.

The priests would serve in the temple or tabernacle from age 30-50. Twenty year service.

Found in the book called 'Numbers'

1 And the L-RD spake unto Moses and unto Aaron, saying , 2 Take the sum of the sons of Kohath from among the sons of Levi, after their families, by the house of their fathers, 3 From thirty years old and upward even until fifty years old, all that enter into the host, to do the work in the tabernacle of the congregation. 4 This shall be the service of the sons of Kohath in the tabernacle of the congregation, about the most holy things:

dysert · Nov 16, 2012

ChavaK said:
I think you might be asking two different questions.
A Jewish "priest", a kohane, is a priest from birth. If a Jew has a Jewish mother
and a father who is a kohane, then "priesthood" is automatically conferred upon him.

If you are asking what age the kohane began to serve in the Temple, I think it was age 20. I could be wrong though, I would have to check after shabbos to verify it.

BTW, I am assuming you are using "priest" as in " kohane", and not using it in reference to a "rabbi".

I very well could be asking two different questions -- I don't know. I guess I'm interested to know at what point a priest (kohane?) is allowed to start serving in the temple? (I am obviously quite ignorant about this stuff.)

Lulav · Nov 16, 2012

dysert said:
I very well could be asking two different questions -- I don't know. I guess I'm interested to know at what point a priest (kohane?) is allowed to start serving in the temple? (I am obviously quite ignorant about this stuff.)

Shalom! You must have missed my post. It will give you the info you seek.

ChavaK · Nov 16, 2012

Lulav said:
Not inappropriate at all.

The priesthood is a genetic occupation. You are born into it, as Chavak said.

The priests would serve in the temple or tabernacle from age 30-50. Twenty year service.

Found in the book called 'Numbers'

1 And the L-RD spake unto Moses and unto Aaron, saying , 2 Take the sum of the sons of Kohath from among the sons of Levi, after their families, by the house of their fathers, 3 From thirty years old and upward even until fifty years old, all that enter into the host, to do the work in the tabernacle of the congregation. 4 This shall be the service of the sons of Kohath in the tabernacle of the congregation, about the most holy things:

The sons of Kohath were Levites and served in the Temple, but they weren't Kohanim.

Lulav · Nov 16, 2012

ChavaK said:
The sons of Kohath were Levites and served in the Temple, but they weren't Kohanim.

Yes, I thought he was speaking of the priests, not the Kohan HaGadol.

Twenty is not mentioned in the Torah but is used as a standard according to Talmud for the High Priest, But this was written down way after the last temple was destroyed.

yedida · Nov 17, 2012

Lulav said:
Yes, I thought he was speaking of the priests, not the Kohan HaGadol.

Twenty is not mentioned in the Torah but is used as a standard according to Talmud for the High Priest, But this was written down way after the last temple was destroyed.

And it would appear, according to the Luke story, that the age limit was raised. From the descritpion of Zacharias (John's dad), he was well past 50 years in age during his 2-week stint. I guess it would be possible, but I wouldn't think very likely, that his wife would be so terribly much older that she was way beyond child-bearing age either and 50 something is not an impossibility.....just saying

Steve Petersen · Nov 17, 2012

IIRC, a priest above 50 was not allowed to officiate, but he could serve in other capacities of the temple activities (in charge of the wood, assisting with other tasks like that.)

yedida · Nov 17, 2012

Steve Petersen said:
IIRC, a priest above 50 was not allowed to officiate, but he could serve in other capacities of the temple activities (in charge of the wood, assisting with other tasks like that.)

John's papa was doing more than what you're describing....

Steve Petersen · Nov 17, 2012

yedida said:
John's papa was doing more than what you're describing....

Where do the gospels give his age?

In the days of the Roman Empire, if you were able to survive into adulthood, the average age at death was 52. Luke says Zachariah was 'well along in years.' By that standard he could have been in his late 40's.

yedida · Nov 17, 2012

Steve Petersen said:
Where do the gospels give his age?

In the days of the Roman Empire, if you were able to survive into adulthood, the average age at death was 52. Luke says Zachariah was 'well along in years.' By that standard he could have been in his late 40's.

I'm using the time of fertility for a woman. Sure it varies from woman to woman; it can begin as early as 35 and can wait until late 50s. Luke speaks as though she were well beyond the time of child-bearing years (putting aside tha fact that all during those years she had been barren - we know nothing about miscarriages that may have taken place, she probably never knew about them either...) but Luke also speaks of Zacharias as being quite elderly and possibly past the time of being able to do the deed???) It just doesn't make sense at 52 or younger to be so astounded by it.
On another note, Luke makes it sound like he was doing more than just the normal levitical duties, perhaps even taking care of the Holy Place, the second holiest part of the Temple. Of course, I could be reading Luke wrongly...but it sounds like he was doing more than grunt work.

sevengreenbeans · Nov 17, 2012

The High Priest comes from the family line of Kohath. The High Priest serves for life. After the death of a current High Priest, the next in line is appointed (follows birth order, and eldest in the line of descent). This office is in charge of the Holy of Holies.

Aaron, Eleazar, and Ithamar were in charge of covering all of the items in the Most Holy. The rest of the Kohathites were assigned to carry these items, but not touch or look upon.

Eleazar (the High Priest next in line after Aaron) was appointed charge of the whole Tabernacle and all its articles. He was assigned to carry various items on his person. He singularly carried the oil for the menorah, anointing oil, the incense, and the daily offering.

The Kohathites were in charge of the Most Holy.

Kohathites, Gershonites, Merarites - all Levites - priests all assigned to different duties according to their family line. 30 - 50 years old.

Gershonites and Merarites answered to Ithamar, son of Aaron, a Kohathite.

Ithamar's descendants cannot rightfully serve as High Priest until all of Eleazar's descendants die out, though this is the secondary line of descent for High Priesthood.

Numbers 4 describes the Levitical hierarchy.

sevengreenbeans · Nov 17, 2012

yedida said:
I'm using the time of fertility for a woman. Sure it varies from woman to woman; it can begin as early as 35 and can wait until late 50s. Luke speaks as though she were well beyond the time of child-bearing years (putting aside tha fact that all during those years she had been barren - we know nothing about miscarriages that may have taken place, she probably never knew about them either...) but Luke also speaks of Zacharias as being quite elderly and possibly past the time of being able to do the deed???) It just doesn't make sense at 52 or younger to be so astounded by it.
On another note, Luke makes it sound like he was doing more than just the normal levitical duties, perhaps even taking care of the Holy Place, the second holiest part of the Temple. Of course, I could be reading Luke wrongly...but it sounds like he was doing more than grunt work.

If Zacharias was High Priest, he would have served for life.

yedida · Nov 17, 2012

sevengreenbeans said:
If Zacharias was High Priest, he would have served for life.

Not back in those days. The priesthood had gone thru many changes. I'm not sure if it was the first or just the most notable, but Zadok was not in line to be of the HP'hood. By Yeshua's time, it could be bought and it wasn't for life. (Keep in mind that Messiah was to come during an extremely corrupt period of time, I think that this was one of the worst for corruption.)

sevengreenbeans · Nov 18, 2012

yedida said:
Not back in those days. The priesthood had gone thru many changes. I'm not sure if it was the first or just the most notable, but Zadok was not in line to be of the HP'hood. By Yeshua's time, it could be bought and it wasn't for life. (Keep in mind that Messiah was to come during an extremely corrupt period of time, I think that this was one of the worst for corruption.)

I don't know if you meant Zadok or Zecharias?

Elisabeth was among the daughters (female descendants) of Aaron, so that makes her a Kohathite. (High Priestly line of descent.)

I agree the priesthood was very corrupt. But, what are we told about Zecharias? We are told that Zecharias and his wife, Elisabeth, were both righteous before G-d, they both followed all of the commandments and ordinances of the L-rd, and they were blameless. (Luke 1:6)

We are told in Luke 1:11 that Zecharias was standing by the altar of incense, as it was his duty to burn incense.

It was Aaron who burned incense according to Exodus 30:7-8. This task was then inherited by Eleazar.

Numbers 16:40 "To be a memorial unto the children of Israel, that no stranger, which is not of the seed of Aaron, come near to offer incense before the LORD; that he be not as Korah, and as his company: as the LORD said to him by the hand of Moses."

Gabriel appeared to Zecharias. This archangel is one who stands (in the spiritual realm) in the presence of G-d. (In the physical realm, this is the most holy place, where a High Priest serves.)

Luke 1:23 states that when the days of Zecharias' public function were accomplished, he went to his own house. This does not necessarily mean he had his 50th birthday, especially if he was High Priest, as he would have served in this capacity for life. He could very well have resumed his duties after having time with his wife, after having taken the necessary steps to return to a clean/tahor status.

Luke 1:74 and 75 implies that he was not able to serve openly without fear of 'enemies'. Is it possible that a preserved priesthood was operating parallel to the corrupt? An example that this might be the case is this... Matthew 23:35 and Luke 11:51 are verses where an adult Yeshua states that a man named Zecharias was killed between the altar and the sanctuary. If this is the same Zecharias, then Yochanan would have been next in line for High Priest, and after Yochanan, next near kin would have been Yeshua. Luke 3:1-2 states the rulers and leaders serving during Yochanan's adult life, thus Yeshua's adult life, as well. The High Priest(s) listed as two people, Annas and Caiphas - corrupt - this situation does not match Torah, as there cannot be two people serving in the capacity where there could be only one, according to the words of the Law. The word of YHWH came to Yochanan in the wilderness. The preserved line, perhaps?

In the words of Yeshua:
Matthew 23:29 "Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because you build the tombs of the prophets, and garnish the sepulchres of the righteous,
23:30And say, 'If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets.'
23:31Wherefore you be witnesses unto yourselves, that you are the children of them which killed the prophets."
(The children of Jerusalem, according to 23:37.)

Matthew 23:35 "That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom you slew between the temple and the altar."

Matthew 23:37 "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem,thouthat kills the prophets, and stones them which are sent unto you, how often would I have gathered your children together, even as a hen gathers her chickens underherwings, and you would not!
23:38Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.
23:39For I say unto you, You shall not see me henceforth, till you shall say, Blessedishe that comes in the name of the Lord."

Up to the current events of the day, we have - that which is Corrupt vs. that which is Truth - in the Land.

Restoration of Truth...something to look forward to.

yedida · Nov 18, 2012

sevengreenbeans said:
I don't know if you meant Zadok or Zecharias?

Elisabeth was among the daughters (female descendants) of Aaron, so that makes her a Kohathite. (High Priestly line of descent.)

I agree the priesthood was very corrupt. But, what are we told about Zecharias? We are told that Zecharias and his wife, Elisabeth, were both righteous before G-d, they both followed all of the commandments and ordinances of the L-rd, and they were blameless. (Luke 1:6)

We are told in Luke 1:11 that Zecharias was standing by the altar of incense, as it was his duty to burn incense.

It was Aaron who burned incense according to Exodus 30:7-8. This task was then inherited by Eleazar.

Numbers 16:40 "To be a memorial unto the children of Israel, that no stranger, which is not of the seed of Aaron, come near to offer incense before the LORD; that he be not as Korah, and as his company: as the LORD said to him by the hand of Moses."

Gabriel appeared to Zecharias. This archangel is one who stands (in the spiritual realm) in the presence of G-d. (In the physical realm, this is the most holy place, where a High Priest serves.)

Luke 1:23 states that when the days of Zecharias' public function were accomplished, he went to his own house. This does not necessarily mean he had his 50th birthday, especially if he was High Priest, as he would have served in this capacity for life. He could very well have resumed his duties after having time with his wife, after having taken the necessary steps to return to a clean/tahor status.

Luke 1:74 and 75 implies that he was not able to serve openly without fear of 'enemies'. Is it possible that a preserved priesthood was operating parallel to the corrupt? An example that this might be the case is this... Matthew 23:35 and Luke 11:51 are verses where an adult Yeshua states that a man named Zecharias was killed between the altar and the sanctuary. If this is the same Zecharias, then Yochanan would have been next in line for High Priest, and after Yochanan, next near kin would have been Yeshua. Luke 3:1-2 states the rulers and leaders serving during Yochanan's adult life, thus Yeshua's adult life, as well. The High Priest(s) listed as two people, Annas and Caiphas - corrupt - this situation does not match Torah, as there cannot be two people serving in the capacity where there could be only one, according to the words of the Law. The word of YHWH came to Yochanan in the wilderness. The preserved line, perhaps?

In the words of Yeshua:
Matthew 23:29 "Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because you build the tombs of the prophets, and garnish the sepulchres of the righteous,
23:30And say, 'If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets.'
23:31Wherefore you be witnesses unto yourselves, that you are the children of them which killed the prophets."
(The children of Jerusalem, according to 23:37.)

Matthew 23:35 "That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom you slew between the temple and the altar."

Matthew 23:37 "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem,thouthat kills the prophets, and stones them which are sent unto you, how often would I have gathered your children together, even as a hen gathers her chickens underherwings, and you would not!
23:38Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.
23:39For I say unto you, You shall not see me henceforth, till you shall say, Blessedishe that comes in the name of the Lord."

Up to the current events of the day, we have - that which is Corrupt vs. that which is Truth - in the Land.

Restoration of Truth...something to look forward to.

You just repeated, with references (thank you) what I've been saying: John's papa was not doing grunt work in the temple, he was doing more than the normal levitical duties, he was of the priestly line.
And I meant Zadok, the guy David made HP back in the day.

Gxg (G²) · Nov 18, 2012

dysert said:
Apologies if this question is inappropriate for this forum, but it seemed the best place to start. Is there anywhere in Jewish literature or tradition that indicates there was/is a certain age requirement to be a priest? I had always thought that you were anointed as a priest whenever your "mentor" said you were ready, but I was asked today if you were granted priesthood at a specific age. Does anyone know? Thanks.

Interesting question..

Some people have wondered the same when it came to the man known as Zadok and wondering how Zadok could support the young King David and then serve Solomon for years since many feel the priestly ministry does not start until a man is 30 years of age.

Of course, one would need to show where Zadok wasn't in his 30s when he began serving David. To my knowledge, the main reference for the 30yrs of age/Priest connection was 1 Chronicles 23:2-4 when it came to counting/numbering the Levites in one instance--and for the other:

Numbers 4:3
Count all the men from thirty to fifty years of age who come to serve in the work at the tent of meeting.
Numbers 4:2-4/

Click to expand...

Numbers 8:23-25Numbers 8
19 From among all the Israelites, I have given the Levites as gifts to Aaron and his sons to do the work at the tent of meeting on behalf of the Israelites and to make atonement for them so that no plague will strike the Israelites when they go near the sanctuary.

20 Moses, Aaron and the whole Israelite community did with the Levites just as the LORD commanded Moses. 21 The Levites purified themselves and washed their clothes. Then Aaron presented them as a wave offering before the LORD and made atonement for them to purify them. 22 After that, the Levites came to do their work at the tent of meeting under the supervision of Aaron and his sons. They did with the Levites just as the LORD commanded Moses.

23 The LORD said to Moses, 24 This applies to the Levites: Men twenty-five years old or more shall come to take part in the work at the tent of meeting, 25 but at the age of fifty, they must retire from their regular service and work no longer. 26 They may assist their brothers in performing their duties at the tent of meeting, but they themselves must not do the work. This, then, is how you are to assign the responsibilities of the Levites.

Numbers 8 liberalizes the age limits for levitical duty, and other writings expand them even more---if investigating I Chronicles 23 and I Chronicles 23:24/1 Chronicles 23:23-25

2 Chronicles 31:17
And they distributed to the priests enrolled by their families in the genealogical records and likewise to the Levites twenty years old or more, according to their responsibilities and their divisions.
2 Chronicles 31:16-18

Ezra 3:7-9
In the second month of the second year after their arrival at the house of God in Jerusalem, Zerubbabel son of Shealtiel, Joshua son of Jozadak and the rest of the people (the priests and the Levites and all who had returned from the captivity to Jerusalem) began the work. They appointed Levites twenty years old and older to supervise the building of the house of the LORD.

The variations/diffeences are presumably due to variations over time in the numbers and duties of the Levities. An upper age limit is more appropriate for those doing heavy work such as transportating (Numbers 3-4)..and in Numbers 8:26, it was noted that Levites over fifty could still assist in the tent of meeting. When the tabernacle was stationary within the temple (I Kings 8:1-13), no such duties would fall to the Levites. Differences in lower age limits may be due to changing numbers of available Levite Males (see Ezra 2 , etc).

If one takes issue with Zadok on the basis of age, the man who was leader before him became corrupt/was displaced...and on the issue of replacements, when no one was available, if disagreeing, it'd be a good thing for one to show where the Law never allowed for exceptions in replacing others who were more righteous than others in a position when they were corrupt.

David Wilkerson (author of the book entitled "Cross and Switchblade" and creator of the organization Teen Challenge ) shared more on the subject here in the thread entitled "The Zadok Priesthood!" by David Wilkerson, founding pastor of Times Square Church ...

The Folks at "Jewish Virtual Library" did an excellent review on the matter, as seen here (for an excerpt)

:

ZADOK (Heb. צָדוֹק, "righteous"), priest in the time of king *David. Zadok established a high priestly dynasty which continued until approximately 171 B.C.E., both in the First and Second Temple periods. He first appears, together with *Abiathar, as the priest in charge of the Ark at the time of Absalom's revolt (II Sam. 15:2437). He and Abiathar joined David in his flight from Jerusalem, carrying the Ark with them, but the king ordered them to return to the capital to inform him of events in Absalom's court. There they had freedom of movement and were able to deliver messages to David about the rebels' intrigues (ibid. 17:15ff.).

After Absalom's death, Zadok and Abiathar acted according to a message sent to them by David requesting them to suggest to the people that the king should be called back (ibid. 19:1213). They are mentioned next to each other in both lists of David's chief officials (ibid. 8:17; 20:25), where Zadok is always mentioned before Abiathar. They are heard of again in the story of the dynastic struggle in David's last days (I Kings 12). When *Adonijah plotted to usurp the throne, Zadok remained faithful to David, while Abiathar joined the usurper (ibid 1:7,8).

When David became aware of the plot, he instructed Zadok and *Nathan the prophet to anoint *Solomon king (ibid. 32ff.). For his loyal service in anointing Solomon, Zadok was made chief priest (ibid. 2:35), while Abiathar was deposed from the priesthood and banished to Anathoth (ibid. 2:2627). Zadok must have died shortly afterwards, for he is never again mentioned and in the list of the main officials, which was compiled in the middle of the reign, it is his son Azariah who holds the title of priest (I Kings 4:2; the mention of Zadok and Abiathar in verse 4 is probably an interpolation).

Origin

The question of Zadok's origin is extremely obscure, for there is no clear and accurate picture of his background in the Bible. In the narrative he appears, as it were, from nowhere. In II Samuel 8:17 he is called the "son of Ahitub" and seems to be connected with the House of *Eli, but this verse is clearly the result of a textual corruption.

Indeed, the prophecy of I Samuel 2:2736 (cf. I Kings 2:27) makes it clear that the House of Zadok was considered to have supplanted the House of Eli. Nor are the genealogies in Chronicles and Ezra (I Chron. 5:2734; 6:3538; 24:3; Ezra 7:2), which treat Zadok as a descendant of the Aaronide house of Eleazar, any more reliable, for they repeat the error of II Samuel 8:17. Zadok thus remains without a genealogy in the ancient texts.

It seems likely, however, that the reason David made Zadok an equal to Abiathar, who had served him loyally from the time of his break with Saul, is connected with the position occupied by Zadok before he entered the service of David. Several hypotheses have been consequently advanced about his origin:

a) Zadok was the priest of *Gibeon, where the Tabernacle stood (cf. II Chron. 1:3), while Abiathar served before the Ark at Jerusalem (Auerbach; Grintz). This hypothesis is based on I Chronicles 16:37ff., where the two are mentioned as the principal sanctuaries in David's time. In support of this theory it is pointed out that after the exile of Abiathar not only was Zadok made the sole chief priest, but Solomon went to Gibeon to sacrifice (I Kings 3:4).

b) Zadok was appointed priest already by Saul, replacing Abijah (= *Ahimelech; cf. Jos., Ant., 5:350; Wellhausen).

c) The proper name Ahio in II Samuel 6:34 should be read as 'aḥiw, "his [Uzzah's] brother," this nameless brother being Zadok (Sellin, Budde). According to this theory Zadok served the Ark at Kiriath-Jearim and afterwards remained at Jerusalem, as one of the two men who carried the Ark (*Uzzah would have been replaced by Abiathar; II Sam. 15:29).

d) Since Zadok does not appear until after the capture of Jerusalem and since his genealogy is not given, he may have been a priest of Jebusite Jerusalem before the conquest by David (Rowley). According to this theory, David permitted him to retain his priestly function in order to help reconcile the old inhabitants to their new master.

It is safer to admit that Zadok's origin is unknown; it can be assumed that he was indeed of levitical origin, though not from the same branch as the house of Eli.

The House of Zadok

I Chronicles 5:3440 gives a list of the successors of Zadok as head of the priesthood in Jerusalem. It contains eleven names from *Ahimaaz (Zadok's son) to Jehozadak. This gives exactly 12 generations of priests from the building of the Temple under Solomon to its reconstruction after the Exile. The list of Zadok's ancestors given immediately before, in I Chronicles 5:2934, also contains exactly 12 generations from the erection of the Sanctuary in the desert to the building of the Temple; and 12 generations of 40 years corresponds exactly to the 480 years in I Kings 6:1 as the period from the Exodus to the erection of the Temple. This symmetry is deliberate, and other parts underline the artificial nature of the list. Ahimaaz was undoubtedly Zadok's son (II Sam. 15:36), but Azariah was another son of Zadok, not his grandson (as I Chron. 5:35 states). Moreover, the list is incomplete; though it contains some names which are found elsewhere in the Bible (Azariah, II Kings 4:2; *Hilkiah, II Kings 22:4; *Seraiah, II Kings 25:18; Jehozadak, Hag. 1:1), it omits *Jehoiada (II Kings 12:8), Urijah (or *Uriah; II Kings 16:10; Isa. 8:2), and at least two others who are mentioned in the narrative part of Chronicles itself (II Chron. 26:20; 31:10). Another difficulty is that the series Amariah-Ahitub-Zadok recurs in identical form among the immediate ancestors of Zadok (I Chron. 5:3334) and among his descendants (verses 3738). The list, however, seems to express a real fact, namely the continuity of Zadok's line, but it cannot be used as the basis of a detailed history of his house.

J.M. Grintz attempted to reconstruct a list of the high priests by comparing those mentioned in Josephus (Ant., 10:152) with those retained in Seder Olam Zuta 56. He claims that the list he obtained by this process is authentic and that those names which appear in the list, but not in I Chronicles, represent a lineage other than that of the House of Zadok. This new, otherwise not attested, dynasty (probably of the House of Abiathar) began to serve, according to Grintz, in the Temple after Solomon's death, but was deposed during the reforms of King *Josiah, being, as it seems, suspected of idolatrous inclinations.

J.R. Bartlett, on the other hand, doubts that the high priests of Jerusalem were directly descended from Zadok. He claims that they were rather appointed in each case by the kings, on the basis of merit. According to this view, the term "House of Zadok" was fixed only in Josiah's time, in order to distinguish between the Jerusalemite priests and the priests of the high places.

The fortunes of the House of Zadok after the Exile are reflected in the position given to them in the books of Ezekiel and Chronicles. In Ezekiel 4048, the exiled Zadokites expect as reward for their faithfulness that they alone shall perform the priestly functions in the new temple; the rest of the levites are to be reduced to the status of servants. The Book of Chronicles shows that after the return this program was not put into practice.

Gxg (G²) · Nov 18, 2012

ChavaK said:
A Jewish "priest", a kohane, is a priest from birth. If a Jew has a Jewish mother
and a father who is a kohane, then "priesthood" is automatically conferred upon him.
.

Indeed...

I often wonder how the scriptures worked themselves out when it came to instances that there were more than 2 priesthoods available.

In example, the first two sons of Aaron were Nadab and Abihu. They were
killed by the LORD, when they carried strange fire into the tabernacle. This left Eleazar and Ithamar to carry on the work of the priests. Since Nadab and Abihu had no children when they died, it would be up to the families of Eleazar and Ithmar to keep the priesthood going.

I Chronicles 24:2 says "But Nadab and Abihu died before their father,
and had no children: therefore Eleazar and Ithamar executed the
priest's office."

Their father, Aaron, was not even allowed to grieve for them. He had the anointing oil upon him, when they died, and some other relatives had to come and take them out of the tabernacle. Eleazar and Ithamar would be the priests under their father, Aaron, who was high priest.

I Chronicles 24:3 "And David distributed them, both Zadok of the sons of Eleazar, and Ahimelech of the sons of Ithamar, according to their offices in their service."

This appears, that David, Zadok, and Ahimelech made the arrangements for the services in the work of the LORD. Ahimelech and Zadok were both acting high priests at the time of David. Ahimelech was the father of Abiathar. David made Abiathar high priest, after Saul killed all of his brothers.

I Chronicles 24:4 says "And there were more chief men found of the
sons of Eleazar than of the sons of Ithamar; and [thus] were they
divided. Among the sons of Eleazar [there were] sixteen chief men of
the house of [their] fathers, and eight among the sons of Ithamar
according to the house of their fathers."

There were 16 men of the sons of Eleazar, who were capable of
leading. There were just eight of the sons of Ithamar, who were
leaders.

Moreover, I Chronicles 24:5 says "Thus were they divided by lot, one sort with another; for the governors of the sanctuary, and governors [of the house] of God, were of the sons of Eleazar, and of the sons of Ithamar."

Of the children of Ithamar and of Eleazar, there was no order of importance, so the various tasks were decided by lot. The sons of Eleazar are allotted the governorship of the sanctuary. They would work under their father, Eleazar. The house of God is, possibly, speaking of the holy of holies.

I Chronicles 24:6 notes "And Shemaiah the son of Nethaneel the scribe, [one] of the Levites, wrote them before the king, and the princes, and Zadok the priest, and Ahimelech the son of Abiathar, and [before] the chief of the fathers of the priests and Levites: one principal household being taken for Eleazar, and [one] taken for Ithamar."

The lots that were drawn were recorded by Shemaiah. This is just saying, that the two high priests were eyewitnesses to the procedure. There seemed to be two sets of names. One was drawn for Eleazar, and
one was drawn for Ithamar.

According to I Chronicles 24:7, the text says "Now the first lot came forth to Jehoiarib, the second to Jedaiah," I Chronicles 24:8 "The third to Harim, the fourth to Seorim," I Chronicles 24:9 "The fifth to Malchijah, the sixth to Mijamin," I Chronicles 24:10 "The seventh to Hakkoz, the eighth to Abijah," I Chronicles 24:11 "The ninth to Jeshuah, the tenth to Shecaniah," I Chronicles 24:12 "The eleventh to Eliashib, the twelfth to Jakim," I Chronicles 24:13 "The thirteenth to Huppah, the fourteenth to Jeshebeab," I Chronicles 24:14 "The fifteenth to Bilgah, the sixteenth to Immer," I Chronicles 24:15 "The seventeenth to Hezir, the eighteenth to Aphses," I Chronicles 24:16 "The nineteenth to Pethahiah, the twentieth to Jehezekel," I Chronicles 24:17 "The one and twentieth to Jachin, the two and twentieth to Gamul,"

I Chronicles 24:18 also says "The three and twentieth to Delaiah, the four and twentieth to Maaziah."

In verse 10 above, the Abijah was the family that Zacharias, the
father of John the Baptist, descended from. These are a listing of
the twenty-four descendents of Aaron in the order of the lot that was
cast.

I Chronicles 24:19 says "These [were] the orderings of them in their service to come into the house of the LORD, according to their manner, under Aaron their father, as the LORD God of Israel had commanded
him."

Each priest served a week from the seventh day to the seventh. The first lot taken served first, until it had gone through all 24, then the first one started, again.

I Chronicles 24:20 also says "And the rest of the sons of Levi [were
these]: Of the sons of Amram; Shubael: of the sons of Shubael;
Jehdeiah." The rest of the sons of Amram and their descendents were not
priests or high priests, but were to wait on the sons of Aaron.
Shubael was Moses grandson.

I Chronicles 24:21 "Concerning Rehabiah: of the sons of Rehabiah,
the first [was] Isshiah."

Rehabiah was the grandson of Moses through his younger son
Eliezer. This verse and the one prior to it show Moses's line.

I Chronicles 24:22 "Of the Izharites; Shelomoth: of the sons of
Shelomoth; Jahath."

This jumps back up to Kohath's son, Izhar, Amram's brother.

I Chronicles 24:23 "And the sons [of Hebron]; Jeriah [the first],
Amariah the second, Jahaziel the third, Jekameam the fourth."

Hebron is yet another son of Kohath, and was, also, brother to
Amram.

I Chronicles 24:24 "[Of] the sons of Uzziel; Michah: of the sons of Michah; Shamir." I Chronicles 24:25 "The brother of Michah [was]
Isshiah: of the sons of Isshiah; Zechariah."

Uzziel was another son of Kohath and brother of Amram. This line
leads to Zechariah, and Shamir.

I Chronicles 24:26 "The sons of Merari [were] Mahli and Mushi:
the sons of Jaaziah; Beno." I Chronicles 24:27 "The sons of Merari
by Jaaziah; Beno, and Shoham, and Zaccur, and Ibri." I Chronicles
24:28 "Of Mahli [came] Eleazar, who had no sons." I Chronicles 24:29
"Concerning Kish: the son of Kish [was] Jerahmeel."

Merari was brother to Kohath. Eleazar's daughters married Kish's
sons. These two houses were absorbed into one house in this, as the
daughters of Eleazar took on the names of the sons of Kish. Jerahmeel
carried on their families.

I Chronicles 24:30 "The sons also of Mushi; Mahli, and Eder, and
Jerimoth. These [were] the sons of the Levites after the house of
their fathers."

Mushi was the grandson of Merari. The others, mentioned here,
were descended from Mushi.

I Chronicles 24:31 "These likewise cast lots over against their
brethren the sons of Aaron in the presence of David the king, and
Zadok, and Ahimelech, and the chief of the fathers of the priests and
Levites, even the principal fathers over against their younger
brethren."

They cast lots in front of David, and the two high priests to
determine their position, as well.

Age to be a Jewish priest?

Member

Well-Known Member

להיות טוב ולעשות טוב

Y'shua is His Name

Member

Y'shua is His Name

להיות טוב ולעשות טוב

Y'shua is His Name

Ruth Messianic, joining Israel, Na'aseh v'nishma!

Senior Veteran

Ruth Messianic, joining Israel, Na'aseh v'nishma!

Senior Veteran

Ruth Messianic, joining Israel, Na'aseh v'nishma!

Remember Yosef

Remember Yosef

Ruth Messianic, joining Israel, Na'aseh v'nishma!

Remember Yosef

Ruth Messianic, joining Israel, Na'aseh v'nishma!

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)

Similar threads