PacMan Posted February 5, 2020 Posted February 5, 2020 On Sunday, I was asked how it was that Lehi was able to perform sacrifices in the wilderness being from the tribe of Manasseh (and not a Levite). The easy answer is, as Joseph Smith taught: "All prophets had the Melchizedek Priesthood and were ordained by God himself." Consequently, Lehi could administer the ordinances of the Aaronic Priesthood as an appendage of the Melchizedek Priesthood. No problem. I think there is also a historical answer. My research heavily suggests that the Levitical Priesthood was not necessary to perform sacrifices; e.g. Gideon (an Abiezrite) of Manasseh (Judges 6:24-26,28; 6:11), David (1 Sam. 13:9), and Solomon (1 Kings 3:4). In fact, the first sacrifice offered for Israelites after leaving Egypt was by Jethro, the father-in-law to Moses and a non-Israelite. Ex. 18:12 (although, this was admittedly before the law of Moses was given). Other support exists albeit with complications: Elkanah, Samuel's father, was an Ephrathite of Ephrathah (1 Sam. 1:1-2, 20) which is an Israelite tribe of Judah (1 Chron. 4:4). He is also often identified with the tribe of Ephraim (Elkenah was also from the mountain of Ephraim--1 Chron. 6:16, 23, 25-28, which curiously omits Samuel as Elkanah's son). Nevertheless, Samuel (his son) sacrificed to God at Mizpeh (away from the tabernacle in Jerusalem) without consequence. 1 Sam. 7:7-10; 10:8. That said, the biblical tradition is that Samuel was a Levite. See 1 Chron. 6:27; 1 Sam. 1:1. Chronicles, however, is not viewed by scholars as historical but as an attempt to conform Samuel and the Kings to conform to religious motivations. My question is, was there a prohibition against a non-Levite performing sacrifices? There's clearly a priestly duty to the "altar" and "within the veil" and to receive a portion of the sacrificial offerings--but not necessarily to sacrifice. Numbers 18:6-8. The command to sacrifice speaks to the general congregation--not just Levites (but also specifies the Levitical role to offer the blood and place on fire). Leviticus 1:1-5. 1
Bernard Gui Posted February 5, 2020 Posted February 5, 2020 (edited) Perhaps this article from the Temple Institute will help explain. https://www.templeinstitute.org/red_heifer/levitical_priests.htm Quote The Levitical Priests: Their Function and Role in the Holy Temple “And it shall be for them an appointment as priests forever, for all generations." (Ex. 40:15) "For the Lord your God has chosen him out of all your tribes, to stand to serve in the name of the Lord, him and his sons forever." (Deut. 18:5).... “The priest must be holy to his God. You must keep him holy, for he presents the offering to your God... He must be holy, for I am God - I am holy and I am making you holy" (Lev. 21). God Has Sanctified The Priests Above All Men The Holy One ordained special laws which effect the lives of the priests. The fundamental understanding behind these principles is that the status of the priest is different than that of other men. Their lot is one of dedication, of separation - for they are the servants of the Lord, and the custodians of His service. "... For he presents the offering to your God... " Because of this, "... he must be holy, for I am God - I am holy and I am making you holy." The Creator has sanctified these men above the rest for all time, and drawn them to Himself through unique commandments. Overview These laws are recorded in the book of Leviticus, and by way of an introduction, let us examine the verse quoted above. The priests are expected and commanded to keep holy... but what is meant by "holiness?" What is the Bible's intention? "He must be holy, for I, God, am holy." How are we to understand this state of holiness? How can we best explain such a concept? It seems intangible at best - for in the context of this verse, it seems that the priest is called upon to be holy in the same sense that God Himself is holy. It would surely be instructive at this point for us to attempt a definition for the word "holy." For we can see that the Bible uses this word quite emphatically in the context of the priests: they are actually mandated to be holy, to lead holy lives, because God is holy. But how can a person be holy like God? Many people seem to equate the concept of holiness with spirituality in general; anything ethereal or mystical is presumed to be holy. According to this mentality, one supposes that holiness is a matter of secret knowledge, or simply a question of allegiance to any proscribed ritual claimed by its adherents to bring the devotee closer to fulfillment.... Holiness Means Separation By contrast to the concept of "spiritual" - which seems to be rather unstable for our liking, since it can actually apply to things quite far from all which we have considered sacred - we find that the primary definition of "holy" is "set apart to the service of God." God Himself is called holy because He is completely separate; unique and unequaled in all of His creation. Nothing can be compared to Him because He is peerless; He is the Creator of the universe and all existence, and absolutely different from anything else that exists. It is in this light that Israel is collectively called upon to be a "holy nation" - that is, a nation set apart from all others, completely different from any other, whose Divinely-mandated lifestyle serves as living proof that an entire nation can walk with God in its midst... "it is a nation dwelling alone in peace; not counting itself among other nations"(Numbers 23:9). This separation is the true Biblical view of holiness. This is why the opposite of something holy is said to be mundane or profane; ordinary. To be holy is to be removed from the realm of the ordinary. Israel lives separately, according to the Torah's commandments, precisely because God is separate... for the highest form of religious experience is to reflect, to imitate the Divine. Man must strive to be a reflection of his Creator. So too, the priests in the Holy Temple "must be holy for I, God, am holy." If Jewish life is to be holy, then the priests must take care to be especially holy. They have been distinctively sanctified by the Creator Himself for all time and singled out for a life dedicated to Him. The vehicle that accomplishes this sanctification is the commandments, which obligate them to their Creator. These commandments reflect their unique status. Edited February 5, 2020 by Bernard Gui 1
RevTestament Posted February 5, 2020 Posted February 5, 2020 There appears not to be a prohibition against a non-levite performing sacrifices. However, I believe there arose an expectation that only Levites could perform the temple sacrifice. Other altars and temples built by Israel were not recognized by the Jews. My understanding is that when a temple was built on Elephantine island in Egypt, permission had to be granted by the Jerusalem Temple in order for it to perform sacrifices. Clearly before the Levitical priesthood was set up, priests performed sacrifices back to Adam. I would also like to take this opportunity to discuss trespass offerings vs sin offerings. Wikipedia says: " 'guilt, trespass'; plural ashamot), also referred to in English as a trespass offering (KJV, 1611), was a type of Biblical sacrifice, specifically a sacrifice made as a compensation payment for unintentional and certain intentional transgressions. It was distinct from the biblical sin offering." Could this have something to do with it?
Robert F. Smith Posted February 5, 2020 Posted February 5, 2020 (edited) 4 hours ago, PacMan said: On Sunday, I was asked how it was that Lehi was able to perform sacrifices in the wilderness being from the tribe of Manasseh (and not a Levite). The easy answer is, as Joseph Smith taught: "All prophets had the Melchizedek Priesthood and were ordained by God himself." Consequently, Lehi could administer the ordinances of the Aaronic Priesthood as an appendage of the Melchizedek Priesthood. No problem. I think there is also a historical answer. My research heavily suggests that the Levitical Priesthood was not necessary to perform sacrifices; e.g. Gideon (an Abiezrite) of Manasseh (Judges 6:24-26,28; 6:11), David (1 Sam. 13:9), and Solomon (1 Kings 3:4). In fact, the first sacrifice offered for Israelites after leaving Egypt was by Jethro, the father-in-law to Moses and a non-Israelite. Ex. 18:12 (although, this was admittedly before the law of Moses was given). Other support exists albeit with complications: Elkanah, Samuel's father, was an Ephrathite of Ephrathah (1 Sam. 1:1-2, 20) which is an Israelite tribe of Judah (1 Chron. 4:4). He is also often identified with the tribe of Ephraim (Elkenah was also from the mountain of Ephraim--1 Chron. 6:16, 23, 25-28, which curiously omits Samuel as Elkanah's son). Nevertheless, Samuel (his son) sacrificed to God at Mizpeh (away from the tabernacle in Jerusalem) without consequence. 1 Sam. 7:7-10; 10:8. That said, the biblical tradition is that Samuel was a Levite. See 1 Chron. 6:27; 1 Sam. 1:1. Chronicles, however, is not viewed by scholars as historical but as an attempt to conform Samuel and the Kings to conform to religious motivations. My question is, was there a prohibition against a non-Levite performing sacrifices? There's clearly a priestly duty to the "altar" and "within the veil" and to receive a portion of the sacrificial offerings--but not necessarily to sacrifice. Numbers 18:6-8. The command to sacrifice speaks to the general congregation--not just Levites (but also specifies the Levitical role to offer the blood and place on fire). Leviticus 1:1-5. Anyone could build an altar of unhewn stones and make a sacrificial offering to God. Israelites did it all the time, regardless of tribe. However, at formal temples, or high places, all Israelites were assisted in doing so by Levittes, whose job it was (after the consecration of the Levites in the days of Moses) to be the priestly tribe of all Israel. The tribe of Levi was divided up into courses (just like Egyptian priests), and some priests were more important than others. For example, only the descendants of Aaron (the kohens) could make the actual offerings, and their primary authority continues to be recognized in Judaism to this day. https://www.quora.com/Which-is-the-oldest-organization-of-the-world/answer/Bob-Smith-3106. The LDS Church likewise divides up the levitical functions, with only full priests allowed to bless the sacrificial bread and water of the Sacrament of the Last Supper, and the lesser priests (deacons and teachers) to pass that sacrificial bread and water. Furthermore, the LDS Church recognizes the authority of the Aaronides (full priestly kohens) within the actual tribe of Levi (D&C 68:14–21, 84:18-30, 107:68-76). Edited February 5, 2020 by Robert F. Smith 3
Robert F. Smith Posted February 5, 2020 Posted February 5, 2020 3 hours ago, RevTestament said: There appears not to be a prohibition against a non-levite performing sacrifices. However, I believe there arose an expectation that only Levites could perform the temple sacrifice. Other altars and temples built by Israel were not recognized by the Jews. My understanding is that when a temple was built on Elephantine island in Egypt, permission had to be granted by the Jerusalem Temple in order for it to perform sacrifices. Clearly before the Levitical priesthood was set up, priests performed sacrifices back to Adam. ............................... Temples and high places were fully functional throughout Israel, from Dan to Beersheva, Arad, etc. Israelites had no dearth of places to offer sacrifices, and Levites were scattered among the tribes to assist them. The fully functional Jewish temples at Elephantine in Upper Egypt, and the one at Leontopolis (Tell el-Yehudiyah) in Lower Egypt were operational for centuries. When Nephi built a small temple in the New World, that was completely normal. 1
PacMan Posted February 6, 2020 Author Posted February 6, 2020 5 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said: Anyone could build an altar of unhewn stones and make a sacrificial offering to God. Israelites did it all the time, regardless of tribe. However, at formal temples, or high places, all Israelites were assisted in doing so by Levittes, whose job it was (after the consecration of the Levites in the days of Moses) to be the priestly tribe of all Israel. The tribe of Levi was divided up into courses (just like Egyptian priests), and some priests were more important than others. For example, only the descendants of Aaron (the kohens) could make the actual offerings, and their primary authority continues to be recognized in Judaism to this day. https://www.quora.com/Which-is-the-oldest-organization-of-the-world/answer/Bob-Smith-3106. The LDS Church likewise divides up the levitical functions, with only full priests allowed to bless the sacrificial bread and water of the Sacrament of the Last Supper, and the lesser priests (deacons and teachers) to pass that sacrificial bread and water. Furthermore, the LDS Church recognizes the authority of the Aaronides (full priestly kohens) within the actual tribe of Levi (D&C 68:14–21, 84:18-30, 107:68-76). That’s a fascinating parallel between the Levitical functions and the Aaronic functions. Do you have any citations that non-Levite’s could offer sacrifices? I think you’re right. I’m just looking for added support.
Robert F. Smith Posted February 6, 2020 Posted February 6, 2020 2 hours ago, PacMan said: That’s a fascinating parallel between the Levitical functions and the Aaronic functions. Aaron is a Levite, and the Aaronides (cohens)are all Levites. They are primus inter pares -- by lineage. 2 hours ago, PacMan said: Do you have any citations that non-Levite’s could offer sacrifices? I think you’re right. I’m just looking for added support. Ordinary humans can always make offerings to the Lord (Gen 4:3-5, 35:14, I Sam 6: [Philistine priests]), and there are plenty of occasions when ordinary Israelites make offerings to God (Num 15, Judg 11:31-40, 13:19-23, I Sam 1:21, I Chron 16). When he makes offerings down by the Red Sea, Lehi does repeatedly what any Israelite would do. 1
PacMan Posted February 6, 2020 Author Posted February 6, 2020 8 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said: Aaron is a Levite, and the Aaronides (cohens)are all Levites. They are primus inter pares -- by lineage. Ordinary humans can always make offerings to the Lord (Gen 4:3-5, 35:14, I Sam 6: [Philistine priests]), and there are plenty of occasions when ordinary Israelites make offerings to God (Num 15, Judg 11:31-40, 13:19-23, I Sam 1:21, I Chron 16). When he makes offerings down by the Red Sea, Lehi does repeatedly what any Israelite would do. The example of Manoah of Dan in Judges 13:19 is a good one. But I'm going to give a little push back on the others. Genesis is before the law of Moses, 1 Sam 6 appears to have been offered by the Levites after the Philistines arrive to Beit Shemesh (the Levite city within Judah), Jephthah ended up sacrificing his daughter in Judges 11 , and 1 Chronicles 16 seems a bit broad--hard to know if it wasn't done by the Levites. But like I said, Manoah was a great one because it explicitly talks about how well the sacrifice was received. If I'm wrong on the others, let me know. Thanks for the help. 1
Robert F. Smith Posted February 6, 2020 Posted February 6, 2020 1 hour ago, PacMan said: ........................ I'm going to give a little push back on the others. Genesis is before the law of Moses, That's why I specifically separated it from the Israelite instances. 1 hour ago, PacMan said: 1 Sam 6 appears to have been offered by the Levites after the Philistines arrive to Beit Shemesh (the Levite city within Judah), I Sam 6:1-12 refers to the Philistine offering, not that of the Levites. The Philistines are not Israelites. 1 hour ago, PacMan said: ...................... 1 Chronicles 16 seems a bit broad--hard to know if it wasn't done by the Levites. ............................ I Chron 16:2-3 says "After David had finished sacrificing the burnt offerings and fellowship offerings, he blessed the people in the name of the Lord. Then he gave a loaf of bread, a cake of dates and a cake of raisins to each Israelite man and woman." He then sang a Psalm of thanksgiving before the people. He was well-known as a composer and musician, and had been a singer-musician in the court of King Saul. Yet David was not a Levite. He was a Judahite. The holy, anointed King of Israel. Anointed by whom? By Samuel the Prophet.
Recommended Posts