Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
slocym

Mary a Levite, then Jesus a Levite

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

I will not reply further with regard to the main-debate and I'll just say lets agree to differ on the whole... You seem to be comfortable with your view, but I don't know with what intention and to prove what, but personally I can't say it would make a major difference to me at this time either-way...

Heres one last question:

Marriage was prohibited out of the tribe ( no exeptions ) by Moses ( from God Law)

Now, 2 things can be possible given this statement:

Option 1:

- Are you implying that Moses himself broke 'The Law'?

This is impossible from an Islamic-perspective, period.

Option 2:

- This is an example of a corruption in the Torah...

(Of which I can name many)

This one is the more logical, given the racism which even existed between the tribes of Israel and their chiefs...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To IM Anynoumos:

quoting:

QUOTE(slocym @ Jan 24 2006, 07:55 PM)

Joseph was not husband of Mary, but the Caretaker of a Nazareh preistess of the temple ( Mary)

how can Mary marry, while her mother gave her to the temple to be a nun all her life.

Nobody can change that. It is forbidden to marry a Nun of the Temple ( she is a slave and owned by God , how can you marry her?)

By redeeming her. The Book of Numbers sets the price of redeeming one vowed to God at five shekels.

QUOTE(slocym @ Jan 24 2006, 07:55 PM)

Mary's mother can not give her daughter to the temple as a nun if Mary's father was not a lwevite.

I can't imagine how he wouldn't be a Levite.

QUOTE(slocym @ Jan 24 2006, 07:55 PM)

It was prohibited to marry from other tribes ( Judah from Benjamin, ) Levites in particular could not marry from other tribes so that they don not get inheritence.

That is incorrect. Levites can marry Israelites (Babylonian Talmud: Tractate Yebamoth Folio 85a).

Then IMAnynoumos agrees that Mary's father is a Levite ( Aaronite!)

The 5 sheckels to free bondage to temple is for non israelite slaves built the temple during David and Solomon.

As for the temple, it is not allowed for non levites to enter the inner sanctuary of the temple and thus Zackaria was alevite because he was given the key for the holy of holies ( inner sanctuary) according to movies, then he is definiltely a levite, then his wife a levite( Talmud law does not apply in 3 BC, mishna was finalized 400 AD and Talmud was finalized 600 AD according to jewish historians)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

to jawsofdeath:

Moses did not break the law.

Moses allow to marry from non israelites if they become muslem but they become part of the tribe of the jew who marries)

For example 10000 people non israelites went with the isralites out of egypt, and Moses divided them and enrolled them in the 12 different tribes!

once you are from a specific tribe you can not marry from another tribe.

The reason for this, is the 12 tribes were given different inheritence ( villages cities hills, etc) so marriages between different tribes will cause the inheriters from such marriages cause trouble among the tribes, because a woman from Judah will have to bring her inheritence and join it to her husband from Benjamin tribe and her children will take her inheritence from Judah and become theirs after she dies and then they are Benjaminites, hence the money of Judah ( palm tree, house, gold, etc will be lost from Judah and given to Benjamin tribe!)

After the diaspora after 70 AD all the tribes were expelled from Palestine, and so this law was canceled by the pharaisies ( named Rabbies after 110 AD, according to jewish historians!)

those rabbies wrote the law ( talmud) as explanations of the Torah according to their minds ( they were from Judah or Benjamin or Ephraim or Menasseh tribes who were prohibited by the law of moses to even write the scripture not to explain it ( mission of Levites)

Levites ( and Aaronites in particular are more honored in moses law, because they are decendents of Aaron and Amram and Qahat.

Who is higher Aaron or David, what do you think?

it is more honor to Jesus and Mary be decendents of Aaron than from David.

Can you differ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I meant Jesus lineage from Aaron is better from lineage from David.

Jews were and still waiting for a massiah from lineage of David.

They made fun of Jesus being a levite( Nazarah) because Levites were very poor at the time of Jesus ( no inheritence for levites whatsoever among themselves, they depend completely on Zakah ( religious tax) while other jews were rich and can accumulate wealth. Levites were most honored people at time of Moses and Aaron and after them for a long time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(bismillah)

(salam)

Levites were the real Shia of Nabi Musa (as). They were the only tribe/sect not to turn onto Prophet Moses (as) and foresaken the religion of God. The rest of the tribes of bani Isra'eel turned corrupt, and prefered this world for the hereafter.

The Levites Maryam and Isa (Mary and Jesus) (as) revitalized the Shia of Moses (as), and brought back the message of God, and they were faught by the other Jews who had become corrupt.

The bani Hashim are descendants of the Levites, for all Prophets come from the one family tree.

Of all the sects of Moses, only one stayed loyal to His true teachings. And of all the sects of Jesus, only one stayed loyal to His true teachings. And of all the sects of Mohammed, only one stayed loyal, and they are the followers (Shia) of Ahlul Bayt (as).

There were 12 tribes of Israel, there were 12 disciples of Jesus and there were 12 Guides (Imams) of Muhammed, for which only the Shia follow.

ws

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

levites though went corrupt few hundred years before Jesus but a branch of them made it their duty to preserve the original scriptues uncorrupted, they were from Qahat and Amram lineage.

That is why we find some scrolls in the dead sea scrolls date to 400 BC maybe 600 BC!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh yes I want you to read the last verse of Surah 66

In regard to your statement:

there are no two amrams =imran

Mary daughter of Imran means Mary is a decendent from Imran ( father of Moses)

Also, " O' Sister of Aaron" means she is from the tribe of Aaron.

Her cousin is Elizabeth the wife of Zakaria ( a preist or high preist =a Levite) Levite can not marry but a levite, then Elizabeth is a Levite, then Mary is a Levite ( cousin).

Mary was given a nun (slave to God all her life) a privilige only to decendents of Aaron ( a branch of Levites)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[shakir 66:12] And Marium, the daughter of Imran, who guarded her chastity, so We breathed into her of Our inspiration and she accepted the truth of the words of her Lord and His books, and she was of, the obedient ones.

[Yusufali 66:12] And Mary the daughter of 'Imran, who guarded her chastity; and We breathed into (her body) of Our spirit; and she testified to the truth of the words of her Lord and of His Revelations, and was one of the devout (servants).

[Pickthal 66:12] And Mary, daughter of 'Imran, whose body was chaste, therefor We breathed therein something of Our Spirit. And she put faith in the words of her Lord and His scriptures, and was of the obedient.

Can you show me anyplace in Qur'aan where it speaks metaphorically or allegorically regarding anyone being the "daughter of (Someone)"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it was the habit of jews to call people by names of famous people.

so it was not the quran that speaks metaphorically but the jews. and quran was recording that.

If you insist that Mary was daughter of imran then what about Aaron her brother?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was reported that the prophet sent a missionary to Yemen.

He was met by christians who told him that the Quran mentions that Mary is the sister of Harun.

The missionary came back to the prophet to ask him about this.

The prophet told him ( tell them that the jews used to call their names by names of prominent people)

When the Quran says ( O'Mary, sister of Aaron, ) not to be ashamed of people etc..

Mary was called sister of Aaron as she is as pious as Aaron ( and from his progeny too) not that she has a literal brother his name is Aaron!

That is the point the prophet explained.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It was reported that the prophet sent a missionary to Yemen.

He was met by christians who told him that the Quran mentions that Mary is the sister of Harun.

The missionary came back to the prophet to ask him about this.

The prophet told him ( tell them that the jews used to call their names by names of prominent people)

When the Quran says ( O'Mary, sister of Aaron, ) not to be ashamed of people etc..

Mary was called sister of Aaron as she is as pious as Aaron ( and from his progeny too) not that she has a literal brother his name is Aaron!

That is the point the prophet explained.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

What is the verse number?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
to jawsofdeath:

Moses did not break the law.

Moses allow to marry from  non israelites if they become muslem but they become part of the tribe of the jew who marries)

For example 10000 people non israelites went with the isralites out of egypt, and Moses divided them and enrolled them in the 12 different tribes!

once you are from a specific tribe you can not marry from another tribe.

The reason for this, is the 12 tribes were given different inheritence ( villages cities hills, etc) so marriages between different tribes will cause the inheriters from such marriages cause trouble among the tribes, because a woman from Judah will have to bring her inheritence and join it to her husband from Benjamin tribe and her children will take her inheritence from Judah and become theirs after she dies and then they are Benjaminites, hence the money of Judah ( palm tree, house, gold, etc will be lost from Judah and given to Benjamin tribe!)

After the diaspora after 70 AD all the tribes were expelled from Palestine, and so this law was canceled by the pharaisies ( named Rabbies after 110 AD, according to jewish historians!)

those rabbies wrote the law ( talmud) as explanations of the Torah according to their minds ( they were from Judah or Benjamin or Ephraim or Menasseh tribes who were prohibited by the law of moses to even write the scripture not to explain it ( mission of Levites)

Levites ( and Aaronites in particular are more honored in moses law, because they are decendents of Aaron and Amram and Qahat.

Who is higher Aaron or David, what do you think?

it is more honor to Jesus and Mary be decendents of Aaron than from David.

Can you differ?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

To answer your last question, what difference would it make?

I would say David (as) since he brought the Pslams and Aaron (as) didn't bring a book... Moses did though...

But rather I shouldn't judge if Allah (SWT) deams Aaron or David higher than the other...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Surah Mariam???

surah Mariam 19, Ayat 23 ( 19:23)

[shakir 19:23] And the throes (of childbirth) compelled her to betake herself to the trunk of a palm tree. She said: Oh, would that I had died before this, and had been a thing quite forgotten!

[Yusufali 19:23] And the pains of childbirth drove her to the trunk of a palm-tree: She cried (in her anguish): "Ah! would that I had died before this! would that I had been a thing forgotten and out of sight!"

[Pickthal 19:23] And the pangs of childbirth drove her unto the trunk of the palm-tree. She said: Oh, would that I had died ere this and had become a thing of naught, forgotten!

Aswell: Do you know how Prophet Dawood Suffered?

You recall he fought Golliath and his huge army?

He had huge trials...

Edited by JawzofDETH

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Moses and Aaron were important for the religion.

David was not as important. There was a King Saul, the people established themselves.

Moses and Aaron brought the israelites from Egypt against all odds ( Moses convinced millions of people to follow him to the desert and leave every thing behind.

a line from david is for kings. Messiah is not a king but a prophet, a prophet is much higher than a king!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Forgive me but that's a bit weak, the Israelites at the time of Musa (as) were awaiting a saviour-Prophet from among them... it was fortold by the wise-ones and astrologers among them who awaied his coming. He didn't have to do much convincing...

I do not wish to continue debating on things that I am not worthy enough to put my opinion on... Allah is the only true judge...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

all prophets are equal.

But for Israelites there is more honor to bestow on a person if he was decendent of Moses and Aaron than from David.

Jesus was decendent of Aaron from his mother.

Who needs a father if his mother is Mary( the best of women of all history)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are five places in the LXX in which the term sungenes [συγγενης] is used; although in three of those places, the term can be applied in a general sense of kinsman, yet as a legal term of relation, it is used only twice in the LXX of the Torah, both in the same Book and as part of the same context of relation- Leviticus 18:14 and Leviticus 20:20. In both of these two passages, sungenes meant the wife of a paternal uncle [an aunt married to the brother of the father]. Mary's sungenes was Elizabeth who was a descendant of the Levites as well as from the priestly class and who was married to a Kohen [ Priest]- Zachariah (Luke 1:5). This meant, if we understand the legal text, that Zachariah was the paternal uncle of Mary [in other words, Mary's father was a Levite of the Kohen class from the line of Aaron] (Luke 1:36). According to the Torah [the two tablets of Stone given to Israel], the original mashi'ach [messiah] was the Kohen Gadol [High Priest]- not a king, prophet, or any other mundane usage of the term.

 

1) Mary, as explained above, was a Levite and was from the priestly tribe of Aaron- which was necessary for anyone to become a true Messiah according to the Torah.

2) The lineages were from the paternal lines only when a paternal line existed. Josef was not the paternal father of Jesus and could not grant him his yechus [the genealogical record]. Makes no difference how much people wish it to be so, Jesus was a result of a miraculous birth and had no physical father.

3) It was the yechus- or the lack thereof- which debarred the priest from serving as Priests in the days of Nehemia and Ezra when the Southern Israelites returned from exile (Ezra 2:62; Nehemia 7:64).

4) The idea behind the Melchizedek priesthood being without paternal record is absolutely relevant as Jesus could have no yechus- no father meant no paternal record. If one claiming the Jewish line through Josef as Jesus' yechus, this would make no sense- The Melchizedek priesthood was established without one.

5) Jesus claimed the Temple as his father's house; this meant he was from the tribe of Levi- specifically, the line of Aaron. We know this to be the case since it was the Tabernacle, the cities of refuge, etc which were the only inherited property for the Levites- the Tabernacle itself being the inherited property of the sons of Aaron.

6) The only true claim to Messiah that Jesus could have had would have been through the line of Aaron- a Priest. This was and is the only true messianic lineage of the Torah [the Tablets of Stone given to Moses]. The Messianic kingdoms of Saul ben Kish and David ben Jessi were established as a rebellious act against God (1 Samuel 8:7). 

7) It was not until the 2 century ACE that the Rabbinic authorities changed the law of descent from paternal [as required by Torah] to maternal [from the Talmudic law written by the hands of the Rabbis].

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/15/2017 at 1:59 PM, Yaaqov Ben Yisrael said:

There are five places in the LXX in which the term sungenes [συγγενης] is used; although in three of those places, the term can be applied in a general sense of kinsman, yet as a legal term of relation, it is used only twice in the LXX of the Torah, both in the same Book and as part of the same context of relation- Leviticus 18:14 and Leviticus 20:20. In both of these two passages, sungenes meant the wife of a paternal uncle [an aunt married to the brother of the father]. Mary's sungenes was Elizabeth who was a descendant of the Levites as well as from the priestly class and who was married to a Kohen [ Priest]- Zachariah (Luke 1:5). This meant, if we understand the legal text, that Zachariah was the paternal uncle of Mary [in other words, Mary's father was a Levite of the Kohen class from the line of Aaron] (Luke 1:36). According to the Torah [the two tablets of Stone given to Israel], the original mashi'ach [messiah] was the Kohen Gadol [High Priest]- not a king, prophet, or any other mundane usage of the term.

 

1) Mary, as explained above, was a Levite and was from the priestly tribe of Aaron- which was necessary for anyone to become a true Messiah according to the Torah.

2) The lineages were from the paternal lines only when a paternal line existed. Josef was not the paternal father of Jesus and could not grant him his yechus [the genealogical record]. Makes no difference how much people wish it to be so, Jesus was a result of a miraculous birth and had no physical father.

3) It was the yechus- or the lack thereof- which debarred the priest from serving as Priests in the days of Nehemia and Ezra when the Southern Israelites returned from exile (Ezra 2:62; Nehemia 7:64).

4) The idea behind the Melchizedek priesthood being without paternal record is absolutely relevant as Jesus could have no yechus- no father meant no paternal record. If one claiming the Jewish line through Josef as Jesus' yechus, this would make no sense- The Melchizedek priesthood was established without one.

5) Jesus claimed the Temple as his father's house; this meant he was from the tribe of Levi- specifically, the line of Aaron. We know this to be the case since it was the Tabernacle, the cities of refuge, etc which were the only inherited property for the Levites- the Tabernacle itself being the inherited property of the sons of Aaron.

6) The only true claim to Messiah that Jesus could have had would have been through the line of Aaron- a Priest. This was and is the only true messianic lineage of the Torah [the Tablets of Stone given to Moses]. The Messianic kingdoms of Saul ben Kish and David ben Jessi were established as a rebellious act against God (1 Samuel 8:7). 

7) It was not until the 2 century ACE that the Rabbinic authorities changed the law of descent from paternal [as required by Torah] to maternal [from the Talmudic law written by the hands of the Rabbis].

Only Mathew and Luke tell Jesus was born by a Virgin. They do not agree on his genealogy. All other NT writers seemingly did not know anything about this. Virgin birth is most likely a myth. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, andres said:

Only Mathew and Luke tell Jesus was born by a Virgin. They do not agree on his genealogy. All other NT writers seemingly did not know anything about this. Virgin birth is most likely a myth. 

It may be a myth- I was not there to witness it. However, the tradition is an old one and is repeated in the Qur'an. The Qur'an hints that Jesus was a Levite, had no physical father and was born of a virgin. 

If we are to take the tradition that he was born from a virgin, he would have been Levite. However, if Josef was the father, the tradition just being a fairy tale, then he might have been a Jew.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recent Posts on ShiaChat!

    • Guest ????
      Why is it not farz on men? 
    • Some men do it voluntary to cover their hair out of piety, even when it is not necessary for them to wear it. It is not confused Sister, and He do say you need to cover your hair clearly. He clearly in verse make it obligatory to cover the hair but also the chest, because there used to be women who only covered their hair and not chest. to wrap [a portion of] their headcovers over their chests and not expose their adornment except to their husbands... Quran 24:31 Many people always focus on Physical aspect on Hijab, when the spiritual is the most important. We need to obey Allah سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى if we claim ourselves to be Muslim in every commands He give us, if we do not do that, then we are obeying Shaytan and Shaytan will lead us to wrong path. Don't you want to be guided and follow Allah سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى way?
    • Guest ????
      I understand. But i just don't understand the reasoning nor the justice as to why men dont have to cover their hair. Allah has written about hijab in such a confusing way. He doesnt say anywhere that you need to cover your hair, from what i have read. And people always use the "oh it protects you" argument. Which is a complete lie. Girls wearing hijab still get hit on.
    • أعوذ بالله من الشيطان الرجيم بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم Alif, Lam, Meem, Allah, there is no God but He, the Everliving, the Self-subsisting by Whom all things subsist, Allah bears witness that there is no God but He, and so do the angels and those possessed of knowledge, maintaining His creation with justice; there is no god but He, the Mighty, the Wise, Whoever goes aright, for his own soul does he go aright; and whoever goes astray, to its detriment only does he go astray: nor can the bearer of a burden bear the burden of another, nor do We chastise until We raise a messenger, Whoever desires this present life, We hasten to him therein what We please for whomsoever We desire, then We assign to him the hell; he shall enter it despised, driven away, And whoever desires the hereafter and strives for it as he ought to strive and he is a believer; as for these, their striving shall surely be accepted,
    • I know your self hate it, you should ponder over yourself and your relation with God, because the hate does not come from piece of cloth, but rather of your self desire and your beauty.
×