Sadducees came, then the Levites were no longer?

[Deacon_Joseph]

After the Sadducees became the priests of the Temple, what happen to the Levites? I know they didn’t die out, but they were no the priests of Israel, right? Any info on this would be appreciated.

 

[geometer]

After the Sadducees became the priests of the Temple, what happen to the Levites? I know they didn’t die out, but they were no the priests of Israel, right? Any info on this would be appreciated.

Levites are sons of Levi among the levites are the kohenim who are priests. The sadducees could be anyone who holds to their liberal views.

 

[inkaneer]

After the Sadducees became the priests of the Temple, what happen to the Levites? I know they didn’t die out, but they were no the priests of Israel, right? Any info on this would be appreciated.

Sadducees and Pharisees were two main branches of Jewish religious thought. The chief difference between them is that the Pharisees believed in a bodily resurrection while the Sadducees denied any bodily resurrection. See Matthew 22:23, Mark 12:18, Luke 20:27 and Acts 23:8.

 

[Nita]

After the Sadducees became the priests of the Temple, what happen to the Levites? I know they didn’t die out, but they were no the priests of Israel, right? Any info on this would be appreciated.

As theosopher noted, Levites refers to the physical heritage/ancestry. Pharisee and Sadducee refers to a theological outlook/belief. Thus you could have some Levites who were Pharisees and some Levites who were Sadducees.

All priests were to be from a particular Levitic branch; they were to be descendants of the Levite Aaron. That is why the OT priesthood is sometimes referred to as the “Aaronic priesthood”. The other Levitic branches were assigned other temple duties, but they were not to be priests. (See chapters 3 & 4 in Numbers). It is interesting to read the incident where some of the non-Aaronic Levites were jealous and challenged Moses and Aaron claiming they were just as qualified to be priests (See Numbers 16). Moses responds:
“Hear now, you sons of Levi: is it too small a thing for you that the God of Israel has separated you from the congregation of Israel, to bring you near to Himself to do service in the tabernacle of the LORD, and…? And would you seek the priesthood also? Therefore it is against the LORD that you and all your company have gathered together; what is Aaron that you murmur against him?”
(Jude refers to this incident in his short epistle.)

 

[patrick457]

After the Sadducees became the priests of the Temple, what happen to the Levites? I know they didn’t die out, but they were no the priests of Israel, right? Any info on this would be appreciated.

1.) Note that according to Josephus, the Zadokites/Sadducees were mainly a group/sect within the Jewish priesthood, with some non-priestly members (perhaps through family connections), mainly wealthy upper-class aristocrats. The ‘Zadokites’ were the priestly aristocracy, comprised of a few families of leading priests. And we are not even sure if ALL leading priests belonged to the party - in fact, there is some substantial evidence in Josephus that some priests belonged to the P’rushim/Pharisees.

In talking about ordinary priests and Levites therefore, we are by no means automatically talking about the Sadducees (since as mentioned, there were some Sadducees who were not priests).

2.) In the 1st century, only those descended from Aaron may become kohanim/priests, while the positions of kohanim gedolim (chief/high priests) were filled in with descendants of Zadok. Other Levites who were not in this category were relegated to the lowest strata of the Temple hierarchy, doing menial tasks such as gatekeeping, patrolling, singing and playing the Temple instruments, and maintenance! It is estimated that there were 10,000 Levites in all enrolled in Temple service, divided like the priests into twenty-four sections, each serving for a week. At that time, these Levites were removed from all contact with the altar and the daily sacrifices: they were in an inferior position compared to the priests. In fact, in many practical regulations relating to the Temple, the Levites were usually discriminated against (the Levites actually fought for the right to wear fine linen in-work at the end of the Second Temple period!). It was not until Agrippa II convened a council that matters were settled upon in favor of the Levites.

Note, however, that while the Temple is technically run by Levites (Aaron and Zadok were from the tribe of Levi), not all Levites were kohanim or chose to follow the traditional role of their tribe, instead pursuing other jobs.

 

[Stylteralmaldo]

2.) In the 1st century, only those descended from Aaron may become kohanim/priests, while the positions of kohanim gedolim (chief/high priests) were filled in with descendants of Zadok. Other Levites who were not in this category were relegated to the lowest strata of the Temple hierarchy, doing menial tasks such as gatekeeping, patrolling, singing and playing the Temple instruments, and maintenance! It is estimated that there were 10,000 Levites in all enrolled in Temple service, divided like the priests into twenty-four sections, each serving for a week. At that time, these Levites were removed from all contact with the altar and the daily sacrifices: they were in an inferior position compared to the priests…

…Note, however, that while the Temple is technically run by Levites (Aaron and Zadok were from the tribe of Levi), not all Levites were kohanim or chose to follow the traditional role of their tribe, instead pursuing other jobs.

This is insightful information. I always wondered how to distinguish the roles of priests and Levites when contemplating the parable of the Good Samaritan.

 

[patrick457]

Sadducees and Pharisees were two main branches of Jewish religious thought. The chief difference between them is that the Pharisees believed in a bodily resurrection while the Sadducees denied any bodily resurrection. See Matthew 22:23, Mark 12:18, Luke 20:27 and Acts 23:8.

To add upon your post:

The Tzadokim (aka Zadokites, Sadducees) and the P’rushim (aka Pharisees) are actually only two out of the four main parties in Roman Judea - the other two were the Zealots (who however religiously held to Pharisaic teaching) and the Essenes.

1.) The Pharisees were most likely an outgrowth of the Chasidim/Hasideans of the Maccabean period, mostly composed of teachers who functioned as interpreters who made commentaries on the Law or copied Scripture.

Mostly composed of men of humble origins (one element which contrasts them with the aristocratic Sadducees), they dedicated their lives to the study and interpretation of the Tanakh. They enjoyed popular support and fame because the masses could identify with them, many of the Pharisees being common people who work with and suffer with them (St. Paul’s tentmaking, for example). Because of this they were thorns in the flesh for the aristocrats, since they often used their fame to gain political influence and even to stir up the people against the authority.

The Pharisees believed in the following ideas:

• All of the children of Israel were to be like priests. This was expressed elsewhere in the Torah, for example, when the Law itself was transferred from the sphere of the priesthood to every man in Israel (Exodus 19: 29-24; Deuteronomy 6: 7, 11: 19). The Pharisees believed that all Jews in their ordinary life, and not just the Temple priesthood or Jews visiting the Temple, should observe rules and rituals concerning purification (this explains why then can often be sticklers for the rules!),
• There were two Torahs, one in conjunction with the other. In addition to the Torah recognized by both the Sadducees and Pharisees and believed to have been written by Moses, the Pharisees believed that there was another Torah. They referred to the five books of Moses as the “Written Torah,” (Torah Shebiktav) and the corpus of oral laws and traditions as the “Oral Torah,” (Torah She’Baal Peh) because it was not written down but was rather transmitted by God to Moses orally, and was then memorized and then passed down orally by Moses and his successors over the generations. In other words, they did not interpret the Written Torah literally; rather, they asserted that the Scriptures were not complete and could therefore not be understood on their own terms. The Oral Torah functioned to elaborate and explicate what was written; it is unclear whether or not the Pharisees and later rabbis believed they were interpreting the Torah. The sages of the Talmud believed that the Oral law was simultaneously revealed to Moses at Sinai, and the product of debates among rabbis. Thus, one may conceive of the “Oral Torah” not as a fixed text but as an ongoing process of analysis and argument; this is an ongoing process in which God is actively involved; it was this ongoing process that was revealed at Sinai, and by participating in this ongoing process rabbis and their students are actively participating in God’s ongoing revelation. That is, “revelation” is not a single act, and “Torah” is not a single or fixed text. It is this ongoing process of analysis and argument that is itself the substance of God’s revelation. (Interestingly, this almost sounds like the Jewish version of the idea of Scripture and Tradition!)
• Unlike the Sadducees, the Pharisees also believed in the resurrection of the dead in a future, messianic age. However, their eschatology was strongly tempered by religious pragmatism. Their emphasis lay on the existing world - on the creation of a living Judaism which bore the stamp of their scriptural interpretations rather than on the imminency of a Messiah or the appearance of a divine revolutionary. Because of this, the Romans considered them very much politically benign.

2.) The Sadducees were a priestly group, Levites, associated with the leadership of the Temple in Jerusalem. Sadducees represented the aristocratic group of the Hasmonean High Priests, who replaced the previous High Priestly lineage. They were characterized by their wealth and power, influence and collusion with Rome: they kept order for the Romans by exercise of religious authority, and the Romans in return kept them in power (which made the commoners hate them!). Religiously, they only accepted the Torah and followed it literally* without the assistance of an “Oral Torah”, expressing a more “worldly” - and Hellenized/Romanized - attitude. By wholesalely rejecting Pharisaic Halakhah and eschatological ideas (such as the ideas of a resurrection of the righteous and a Messiah), the Romans also considered them as unhazardous. There might be evidence, howeer, that there was an internal schism among those called “Sadducees” - some who rejected the above concepts - and some which accepted these teachings and the entirety of the Hebrew Bible.

*So literally, in fact, that they are said to have insisted on the literal execution of the law of retaliation: “Eye for eye, tooth for tooth”! Most Pharisees, meanwhile, understood this to mean that the value of an eye was to be sought by the perpetrator.

 

[Deacon_Joseph]

Was Zadok a descendant of Aaron?

 

[patrick457]

Was Zadok a descendant of Aaron?

According to 1 Chronicles 5:29-34 (6:3-8) and 24:1-3, Zadok’s lineage goes back to Aaron’s third son Eleazar, so in a sense, yes.

Hebrew:
6:1: Sons of Levi: Gershon, Qohat and M’rari.
2: And sons of Qohat: Amram, Itzhar, Khevron, and Uzi’el.
3: And sons of Amram: Aharon and Mosheh and Miryam.
And sons of Aharon: Nadav and Avihu, El’azar and Itamar.
4: El’azar begot Pinehas, Pinehas begot Avishua,
5: and Avishua begot Buqqi, and Buqqi begot Uzzi,
6: and Uzzi begot Zerakhyah, and Zerakhyah begot Merayot,
7: Merayot begot Amaryah, and Amaryah begot Akhituv,
8: and Akhituv begot Zadok, and Zadok begot Akhima’atz…

Greek:
5:27: Sons of Leui: Gedson, Kaath, and Merari.
28 And sons of Kaath: Ambram and Issaar, Chebron and Oziel.
29: And sons of Ambram: Aaron and Moyses and Mariam.
And sons of Aaron: Nadab and Abioud, Eleazar and Ithamar.
30: Eleazar begot Phinees, Phinees begot Abisou,
31: Abisou begot Bokai, Bokai begot Ozi,
32: Ozi begot Zaraia, Zaraia begot Mariel,
33: And Mariel begot Amaria, And Amaria begot Achitob,
34: And Achitob begot Sadok, And Sadok begot Achimaas…

Latin:
6:1: Sons of Levi: Gerson, Caath, and Merari.
2: Sons of Caath: Amram, Isaar, Hebron, and Oziel.
3: Sons of Amram: Aaron, Moyses, and Maria.
Sons of Aaron: Nadab and Abiu, Eleazar and Ithamar.
4: Eleazar begot Phinees, and Phinees begot Abisue,
5: Truly, Abisue begot Bocci, and Bocci begot Ozi.
6: Ozi begot Zaraias, and Zaraias begot Meraioth.
7: Then Meraioth begot Amarias, and Amarias begot Achitob.
8: Achitob begot Sadoc, and Sadoc begot Achimaas.

======

Hebrew:
24:1: And to the sons of Aharon were their divisions.
Sons of Aharon: Nadav and Avihu, El’azar and Itamar.
2: And Nadav died, and Avihu, in the face of their father and had no sons; and Eleazar and Ithamar served as priests.
3: And David divided them, and Zadok of the sons of El’azar, and Akhimelek of the sons of Itamar according to their offices in their service.

Greek:
24:1: And the sons of Aaron had divisions.
Sons of Aaron: Nadab and Abioud, Eleazar and Ithamar.
2: And Nadab died, and Abioud, over-against their father and had no sons; and Eleazar and Ithamar, sons of Aaron, served as priests.
3: And Dauid divided them, and Sadok of the sons of Eleazar, and Achimelech of the sons of Ithamar according to their enrollment, according to their service, according to the houses of their ancestry.

Latin:
24:1: Now these were the divisions of the sons of Aaron.
Sons of Aaron: Nadab, and Abiu, and Eleazar and Ithamar.
2: But Nadab died, and Abiu, before their father, without children; so Eleazar and Ithamar served as priests.
3: And David divided them, that is, Sadoc of the sons of Eleazar, and Ahimelech of the sons of Ithamar, according to their courses and ministry.

 

[Deacon_Joseph]

Thank you everyone for all the information. I was very helpful.