> General Discussions

ACTS 4:36-37

(1/3) > >>

Kenneth Clark:
I thought that the Levites were not allowed to be land owners.  It was my understanding that Israel was to take care of the Leviticus priests for this reason.  Please help my understanding. 

lilitalienboi16:

--- Quote from: Kenneth Clark on May 01, 2012, 05:33:19 PM ---I thought that the Levites were not allowed to be land owners.  It was my understanding that Israel was to take care of the Leviticus priests for this reason.  Please help my understanding.

--- End quote ---

Can you please share the passages of scripture in which you believe the levites were not allowed to be land owners. It would help me in trying to understand your confusion.

Kindly,

Alex

Kenneth Clark:
numbers 18:20; deut 10:9  and ch. 18

lilitalienboi16:
Here are the two versus you referred to;

Numbers 18:20
King James Version (KJV)
 20And the LORD spake unto Aaron, Thou shalt have no inheritance in their land, neither shalt thou have any part among them: I am thy part and thine inheritance among the children of Israel.

Numbers 18:20
New International Version (NIV)
20 The Lord said to Aaron, “You will have no inheritance in their land, nor will you have any share among them; I am your share and your inheritance among the Israelites.


Deuteronomy 10:9
King James Version (KJV)
 9Wherefore Levi hath no part nor inheritance with his brethren; the LORD is his inheritance, according as the LORD thy God promised him.

Deuteronomy 10:9
New International Version (NIV)
9 That is why the Levites have no share or inheritance among their fellow Israelites; the Lord is their inheritance, as the Lord your God told them.)

Here is the passage in question:

ACTS 4:36-37
KING JAMES
And Joses, who by the apostles was surnamed Barnabas, (which is, being interpreted, The son of consolation,) a Levite, and of the country of Cyprus,
Having land, sold it, and brought the money, and laid it at the apostles' feet.

Now I am no expert when it comes to the old testament laws and the tribes but I will give you my input on the matter from what I do, with limited experience on this, see at first glance.

What I see in difference between the two passages is that the Levites were not allowed land as it belonged or pertained to the Isrealites. Not that they were allowed NO LAND period.

In Acts it does not tell us where the land was that he sold and it does not tell us what the land that he had sold was in relationship to the isrealites.

So in my opinion,  "You will have no inheritance in their land, nor will you have any share among them;" could still very well hold true under this reasoning when considering the passage in Acts.

Now is this the only explanation or is this explanation even correct? I have no clue.. this is just what stood out to me when I read these all together with the little experience in this area that I do have.

It is possible someone may have an entirely different explanation that may very well be entirely more plausible.

God bless,

Alex

Kenneth Clark:
Thanks for the input...makes sense to me.  So maybe the Levites couldnt own any of the land promised to Israel, but were allowed to own land in the Gentile nations. 

Thanks again
God Bless

Kenneth

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page