[OBW]

I can appreciate the possibilities, like Igzy's. And there is something to it.

But in the case of this particular passage, certain ones were only allowed to serve in the sanctuary/outer court while others were allowed to serve within the Temple. When those allowed to serve in the Temple did so, they were to wear certain clothes that they were required to remove before going to (or back to) any work outside the Temple. The reason was that there was a consecration upon those clothes that was not to be allowed to spread upon the other priests who couldn't wear those clothes and join in the Temple service.

From this, I cannot find a link to a Mary before Martha. It was more like Mary rather than. Yet there were many whose job was Martha's and who had no option to do the "Mary" job first, second, or last. This differentiation was not about priorities, but that God was punishing certain priests for prior offenses by keeping them at a distance. I have not researched further to determine if this was a forever thing, or just a temporal thing designed to make a point.

In terms of the story of Mary and Martha, there is something about choosing the "better part." This particular OT passage is not a parallel. It does not provide "Martha" with any option. The roles are dictated. There is no first or second, but you do this and you do that. Period.

So within this passage I cannot find the "pearl" that is mentioned. It does no good to suggest that my eyes are blinded. It is probably more realistic that Nee was looking for more evidence of a principle and found it by misreading. (Same goes for the woman (Barber?) who showed it to him.)

The principle may be real. But you can't get there from here (Ezekiel 44). Is there another passage that might actually say something about one coming before the other?