Parsha Pinchas - Numbers 25.10-26.51 Chavurah Shalom Saturday 2/3/18

25:1-9 The Apostasy Pinchas is the Hebrew for Phineas. Pinchas in our immediate passage is awarded a Covenant of Peace with God and ensured the priestly lineage because of his actions in behalf of God. We will explore this whole scene a bit more in depth. In last weeks parsha, , as the leader of the Moabite and Midianite coalition, plotted against Israel and hired a prophet named Bilam to come and curse Israel so that they might be able to drive them out of their land and defeat them militarily. God would not allow Bilam to do anything but bless the people of Israel. Three separate times he blessed them immensely. However, in leaving, in attempting to acquire some gain for his journey and his efforts, he counseled Balak to trip up the people of God with idolatry. Numbers 31:13-18; :15; Jude 11; :14. Let’s recount the story at the beginning of Chapter 25. “the people began to play the harlot with the daughters of .” This phraseology is often used of the people of Israel in their infidelity to God as they involved themselves in Idolatry. Exodus 34:15-16 lest you make a covenant with the inhabitants of the land and they play the harlot with their gods, and sacrifice to their gods, and someone invite you to eat of his sacrifice; and you take some of his daughters for your sons, and his daughters play the harlot with their gods, and cause your sons also to play the harlot with their gods. Leviticus 17:7 “And they shall no longer sacrifice their sacrifices to the goat demons with which they play the harlot. This shall be a permanent statute to them throughout their generations.”’ Leviticus 20:5 then I Myself will set My face against that man and against his family; and I will cut off from among their people both him and all those who play the harlot after him, by playing the harlot after Molech. Leviticus 20:6 ‘As for the person who turns to mediums and to spiritists, to play the harlot after them, I will also set My face against that person and will cut him off from among his people. Deuteronomy 31:16 And the LORD said to , “Behold, you are about to lie down with your fathers; and this people will arise and play the harlot with the

- 1 - strange gods of the land, into the midst of which they are going, and will forsake Me and break My covenant which I have made with them. 2Chronicles 21:11 Moreover, he made high places in the mountains of Judah, and caused the inhabitants of Jerusalem to play the harlot and led Judah astray. 2Chronicles 21:13 but have walked in the way of the kings of Israel, and have caused Judah and the inhabitants of Jerusalem to play the harlot as the house of Ahab played the harlot, and you have also killed your brothers, your own family, who were better than you, Ezekiel 16:17 “You also took your beautiful jewels made of My gold and of My silver, which I had given you, and made for yourself male images that you might play the harlot with them. Ezekiel 20:30 “Therefore, say to the house of Israel, ‘Thus says the Lord GOD, “Will you defile yourselves after the manner of your fathers and play the harlot after their detestable things? :3 Then I said to her, “You shall stay with me for many days. You shall not play the harlot, nor shall you have a man; so I will also be toward you.” :10 And they will eat, but not have enough; They will play the harlot, but not increase, Because they have stopped giving heed to the LORD. Hosea 4:13 They offer sacrifices on the tops of the mountains And burn incense on the hills, Under oak, poplar, and terebinth, Because their shade is pleasant. Therefore your daughters play the harlot, And your brides commit adultery. I will not punish your daughters when they play the harlot Or your brides when they commit adultery, For the men themselves go apart with harlots And offer sacrifices with temple prostitutes; So the people without understanding are ruined. Though you, Israel, play the harlot, Do not let Judah become guilty; Also do not go to Gilgal,

- 2 - Or go up to Beth-aven, And take the oath: “As the LORD lives!” Hosea 4:18 Their liquor gone, They play the harlot continually; Their rulers dearly love shame. commit fornication, be a harlot, play the harlot. The basic idea of the word is זָנַה “to commit illicit intercourse” (especially of women).--Theological Wordbook of the . They had settled at Shittim for some time. The Hebrew ya-shav means to sit, settle or reside. We are not given any time frame. This is another set back and they cannot and must not enter into the Land until they are cleansed from their sins. The name means “in the Accacias.” The full name is Abel-Shittim. This is the place from which Joshua sent out the spies to look over and led the nation across the Jordan. Here is where the counsel of Bilam trips up the people of God. They went a whoring after their women. This was predicted Exodus 34:15-16. Sexual attraction led to participation in the sacrificial feasts at the shrine of - and, ultimately, to intermarriage (see v. 6). Much of the pagan worship of Cana'an involved prostitution of both men and women. V. 3 says they joined themselves to Baal-Peor. Baal is the false god and Peor is the location. God responds with just anger. The picture is one of adultery, with God as the jealous husband and Baal as the other man. 1 Corinthians 6:15-20. V. 2-3 qualifies the concept when Israel is joined to Baal of Peor, through going to the sacrifices to their gods, and as the people ate and bowed down to their gods, ADONAI became Angry. attached itself to - Hebrew va-yitsamed le, perhaps by covenant; that is, transferring allegiance from YHVH to Baal. Those who opt for the sexual interpretation of Israel’s attachment to Baal-peor render this term “coupled itself for”; that is, Israel engaged in acts of ritual intercourse required in Baal worship.--JPS Commentary, p. 212. They ate and they bowed down, two specific terms used in the worship of the gods of that time period. Indeed the same is true of the God of Israel. To eat together is an expression of deep, intimate fellowship. is to refer to the anger of men and of God. This anger is אַף The main use of gives specific emphasis to the אַף .expressed in the appearance of the nostrils emotional aspect of anger and wrath, whereas its synonyms and terms related to

- 3 - them give particular expression to other aspects. The anger of God is particularly related to the sin of his people, which pains and deeply displeases him (2 Kgs 13:3). Sin offends and wounds his love. The emotional response to this is divine anger. This anger, though fierce (Jer 25:37) is not sinful, evil, or the source of capricious attitudes or deeds. However, it is expressed in chastisement (Ps 6:1) and punishment (2 Sam 6:7; Jer 44:6). Man’s anger can be legitimate (2 Sam 12:5). But the OT Scriptures warn that anger can be outrageous (Prov 27:4) and stirs up strife (29:22). In contrast, it is said that the man slow to anger appeases strife (15:18) and a wise man turns from it (29:8). Anger must be kept under control.--Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament. is used a few times to indicate חֵמָה Compare this to God’s Wrath, v. 11 - The term physical heat in the sense of a fever or of poison causing fever (Deut 32:24, 33). However, the term is used, as a rule, to convey the concept of an inner, emotional heat which rises and is fanned to varying degrees. The context usually gives a clue as to which translation should be preferred, whether anger, hot displeasure, indignation, wrath, rage or fury. Thus, in Ps 37:8, in a progressive parallelism, .(חֵמָה) yes from intense, hot anger ,(אַף) the Psalmist says, “Cease from anger (Cf. also Jer 20.) appears it refers to God’s reaction to his unfaithful חֵמָה In various places where covenant people (Deut 9:19; Jer 42:18). God is aroused to great heat because he, as a jealous God, sees the people he loves disobey him and appeal to, or consort with, sinners or “no gods.” He then expresses his rage or pours out his fury (Ezek 36:6). Other nations who violate his intentions and Word, also experience God’s displeasure by the pouring out of God’s fury (Jer 10:25; Nah 1:2, 6). God’s indignations and fury are abated and appeased when he has poured them out in judgment (Jer 42:18). Remorse and repentance would not avert it (2 Kgs 22:13–17). However, , jealous with God’s jealousy, having killed the lawbreaker, did turn God’s heat away from Israel (Num 25:11). The point seems satisfaction of some kind must be made by ,חֵמָה clear, once God is provoked to the execution of judgment upon the cause of it.--Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament. The end result of this description is nostrils flaring, red-faced, knuckles white, fists clenched anger and wrath when we think of men. While we don't associate quite

- 4 - the same connotations concerning God, there is the Divine Displeasure that is Hot, Intense and Powerful. V. 4-5 literally calls for the public impaling of the leadership of Israel who allowed this to happen in the first place. The Rabbis maintain that the proper method was stoning and then the hanging of the body in public display. Deuteronomy 21:22-23. Most believe that this public display was in order to stay the plague, the hand of God in judgment. It was to be done before the LORD. ringleaders - Implying that only the guilty leaders were to be punished. However, Hebrew ra'shei ha-'am, literally “heads of the people,” simply means “leaders” suggesting that innocent and guilty leaders alike were to be executed. Rabbi Judah concurs that all the leaders fell under the decree; they were guilty since they had allowed the travesty to take place without protest. This also seems to be the view of Rabbi ben Shammua: “As it is impossible for a doornail to be taken out from the door without extracting some of the wood, so it is impossible for Israel to separate itself from (the worship) of Peor without (losing) souls”; that is, innocent souls must also die.--JPS Torah Commentary, p. 213. I would personally agree with Keil & Delitzsch in this case, asserting that only the guilty were to be impaled and hung up before the entire congregation. Some would suggest that the leadership that allowed this to happen, and did nothing to stop it, were just as guilty and had to be punished in the same way. The point of all of this is that ADONAI sought to arrest such activity before it got any farther along. impaled - Hebrew hoka'. This verb occurs again only in 1 Samuel 21:6,9,13, in reference to the execution of the sons of . The rabbis maintain that the punishment for idolatry was death by stoning, with the body then hanged for public display —and that this is what is meant here. Similarly, the Septuagint and Symmachus render “expose” and Aquila, “impale,” implying that execution could have been by other means and that the hanging or impalement of the corpse followed, a practice clearly envisioned in the law of Deuteronomy: “If a man is guilty of a capital offense and is put to death, and you impale [lit. “hang”] him on a stake, you must not let his corpse remain on the stake overnight, but must bury him the same day. For an impaled body is an affront to God” (Deut. 21:22–23; see Josh. 10:26). The corpses of Saul’s sons, contrary to this law, were exposed to the birds of prey and the beasts of the field for many

- 5 - months, as told in 2 Samuel 21:9–10. Similarly, Mesopotamian law (contrary to the Torah) prescribed impalement and no burial for certain crimes. But in the main, both in Israel and in Mesopotamia, impalement was used as a punishment and a deterrent as well as an expiation to the deity for violating his oath.--JPS Torah Commentary, p. 213. Symmachus (2nd century c.e.) - Translator of the Bible into Greek. Aquila - A convert to from Pontus, Anatolia, and a disciple of Rabbi Akiba. He translated the standardized text into Greek in the 2nd century c.e. There has actually been much debate concerning the Deuteronomy passage, whether it meant impaled upon a stake or hung in some manner upon a tree, a gallows, or a stake similar to a crucifixion. It has generally been taught that the impaling of people as a punishment/torture/execution was invented by the Persians. This however, would be long before the Persian Period that occurred in Daniel's Time. That would not necessarily mean that the people groups of the area of Persia did not invent this method. The point and the purpose was most certainly exposure to everyone else, perhaps as a deterrent, but in our text, with the later aspect of Pinchas' act defined as atonement, we would have to understand something of that in this command to impale them before ADONAI. before the Lord - Hebrew le-YHVH. Rather, “to the Lord,” although in the similar case of the impalement of Saul’s sons, the expression “for the Lord” also occurs (2 Sam. 21:9) together with “to the Lord” (v. 6). The difference is this: “Before” implies a ritual at the sanctuary; “to” connotes a nonritualistic dedication to the Lord outside the sanctuary. Either explanation is possible here. The fact that the impaled corpses would have brought ritual defilement to the sanctuary (e.g., see Lev. 16:1) is not a consideration because an emergency situation prevailed. Moreover, the impalement of Saul’s sons probably took place before the famed altar of Gibeon (cf. 2 Sam. 21:6; LXX; 1 Kings 3:4; see also 1 Sam. 15:33). In this case the public impalement was not to be regarded as a deterrent to others but as expiation for Israel’s apostasy—in the hope that it might terminate the plague. Perhaps this is what Bahya had in mind: “As they desecrated (the name of God) in public (by their idolatrous worship) so they must now sanctify His

- 6 - name in public.”--JPS Torah Commentary, p. 213. V. 6-9 But before this order of ADONAI through Moshe could be carried out, one brought a Midianite woman to his brother in sight of the Mishkan and Moshe and the rest of the leadership of Israel, while they continued to weep over this sin and the judgment of God. For what purpose? The simplest and most probable answer is that, following Ibn Ezra, ʾehav should be rendered as “kinsmen,” thereby implying that he introduced his Midianite bride to his family. Others, like Rashbam, point to the sexual connotation of the word va-yakrev, as in Leviticus 18:6 and Genesis 20:4. The Septuagint interchanges ʾel and ʾet and reads ʾehav as the singular ʾahiv for the rendering “brought his brother to the Midianite woman”—thereby getting others to join him and aggravating the sexual offense. Another explanation holds that the Israelite was convinced (by his Midianite partner?) that ritual intercourse was the best way to appease God and thereby terminate the plague. All interpretations thus agree that this act constituted a brazen escalation of Israel’s sin, committed before the sanctuary in the sight of Moses and the people while they were bewailing the plague in supplication to God. In any case, the result was the same: war with . There can hardly be a more heinous crime than the open and deliberate murder of a princess by one of the highest officials of another nation.--JPS Torah Commentary, p. 214. It becomes hard to determine the point and impact of the scene before us. There are some that suggest, as Hegg, that actually brought this Midianite woman into the Ohel Moed, or at least to the confines of where the men could come. Thus they were engaging in a fertility act as a form of pagan worship. This is determined due to the text indicating that the event took place in the sight of Moshe and the ones weeping at the Ohel Moed because of this sin and the plague that had already begun. Since Pinchas "went into the tent" Hegg and others suppose this to be the Ohel Moed. Hegg in particular suggests that in other cases, the judges of Israel are to be consulted before anyone is put to death, but in the confines of the and later the Temple, the Temple Guard have full authority to act without such consultation. Hegg further relates this as similar to Nadab and Abihu although they were struck down by ADONAI Himself. We can cite other much later situations that would give support to this theory, but we must be careful to read back into our present text.

- 7 - What follows is another possibility whether we regard this as a "Wedding Huppah" or simply a temporary shrine set up near enough to the Ohel Moed for all to see them. Hebrew ha-kubbah. The qubbah among pre-Islamic Bedouin tribes was a miniature red leather tent with a domed top, on occasion small enough to be mounted on camelback. It contained tribal idols or betyls and was set up close to the chieftain’s tent. It was used for divination; it guided the tribe during its wanderings; and it was occasionally attended by a female priest and occupied, in times of crisis, by women from the noblest tribal families. But the kubbah mentioned here was probably not the ancient name for Israel’s Tabernacle; it was more likely a marriage canopy. The egregious, aggravated crime of this couple was not only their intermarriage but that they flaunted it before Moses and the leaders of Israel.--JPS Torah Commentary, p. 215. Quite frankly, I have a very difficult time with Hegg's suggestions here. Neither do I affirm that this was a wedding. The language, albeit the language used at times in It sounds .אֶחָי ,marriage, indicated that Zimri "brought her near" to his brothers much more like a temporary shrine set up to worship Ba'al in a perverted way than a "wedding." Vv. 10-18 The Pact with Pinchas When Israel sinned with the at Sinai, the Levites marked themselves out for God’s service by putting their own families to death (Ex. 32:25-29). On this occasion ’s grandson, Phinehas, distinguished himself by his zeal for the Lord’s glory. Seeing an Israelite take a Midianite chief’s daughter to his tent, he followed them and ran them through with a spear. They were guilty of outright defiance of God’s word in flagrant disregard of the weeping . Phinehas’ action stopped the plague which had already taken 24,000 lives (Paul says 23,000 in a single day; 1 Cor. 10:8; cf. Aaron’s action some years before, 16:47-48). Recognizing Phinehas’ zeal, God confirmed his priesthood in an everlasting covenant (25:13; see Ne. 13:29). God displayed his mercy in giving this covenant, because it guaranteed that there would be priests in future to make atonement for Israel. The NT states that the Aaronic priesthood had been changed with the work of Christ (Heb. 7:11-22). There is no conflict here. Through the work of the prophets, it became clear that the priesthood would ultimately find its fulfilment in Christ.--IVP Commentary, p. 189. The point of this note is to elevate the role of the priest. It is their role and

- 8 - responsibility to protect the Holiness of the Sanctuary, and in so doing protect the people. There is a separating out the role of the Priest and his activity to deal with sin, to protect the sanctity of both the Mishkan and the Camp of Israel. This, as noted, is seen in a full and complete way in our Messiah Yeshua's role as our Great Hight Priest. Some believe that Pinchas was the captain of the guard for the Mishkan, 1 Chronicles 9:20. Pinchas went to action immediately, grabbed his spear, went into the tent after them, and plunged his weapon through the middle of both man and woman. Psalm 106:28-31. While 24,000 died of the plague as the judgment of God swept through the camp, the Scripture attributes to Pinchas the staying of the hand of God by his action. Numbers 25:10-13 describes a special blessing of God on Phineas and his lineage. Whence did Phinehas appear? According to the tradition of 1 Chronicles 9:20, he was already there, at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting, in his capacity as chief of the sanctuary guards (an office held by his father before him; Num. 3:32; and see Excursus 4). Eleazar did not act in this instance: As the High Priest, he was forbidden to come into contact with the dead under any circumstances (Lev. 21:10–12). Under similar circumstances, when Aaron had held this office, he, Eleazar, acted in his father’s stead (17:2; 19:2–7). Phinehas again acts as protector of Israel’s cult in chapter 31 (see also Josh. 22:13–31). spear - Not a long-shafted javelin but a short-shafted pike, which could be held in both hands and, like the modern bayonet, thrust downward upon a recumbent body. Since Phinehas was probably on duty as chief of the sanctuary guards, he was armed.--JPS Torah Commentary, p. 215. through the belly - Hebrew ʾel kovatah. A play on words with kubbah. The rendering “belly” relates it to kevah (Deut. 18:3), the maw of the animal assigned to the priest as his perquisite from the sacrifice. Indeed, the midrash explains homiletically that the priestly right to the animal’s maw stemmed from Phinehas’s deed in the sinners’ maw. Alternatively, render “womb,” relating the term to nekevah, “female, female genitals,” a “measure for measure” punishment. The word may, however, derive from an original kovet, on the model of boshet “shame” (Hos. 9:10, cited in the Comment to v. 3), a derogatory term for her genitals. The phrase should accordingly be rendered “through the genitals.” --JPS Torah Commentary, p. 215.

- 9 - to be torn apart or torn away (Ges., Winer ), refers to the ,יָקַע from ,הוֹקִ יעַ punishment of crucifixion, a mode of capital punishment which was adopted by most of the nations of antiquity (see Winer, bibl. R. W. i. p. 680), and was carried out sometimes by driving a stake into the body, and so impaling them (ἀνασκολοπίζειν), the mode practised by the Assyrians and Persians (Herod. iii. 159, and Layard’s Nineveh and its Remains, vol. ii. p. 374, and plate on p. 369), at other times by fastening them to a stake or nailing them to a cross (ἀνασταυροῦν). In the instance before us, however, the idolaters were not in v. 5, and in הִרְ גּוּ impaled or crucified alive, but, as we may see from the word accordance with the custom frequently adopted by other nations (see Herzog’s Encyclopaedia), they were first of all put to death, and then impaled upon a stake or fastened upon a cross, so that the impaling or crucifixion was only an aggravation of the capital punishment, like the burning in Lev. 20:14, and the .in Deut. 21:22. Keil & Delitzsch (תָּלָה) hanging Psalm 106:28-31 has commentary upon this passage. Pinchas in effect, impaled these two, and in so doing stayed the plague upon Israel. That he took action so quickly most certainly assures us of his presence with the assembly and Moshe at the doorway of the Ohel Moed. It does not necessarily follow that all of this took place within the Ohel Moed. At the doorway, they had full view of at least a large portion of the Camp of Israel. He may well have been captain of the guard, and taking matters into his hands, he got up and dealt with a situation that quickly threatened the whole community. We are told by Paul, as we have seen above, that 23,000 died in a single day. That would have to be the same day as Pinchas' action. It could well be that another 1,000 had died prior to this event. Twenty-four thousand men were killed by this plague. The Apostle Paul deviates from this statement in 1 Cor. 10:8, and gives the number of those that fell as twenty-three thousand, probably from a traditional interpretation of the schools of the scribes, according to which a thousand were deducted from the twenty- four thousand who perished, as being the number of those who were hanged by the judges, so that only twenty-three thousand would be killed by the plague; and it is to these alone that Paul refers.--Keil & Delitzsch. v. 11 God says of Pinchas, he turned back my wrath by displaying among them his passion for Me Literally, “in his becoming impassioned with My passion

- 10 - among them,” or "jealous with My jealousy." Phinehas was upset as much as the Lord Himself over the affront to the Lord caused by the people’s sin. Pinchas gives us a glimpse into what it means to be in the same way with God. Here it is means קָנָא specifically linked to God’s attitude toward a specific sin. The verb “become intensely red,” and refers here to the visible effects of anger on the face. God becomes “impassioned,” that is, aroused, when Israel flirts with other gods, as in Exodus 20:5 and 34:14. However, this phrase most likely means that Phinehas’s passion matched that of God’s because he alone, in distinction to Moses and the tribal heads, obeyed God’s command to kill Israel’s leaders. The central meaning of our word, however, relates to “Jealousy” especially in the marriage relationship. By marriage the “two become one flesh” (Gen 2:24). Hence, adultery was a severing of the body—a form of murder. God is depicted as Israel’s husband; he is a jealous God (Ex 20:5). Idolatry is spiritual adultery and merits death. Phinehas played the faithful lover by killing a man and his foreign wife, and thus stayed the wrath of divine jealousy (Num 25:11). Joshua repeated the fact that God is a jealous God who would not tolerate idolatry and the people voluntarily placed themselves under God’s suzerainty (Josh 24:19). Through idolatry Israel incited God to justified wrath, e.g. in the days of Ahab, and God punished them. Ultimately, repeated warnings went unheeded and God gave his people the justice due their spiritual adultery (Ezek 5:13; 8:3, 5; 16:38).- -Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament. This is not the same kind of jealousy we often exhibit as humans, but there is a jealousy that is appropriate and real for those who are married, have families, etc. This emotion, given to man, is a protection from that which would threaten the marriage, the family, the shalom of a community of faith. We have here, a righteous indignation, perhaps even a spiritually inflamed emotion since Pinchas is said to have God's jealousy. We should not take that statement too lightly. Phinehas, then, has acted in his capacity as chief of the Tabernacle guards (1 Chron. 9:17-20. By his deed, he ransoms (kipper; v. 13). Israel, in keeping with the expiatory function of the sacral guards: (literally) “to ransom [le-khapper] the Israelites, so that no plague [negef] may afflict the Israelites for encroaching upon the sanctuary” (Num. 8:19; see 18:22, 23). It follows that the son of and the successor to the chief of the sanctuary guards (3:32), in striking down a leading culprit from both Israel and Midian, thereby stops the plague. The text implies that had they (or other leaders; v. 4a) been slain earlier, many of those

- 11 - who died in the plague could have been saved (v. 4b). Thus, Phinehas’s “impassioned action for his God” (v. 13) was actually the ideal—and appropriate—behavior of the sanctuary guard: His prompt action “ransomed” Israel by terminating God’s wrath/plague.--JPS Torah Commentary, Excursus 61, p. 477. Would God have wiped out the Israelites? v. 11. Once released, God’s anger destroys everything in its path and makes no moral distinctions. This empirical truth concerning natural disasters—in modern actuarial parlance called “acts of God”—is neither glossed over nor treated apologetically by the Torah. It is reckoned with as a cornerstone of its theology. God rewards Phinehas’s zeal by granting him and his offspring (the Zadokites) the priesthood. Thus, the covenant with Phinehas matches the later covenant with David: Their lines will control, respectively, the spiritual and civil lives of their people. Phinehas’s victims turn out to be from the leading families of their respective nations. Thus, the Midianites who are blamed at the outset for instigating the apostasy of Baal- peor now have yet another reason to perpetuate their enmity toward Israel: to avenge the murder of their princess. Phinehas’s role as chief of the sanctuary guards sheds light upon the theological problem presented by God’s order: Why should all the leaders, innocent and guilty alike, be impaled? In truth, the same question could be asked of the expiatory function of the guards: Why should the entire Levitical cordon be condemned by God when an Israelite succeeds in encroaching on the sanctuary (18:22–23)? The answer is that the Levitical guards are indeed guilty: It is their negligence that makes encroachment possible. Similarly, all of Israel’s leaders must share the responsibility for not checking the Israelite apostates at the outset (R. Judah in Num. R. 20:23). However, Phinehas’s impassioned act in slaying the perpetrators of this single instance of encroachment suffices to ransom the rest of the people and terminates the plague.--JPS Torah commentary, My pact of friendship Hebrew beriti shalom. This basically means, "Covenant of Peace." The idiom is found again in Isaiah 54:10, Ezekiel 34:25. In this case, this is extended to be a "covenant of a forever priesthood." It is interesting to note exactly how this promise is fulfilled. 1 Chronicles 6:4-15, outlines the lineage of the priests from Aharon, through Eleazar, Pinchas, on down to Zadok. Thus this is the lineage of the Zadokites. Ezekiel 44:15-16. In the coming Millennial Temple described in Ezekiel, only the Zadokites are allowed to come before ADONAI to

- 12 - serve in the Temple. This is a promise to a lasting dynasty as priests to his family lineage, that of Zadok. This covenant is one of five issued by God: the promise to Noah that humanity will not be destroyed, the promise of seed and soil to , the Torah to Moses (and Israel), and dynasties to Phinehas and David (cf. Jer. 33:19–22; Ps. 89:29–38). It constitutes another royal gift bestowed upon the High Priest, who, like the king, wears special robes and a crown and is anointed (Lev. 7:12; 2 Kings 11:12). Now, by virtue of this covenant, he is granted a ruling dynasty.-- JPS Torah Commentary, p. 217. Now this is an interesting observation, particularly from a Jewish source that would not identify the Messiah as both Priest and King, and yet makes a connection for us nonetheless. We understand our Messiah Yeshua to be the Prophet like unto Moshe, our Great High Priest, and our coming King of kings. The picture that this presents is a true picture of our Messiah Yeshua, for His Dynasty shall never end. He will continue to function forever in these roles. Back in the beginning of this whole sordid affair, we have the elders of Moab and the elders of Midian, going to hire Bilam to curse Israel for Balak. We have only one king mentioned, and that was Balak the King of Moab. Some have difficulty with mention of Moabite women seducing the Israelite men and then a Midianite woman coming into the picture, followed by God's command to battle Midian. While the Moabites are indicated, the brashness of the event of this Midianite woman, along with the involvement of the "brothers" of Zimri, perhaps more meaning fellow Israelites more than family or fellow Simeonites, would indicate that she was something of the ringleader of the women who came out to seduce Israel. Numbers 26:1-31 The Second Numbering of Israel Our first census of the men of Israel able to go out to war in Israel occurred in Numbers 1:1-43, and serves to bracket the whole wilderness episode where they continually tried God and a whole generation of adults wound up dying in the wilderness. Now that generation is gone, we have a new generation of warriors be- ing numbered for the purpose of war and for entering into the Land of Promise. We learn a bit later, Numbers 26:63-65, that the evil generation had already passed away.

- 13 - The major changes are the precipitous decline in Simeon and the sizable in- crease in Manasseh, perhaps reflecting the historical situation of the settlement: Simeon was soon absorbed by Judah (see Judg. 1:3; Josh. 19:1), whereas Man- asseh expanded beyond its settled territory (Josh. 17:11, 16) and dominated polit- ical events during the judgeships of two of its sons, and Abimelech (Judg. 6–9; see 12:1–6). Alternative proposals for interpreting these tribal totals drastically reduce the numbers so that they are in consonance with the size of armies attested in many documents from the . Thus, if ʾelef is not rendered as “thousand” but as “military unit,” then the totals mustered from the tribes in each census are 5,550 and 5,730 men, respectively. --JPS Torah Commentary, p. 220. The bottom line of this census was a total figure of 601, 730. The previous figure from Numbers 1:46 was 603,550, making a difference of 1, 820 fewer men. Our text affirms the death of , and , but notes that neither the Reubenites nor the sons of Korach had died out.

- 14 -