Study

7. And when Phinehas, the son of Eleazar. The courage of Phinehas is celebrated, who, whilst the rest were hesitating, inflamed with holy zeal, hastens forward to inflict punishment. The backwardness of others is therefore condemned by implication, though their tears were praiseworthy; but, since they were almost stupified by grief, their virtue was not dear from all defect. And certainly, whilst the yet unbridled licentiousness of the people was foaming like a tempestuous sea, we cannot wonder that the minds of the good were altogether or partially disabled. Hence was the zeal of Phinehas the more distinguished, when he did not hesitate to provoke so many worthless and wicked persons infuriated by their lechery. If any object that he transgressed the limits of his calling, when he laid hold of the sword with which God had not armed him, to inflict capital punishment, the reply is obvious, that our calling is not always confined to its ordinary office, inasmuch as God sometimes requires new and unusual acts of His servants. As a priest, it was not the office of Phinehas to punish crime, but he was called by the special inspiration of God, so that, in his private capacity, he had the Holy Spirit as his guide. These circumstances, indeed, ought not to be regarded as an example, so that a general rule may be laid down from them; though, at the same time, God preserves His free right to appoint His servants by privilege to act in His behalf as He shall see fit. God’s judgment of this case may be certainly inferred from its approval, so that we may correctly argue that Phinehas was under His own guidance, since He immediately afterwards declared that He was pleased with the act, as is also stated in Psalm 106:30, 31

Now, if any private person should in his preposterous zeal take upon himself to punish a similar crime, in vain will he boast that he is an imitator of Phinehas, unless he shall be thoroughly assured of the command of God. Let the answer of Christ, therefore, always be borne in mind by us, whereby he restrained His disciples, when they desired, like Elijah, to pray that those who had not received them should be destroyed by fire from heaven, “Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of.” (Luke 9:54, 55.) In order, therefore, that our zeal may be approved by God, it must be tempered by spiritual prudence, and directed by His authority; in a word, the Holy Spirit must go before and dictate what is right.

9. And those that died in the plague. Paul, when he says that only twenty-three thousand died, appears to differ from Moses; but we know that the exact account of numbers is not always observed, and it is probable that about twenty-four thousand were slain. Paul, therefore, subtracted one thousand, and was content with the lesser number; ¹⁸⁵¹⁸⁵     C. in his Commentary on 1 Corinthians 10:8, enlarges somewhat more on this point: “There perished in one day twenty-three thousand, or, as Moses says, twenty-four thousand. Though they differ as to number, it is easy to reconcile them, as it is no unusual thing, when it is not intended to number exactly and minutely each head, to put down a number that comes near it, as among the Romans there were those that received the name of ceatumviri, (the hundred,) while in reality there were two above the hundred. As there were, therefore, about twenty-four thousand that were overthrown by the Lord’s hand — that is, above twenty-three thousand, Moses has set down the number above the mark, and Paul the number below it, and in this way there is in reality no difference.” — Cal. Soc. Edit., vol. 1, p. 324. from which, however, we may perceive how severe and terrible was the punishment, teaching us to beware of provoking God by fornication. For, as it is a monstrous thing that so great a multitude should have been infected by this foul and shameful sin, so God’s fearful judgment against adulterers and fornicators is set before us. We have already seen that, although they were guilty of a wicked rebellion, still the punishment is justly ascribed to their lust, which impelled them to idolatry.

10. And the Lord spake unto Moses. In these words God makes it appear that He was the author of the death (of Zimri and Cozbi;) ¹⁸⁶¹⁸⁶     Added from Fr. not only because He was thus propitiated towards the people, but because He calls the zeal of Phinehas His own. ¹⁸⁷¹⁸⁷     Margin, A.V., “Heb., with my zeal.” It will, however, accord equally well whether we take it actively or passively, viz., either that Phinehas was inflamed with zeal to vindicate God’s glory, or that he took upon him the zeal of God Himself. Whichever be preferred, God refers to Himself what was done by Phinehas. When He declares that He was appeased by the punishment inflicted, let us not imagine that there was a meritorious satisfaction, whereby the Papists feign that their punishments are redeemed before God. For although the just chastisements of sin are sacrifices of sweet savor, they are by no means expiations to reconcile God. Besides, there is no question here of compensation, but what is meant is, that it was a means of appeasing God, when the ungodliness of the people which had, as it were, fanned up His wrath into a flame, was repressed by this severe correction. Thus, in Psalm 106, the atonement is ascribed not to the act of Phinehas, but only to his prayer, ¹⁸⁸¹⁸⁸     Psalm 106:30 A.V., “Then stood up Phinehas, and executed judgment;” in the English Prayer-book, the Chaldee, Syriac, and other versions, “and prayed;” with this, however, C., in his Commentary, does not agree: “Some render the word פלל, pillel, to pray, (he says;) but the other rendering, to execute justice, is more in accordance with the context.” — Cal. Sec. Edit., vol. 4, p. 230 because, in right of his priesthood, he had humbly interceded for the people. At the same time, the statement of Paul is true, that those are not judged by God who voluntarily judge themselves, (1 Corinthians 11:31,) since, by their penitence, they in a manner prevent this judgment.

A perpetual priesthood is promised to Phinehas as his reward. If any object, that he thus obtained nothing new, since, in accordance with the rule of the law, he was the undoubted successor of his father, I reply, that it is not un-common that what God had already freely promised, He declares that He will give by way of reward. Thus, what had been promised to Abraham before the birth of Isaac, is again repeated after he was prepared to sacrifice him, (Genesis 22:16:) “Because thou hast done this thing, and hast not withheld thy son,” therefore, “in blessing I will bless thee, and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed.” Besides, the privilege of a single individual is not simply in question here, but it refers to a perpetual succession, as if God had promised that his posterity should never fail. And assuredly, the change which took place at the commencement of Solomon’s reign, is not repugnant to this promise, for it may be probably inferred that Zadoc, no less than Abiathar, was of the race of Phinehas. This covenant is called a “covenant of peace,” because it was to be surely established; consequently, it may be properly rendered, “My covenant in peace.” At any rate, it indicates prosperity, as if He had said that Phinehas, together with his posterity, should prosperously execute the sacerdotal office.