NUMBERS 25
Repeated attempts to bring a curse upon the people of God having utterly failed, the enemy changed his plan of campaign. If Balaam could not curse he would [p. 313] seek to corrupt (chapter 31:16), and this has often proved to be a more successful device. “The daughters of Moab” became an ensnaring influence, and “they invited the people to the sacrifices of their gods” (verses 1,2).
The friendliness and invitations of the world are more to be feared than its curses. And it must not be supposed that it is only young believers who are exposed to this snare. For it comes in at the end of the wilderness, as acting upon those who have, typically, made a good deal of spiritual progress, and who have known something of the good of the indwelling Spirit, both for inward satisfaction and as power to get the victory over enemies. The fact that persons have come distinctly into view as subjects of divine working makes it a definite object with Satan to seduce and corrupt them. And sometimes it becomes sorrowfully manifest that those who have successfully resisted persecution fall before what appeals to fleshly gratification. How often the friendliness of the world, and even an appeal to the lowest lusts of the flesh, have succeeded in casting the people of God down from their excellency! It is not to little children, but to young men — who are strong, and who have the word of God abiding in them, and who have overcome the wicked one — that the warning is addressed, “Love not the world, nor the things in the world” (1 John 2:15).
“And Israel joined himself to Baal-Peor” (verse 3). Satan uses things which appeal to our flesh, but his real object is to get something which is of himself into the place which God should have in the hearts of His people. His effort is to bring us under the influence of what is idolatrous. The beginnings of unfaithfulness can be detected if we observe how our soul’s relations with God are being affected. Satan will, of course, seek to blind us as to this, but the mercy of God will [p. 314] not leave us without warning. Let us always be prepared to deal honestly with our own souls! When we try to persuade ourselves that there is no harm in this or that, it is generally because there is some inward consciousness that the things in question are not so harmless as we would like to suppose them to be. Let us ask ourselves honestly, Are the things to which we are turning likely to increase our delight and liberty in private prayer, our love for the Scriptures, our pleasure in the company of spiritual persons, or our habitual experience of nearness to God? If not, let us take warning in time, and “flee from idolatry” before it has fully accomplished its deadly work in our souls. Let us watch the beginnings of idolatrous influence, the first movements of departure. Let us pray with the Psalmist, “Search me, O God, and know my heart; prove me, and know my thoughts; and see if there be any idolatrous way in me; and lead me in the way everlasting” (Psalm 139:23,24 margin). How many who once walked in the Spirit have now “joined themselves to Baal-Peor and ate the sacrifices of the dead”! (Psalm 106:28).
It is to be noted that the Midianites were descended from Abraham (Genesis 25:2), so that they represent the influence which those naturally kindred to us may have to draw us into worldly associations. “They invited the people”. It is not always safe to respond to invitations. In writing his first epistle to the Corinthians Paul says, “But if any one of the unbelievers invite you, and ye are minded to go” (1 Corinthians 10:27). He does not commend their going, but he does not forbid it; he leaves them at liberty, and Christianity is a system of liberty, not bondage. It may be that in their carnal state they were hardly prepared for the complete separation which should mark a people among whom God walked. But in the [p. 315] second epistle, when evidence of self-judgment had appeared in them, he enjoins upon them to “come out from the midst of them, and be separate, saith the Lord, and touch not what is unclean, and I will receive you” (2 Corinthians 6:17). Holiness cannot be maintained without separation, and if holiness is not maintained some form of idolatry is almost sure to be present.
Worldly and idolatrous associations call for stern measures; they are a provocation of the Lord to jealousy (1 Corinthians 10:22). “And Jehovah said to Moses, Take all the heads of the people, and hang them up to Jehovah before the sun, that the fierce anger of Jehovah may be turned away from Israel. And Moses said to the judges of Israel, Slay every one his men that have joined themselves to Baal-Peor” (verses 4,6). It is in keeping with this that the Lord presents Himself to the assembly in Pergamos as “he that has the sharp two-edged sword” (Revelation 2:12). He says of that assembly, “thou hast there those who hold the doctrine of Balaam, who taught Balak to cast a snare before the sons of Israel, to eat of idol sacrifices and commit fornication”. And He adds, “Repent therefore: but if not, I come to thee quickly, and I will make war with them with the sword of my mouth”. This shows clearly that what happened to Israel in Shittim has its counterpart in the Christian profession. And the references to Balaam by Peter and Jude (2 Peter 2:15; Jude 11) confirm this. Idolatry takes a more veiled and subtle form in the Christian profession than it does in the heathen world, but it is not less offensive to God. Whatever tends to entangle the people of God in worldly associations is in direct opposition to the truth. For the Lord said, “If ye were of the world, the world would love its own; but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, on account of this the world hates you”. And James says, “know ye not that friendship with the world is enmity with God?” It is very solemn to think that there are professing Christians who hold the doctrine of Balaam. They are not only worldly in practice, but their teaching has the object of ensnaring those who are professedly God’s people in that very world out of which He would have them delivered. Against all such the sharp two-edged sword of the Son of man will assuredly make war. They are definitely His adversaries, and will be treated by Him as such.
One can understand in the light of this how dreadful it was that a man of the children of Israel should come and bring “a Midianitish woman to his brethren, in the sight of Moses, and in the sight of the whole assembly of the children of Israel, who were weeping before the entrance of the tent of meeting” (verse 6). “The whole assembly” were weeping as feeling that they had come under divine displeasure, but one of the princes openly slighted the solemn exercise of the moment. And it is said that he brought the woman “to his brethren”, indicating that his act involved them all. I wonder if Christians who go to worldly entertainments and read novels consider that they are identifying all the brethren with these things? I am afraid this is often forgotten. We think it is our own matter, and that it affects nobody else! But if I am one of the people of God I really identify them all with what I do. My worldly conduct tends to corrupt the whole testimony of God. What a solemn thing this is!
No wonder that the sight of such a thing, and the thought of how it involved all the brethren, moved the soul of Phinehas with a divine jealousy. He “rose up from among the assembly, and took a javelin in his hand, and he went after the man of Israel into the tent-chamber, and thrust both of them through” (verses 7 and 8). Jehovah said of him, “he was jealous [p. 317] with my jealousy ... he was jealous for his God” (verses 11,13). It was no time for lukewarmness or half-hearted measures. Twenty-four thousand had already died of plague in one day. Atonement must be made; in this case by the execution of suitable judgment. Phinehas maintained what was due to God in priestly righteousness, and the judgment executed was accepted by God as making atonement for the children of Israel. We have seen that many may be involved in the consequences of one transgression, but it is a comfort to see, on the other hand, that, many may benefit by the righteousness of one. This is true pre-eminently of that one righteousness wrought by the Lord Jesus Christ, but it is also true in principle of any who act in faithfulness to God in regard of what is due to Him. Every act of righteousness in maintaining what is according to the truth has a beneficial bearing on all the people of God. The judgment of what is evil has necessarily the aspect of severity, but it is really the only ground on which God can go on in His goodness with His people. It can thus be regarded as making atonement and averting a judgment which would otherwise be inevitable. God takes account with pleasure of a holy refusal of what is displeasing to Him, even though it may only be found with a small remnant of His people. And the fact that what is evil has been judged in this way is of more importance before God, and perhaps of more benefit to the whole of His people, than we are apt to think. Faithfulness to God in judging what is displeasing to Him is the truest love and benefit to all His people. The uncompromising decision of Phinehas, who would not suffer worldly and idolatrous associations, made atonement for the children of Israel, and all benefited by it. It also secured to Phinehas Jehovah’s covenant of peace, and the covenant of an everlasting [p. 318] priesthood, so that we find from Ezekiel that his descendants will exercise priesthood in the millennium. If there is the absence of faithfulness in what is due to God there cannot be true holiness, and without holiness no man shall see the Lord; true priestly service will cease.
We do not read of Phinehas as exercising priesthood in a sacrificial or intercessory way; he was a warrior priest. When Jehovah would have His people avenged upon the Midianites, Moses sent twelve thousand armed for war, “and Phinehas the son of Eleazar the priest and the holy instruments even the alarm-trumpets in his hand” (Numbers 31:6). And afterwards when the two and a half tribes built “an altar of grand appearance” by the Jordan, and it was regarded as a movement of rebellion against Jehovah which called for severe judgment, Phinehas was sent with ten princes to call them to order. And then, again, when appalling wickedness in Israel called for punishment, and the children of Israel enquired of Jehovah what they should do, we are told that Phinehas stood before the ark in those days (Judges 20:28). He must have been an old man then, but he still appears in a militant connection, and acting in it in faithfulness to God. When evil is occurrent the holy priesthood must necessarily assume a militant character. People speak sometimes of the “church militant”, and it would be well if the church generally was more worthy of such a designation. It is most essential that we should be “good soldiers of Jesus Christ”. It is only such who really have God’s covenant of peace. There are times of testing in the history of most believers when it becomes imperative to take immediate and decisive action in a military sense. If they fail to do so, they succumb to an influence which is really evil and idolatrous in its tendency, and they give up what is due to God in the circumstances of the moment. This [p. 319] is very serious, because it involves coming under God’s governmental displeasure. Paul reminds us of the many thousands who fell in that day of ensnarement, and he adds that “all these things happened to them as types, and have been written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the ages are come” (1 Corinthians 10:8; 1 Corinthians 10:11,12).
It is instructive to know that Phinehas filled another office which is not mentioned until long after. When the door-keepers are spoken of in 1 Chronicles 9, we are told that “Phinehas the son of Eleazar was the ruler over them formerly; Jehovah was with him”. I suppose he was the first to bear the charge of door-keeping in regard to “the tent of meeting”. It was a holy trust to keep watch “at the gates of the house of Jehovah, the house of the tent”. This conveys to us a very clear intimation that vigilance is to be exercised in regard to those who are allowed to approach “the tent of meeting”. It is to us a commandment of the Lord. There is no thought in Scripture of spiritual privileges being open to anyone who chooses to take them up. Entrance to the tent of meeting, or afterwards to the temple, was never left to the responsibility of those who wished to enter. From the very beginning of God having a place where He might be approached by His people there were door-keepers. At a later period we read that “David and Samuel the seer had instituted them in their trust”, or, perhaps, as the margin reads, “had appointed them on account of their faithfulness” (1 Chronicles 9:22).
As ruler over the door-keepers we are told of Phinehas that “Jehovah was with him”. No doubt he was as jealous for God in regard of those whom he admitted to the tent of meeting as he was jealous in killing Zimri: We have to deplore that there has been great lack of this holy watchfulness in the Christian profession; the door has been left unguarded, and much [p. 320] that is worldly and carnal has got in. This state of things brings an obligation upon all who wish to be faithful in the last days to act upon the word, “Let every one who names the name of the Lord withdraw from iniquity” (2 Timothy 2:19). If Christian fellowship is to be taken up in a divine way in the present condition of things it can only be as we “pursue righteousness, faith, love, peace, with those that call upon the Lord out of a pure heart” (2 Timothy 2:22). To maintain such a position as this there must be vigilance in door-keeping. Something of the spirit of Phinehas is needed. We may be sure that under his rule there would be no likelihood of laxity in the admission of unsuitable persons. Phinehas would consider first for God; his first concern would be that all should be suitable to the place where Jehovah dwelt in holiness. It is well for those who have the trust of door-keeping — and all believers have this responsibility in some measure — to remember that Phinehas was the ruler over the door-keepers, and that “Jehovah was with him” in discharging that trust. We may surely have confidence that if we are truly minded to be faithful in this service of watchfulness at the doors — faithful to admit all who have suitable moral and spiritual qualifications, and faithful to refuse what is not in keeping with the truth, or with the holiness which becomes God’s house — He will be with us as He was with Phinehas.