Baal of Peor and a New Census
The generation God delivered from Egypt would meet its final end. A new generation would arise and fulfill all God had promised.
The Book of Numbers was aptly named bemidbar in Hebrew, for it bore witness to Israel’s experiences “in the wilderness.” YHWH had prepared the Israelite camp and His Tabernacle for entry into Canaan (Numbers 1:1-10:11), but that generation of Israelites continued to persist in rebellion against Him, and to that end He condemned all of them to die in the wilderness (Numbers 10:12-19:22). Over forty years all but Moses, Joshua, and Caleb from that generation would die in the wilderness; Moses would also be condemned to die; YHWH then led Israel to the banks of the Jordan River in the land of Moab (Numbers 20:1-22:1).
Balak king of Moab, concerned about the welfare of Moab in the face of Israel, had hired Balaam son of Beor to curse Israel; nevertheless, three times Balaam instead blessed Israel according to the will and word of YHWH (Numbers 22:1-24:25). In Numbers 25:1-26:65, attention was redirected back to Israel and what would transpire at Shittim in Moab.
At Shittim, the men of Israel “played the harlot,” or “committed sexual immorality,” with the daughters of Moab (Numbers 25:1). After engaging in sexual relations, or perhaps as part of the rituals involving said sexual relations, the Moabite women invited the Israelites to the sacrifices they would make before their gods, and Israelites would bow down to them (Numbers 25:2). The god in particular was Baal of Peor (Numbers 25:3); Baal was the storm god served throughout the lands of Canaan and ostensibly the Transjordan; Peor was a mountain which looked toward the wastelands according to Numbers 23:28. When gods were associated with a particular place, it generally meant there was some special cult site for the god at that location, either because some myth or legend associated that particular place with that god, or because the place had earlier been a cult site for a god which was assimilated into a newly dominant culture.
YHWH’s anger arose against Israel on account of their service to Baal of Peor (Numbers 25:3). YHWH commanded Moses to arrest the leaders of the people and to hang them before YHWH (and all the people) so YHWH’s anger would turn from Israel (Numbers 25:4). It would not seem as if Moses followed this command, unless we are to understand they were eliminated from the lack of mention of any tribal chiefs in Numbers 26:1-65. Instead, Moses commanded the judges of Israel to execute all those who joined themselves to Baal of Peor (Numbers 25:5).
While Moses was having this conversation with the judges of Israel at the tent of meeting, Zimri ben Salu of Simeon brought Cozbi (or Kozbi) bat Zur of Midian into a tent in the full sight of Moses and all the Israelites while they were weeping at the entrance of the tent of meeting (Numbers 25:6). Most reject the suggestion the two entered the tent of meeting itself, but they certainly seemed to enter some kind of tent which included some kind of sanctuary to Baal of Peor or some other god or goddess. We should not imagine Cozbi was merely a Midianite leader’s daughter; she was likely a priestess of some sort, and the sexual activity in which Zimri and Cozbi were engaged was most likely the consummation of some kind of religious ritual.
Zimri’s behavior was blatant and shocking. Moses did not seem to do much of anything. Instead, Phinehas ben Eleazar ben Aaron the high priest took a javelin and thrust through Zimri and Cozbi while they were in flagrante (Numbers 25:7-8, 14-15). Phinehas’ action led to the end of a plague which had spread throughout Israel and which led to the death of 24,000 (Numbers 25:8b-9).
While Zimri’s behavior was inexcusable, Phinehas’ response was itself shocking and well beyond anything so far prescribed in the Law. Zimri was the son of the chief of Simeon, and Cozbi was the daughter of a Midianite leader; there would be political and foreign policy implications for Phinehas’ actions. Perhaps for this reason YHWH spoke to Moses regarding what Phinehas had done: his zeal had turned YHWH’s anger away from Israel, and YHWH would give him a covenant of peace, and his descendants would remain priests before Him; he had made atonement for the Israelites (Numbers 25:10-13). YHWH would also command Moses to tell Israel to bring trouble against the Midianites and to destroy them because of the treachery by which they had deceived Israel in the matter of Baal of Peor and by the behavior of Cozbi (Numbers 25:17-18).
Cozbi was the first Midianite mentioned in regards to the matter of Baal of Peor, but since the Midianites were associated with the Moabites in terms of the Balak and Balaam episode in Numbers 22:1-24:25, we should not be surprised to see Midian involved with the matter of Baal of Peor as well.
Later traditions have been ambivalent about Phinehas and his zeal. Those who have nurtured a strong desire to resist what is deemed religious oppression have tended to strongly exalt Phinehas and to associate themselves with a similar zeal. The author of 1 Maccabees spoke of Mattathias’ actions against the Greek authorities who would have them renounce the customs of Moses in terms of what Phinehas had done:
When Mattathias saw it, he burned with zeal, and his heart was stirred. He gave vent to righteous anger; he ran and slaughtered him on the altar. At the same time he killed the king’s officer who was forcing them to sacrifice, and he tore down the altar. Thus he burned with zeal for the law, just as Phinehas did against Zimri son of Salu (1 Maccabees 2:24-26).
Paul would also speak regarding his former days as a Pharisee as being zealous for God and the traditions of Moses in Acts 22:3 and Galatians 1:14, and wanted his audience to understand such zeal motivated his former persecution of the faith. No doubt those Israelites who resisted the Romans in the First and Second Jewish Wars of 68-70 and 132-135 felt as if they were proving zealous for the traditions of Israel like Phinehas; perhaps for this very reason, the rabbis proved far more suspicious and concerned regarding Phinehas’ zeal, often speaking of its extrajudicial nature and the concerns attendant therein.
We do well to maintain a balanced view of Phinehas and his zeal. We can understand why Phinehas was thus driven to act as he did, but we should also remember how shocking and extrajudicial Phinehas’ actions proved to be. We do best to understand YHWH’s commendation of Phinehas not necessarily as an encouragement for the people of God to act likewise, but instead as justifying Phinehas in the face of the extrajudicial nature of his actions and commending him personally. We should all maintain great zeal for God and His purposes in Christ, but must always channel and direct that energy into serving the Lord as He has prepared the way (Romans 12:11, Hebrews 2:10).
After the plague, YHWH commanded Moses and Eleazar to again take a census of the people, just like they had taken a census forty years earlier (Numbers 26:1-65; cf. Numbers 1:1-3:51). The reason for the new census was made apparent in its conclusion: among the Israelites numbered in the plains of Moab opposite Jericho, none save Caleb ben Jephunneh and Joshua ben Nun were numbered who had been counted before Mount Sinai (Numbers 26:63-65). The word of YHWH against the former generation had been fulfilled; Israel was counted again in order to prepare for the military expedition they would soon begin in Canaan.
Much can be gained by comparing and contrasting the two censuses (Numbers 1:1-3:51 vs. Numbers 26:1-65). The first featured the tribal leaders of the twelve tribes and focused only on the men twenty years and above who could serve in a military capacity; the second was done only by Moses and Eleazar, and while the number still featured the men of military age, each tribe was described in terms of its family units. In the tribal listings, all maintained their places, except Manasseh and Ephraim were reversed (Ephraim then Manasseh, Numbers 1:32-35; Manasseh then Ephraim, Numbers 26:28-37). The overall number of Israelite men counted was smaller the second time, but not by terribly much (from 603,550 in Numbers 1:46 to 601,730 in Numbers 26:51, a loss of 1,820). As with the full number of Israelites, so with some of the tribes: their numbers varied somewhat over the forty years, but not significantly (Reuben, -2,770; Gad, -5,150; Judah, +1,900; Zebulun, +3,100, Dan, +1,700; Levites, +1,000; Numbers 1:20-45, 3:14-39 26:5-50, 58-62). Other tribes, however, saw significant changes in their numbers (Simeon, -37,100; Issachar, +9,900; Manasseh, +20,500; Ephraim and Naphtali, -8,000; Benjamin, +10,200; Asher, +11,900; Numbers 1:20-45, 26:5-50). Some speculate Simeon’s devastation might have come from the plague regarding Baal of Peor on account of Zimri’s affiliation with Simeon, but the text nowhere provides any explanation regarding why some tribes grew and other tribes shrank in population.
Challenges regarding how we should understand the meaning of the Hebrew word ‘eleph remain for Numbers 26:1-65 as in Numbers 1:1-3:51. The word would certainly come to mean “thousand.” Perhaps it meant “thousand” in terms of both of these censuses, yet we have good reason to be skeptical Israel would have truly been so large at the time. God could certainly have made as much provision for millions as thousands in the wilderness; it is not a question of God’s ability to be faithful. Instead, it is a matter of understanding Israel in terms of the Late Bronze Age and with other aspects of Israel as described in the Torah. A military population of over 600,000 and an overall population around 2 million would have completely overwhelmed the Levant in the Late Bronze Age, as far as we can tell; it also would strain credulity to suggest Israel at such numbers was the “least numerous” of all people, as in Deuteronomy 7:7. Perhaps the numbers were deliberately exaggerated; perhaps the term ‘eleph meant a military contingent of a given size far smaller than a thousand and later became a term for a thousand.
The numbers in the second census would matter because they would be the basis on which the land would be apportioned: larger tribes would get a larger inheritance, and smaller tribes a smaller inheritance, with the land divided by lot (Numbers 26:52-56). The lack of an inheritance among the Israelites for the Levites was again re-emphasized (Numbers 26:62).
While the census in Numbers 1:1-46 focused entirely on the tribes and their numbers, the census in Numbers 26:1-65 also would provide some details regarding certain characters associated with the different tribes. Some of the family structures and some of the characters mentioned well be derived from the listing of Jacob’s family from Genesis 46:8-27. Others were mentioned on account of their association with various narratives in Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers: Dathan, Abiram, and Korah (Numbers 26:9-11; cf. Numbers 16:1-50; here we learn Korah’s descendants did not die along with him); Zelophehad and his daughters (Numbers 26:33; cf. Numbers 27:1-11, 36:1-13); Amram, Jochebed, Aaron, Moses, and Miriam (Numbers 26:58-59; cf. Exodus 6:20, 15:20); and Nadab and Abihu (Numbers 26:61; cf. Leviticus 10:1-3).
Despite all the travails and trials in the wilderness, YHWH had proven faithful to His promises regarding Israel. The plague which came as a result of the incident regarding Baal of Peor wiped out the rest of the older generation (and likely not a few of the younger generation as well). One generation had thus passed away, and another generation had arisen at around the same size with around the same strength. The rest of the narrative in Numbers would describe how YHWH would prepare this people to accomplish what He had promised to their ancestors and to prove more faithful than their fathers. May we gain insight from the examples of those who have come before us and faithfully serve God in Christ through the Spirit!
Ethan R. Longhenry
The post Baal of Peor and a New Census appeared first on de Verbo vitae.
