Ps. 106--Phineas, zeal, and consigning everything to judgment

Consigning everything to judgment

There are times when it is appropriate to consign everything to judgment, to place everything beneath the burden of sin. David does it in Psalm 51—he brutally accepts, identifies with and claims his sinfulness. The more he adopts the position as an object of wrath, the more he makes of himself an object of mercy. That same logic, I think, is at work in this psalm.

The psalmist, rather ruthlessly, focuses entirely on Israel’s collective sinfulness. From beginning to end Israel is portrayed as a willfully forgetful and unfaithful covenant partner. That is—for the most part.

There are three moments of sunlight shining through the gloom. The first is, curiously enough, unnamed. It is a collective group and they are referred to right at the outset in verse 3. “How fortunate are those who maintain justice, who do what is right all the time.” Like the psalm itself, this statement appears somewhat at odds with the remainder of the psalm that paints such a dire picture of unfaithfulness. The second is Moses, Yhwh’s “chosen one” (v. 23). Importantly, this term “chosen” is used only one other time in the psalm. In verse 5, the psalmist looks forward to a time, after Yhwh has delivered him and the rest of His people, that he is allowed to “witness the good enjoyed by your chosen ones.” As we can see, the term is used to describe those who stand within the pleasure of Yhwh’s gaze—be it during the process of deliverance or those who rejoice in being delivered. That is important in this psalm, as we will see later. The third ‘righteous’ person in this psalm is Phineas, in verse 30. Like Moses, he is responsible for diverting, or ending, an outburst of Yhwh’s wrath. Moses “stands in the breach”, while Phineas “stood up in mediation.”

What can we determine about these three? The first is unnamed. The second, Moses, while initially praised, is later described as “speaking with temerity” (33). Even Moses falls under judgment. That leaves Phineas. As brief as the episode is concerning Phineas there are some important things to note. The psalm opens by describing Yhwh’s loyal-love as “everlasting”. The unnamed righteous of verse 3 “do what is right all the time.” What we see here is that the righteous mirror Yhwh’s ‘everlastingness’ in their perpetual “doing what is right”. Something similar happens with Phineas. After he diverts the plague, the psalmist says his act “has been regarded by God as a virtuous act throughout all generations forever.” What could that mean? On the one hand, it would appear that Phineas is a shining example of the unnamed righteous in verse 3. But, perhaps more importantly, Phineas is the founder of the Zadokite priesthood, because of his acts. What the psalmist is saying, I believe, is that the establishment of the Zadokite priesthood, and its endurance, is the manifestation of Yhwh’s “regard” for Phineas’ act. In other words—the divine perpetuation of the Zadokite priesthood shows, or is, Yhwh’s recognition and, we might say, and expression of his “loyal-love”.

This is not a minor point within the context of the psalm. An initial reading could lead one to conclude that the witness of Israel is unremittingly negative. But that is not the case. While the psalmist clearly wishes to claim Israel’s sin in order to effectuate Yhwh’s act of mercy, he does lift up Moses (in part) and Phineas (without qualification). The inclusion of Moses and his sin is thematically important and devastating. It is as if the psalmist lifts up the greatest prophet only to show that even he is part and parcel of “our forefathers’ sin”. That makes Phineas more of a curiosity. The psalmist could have ignored him. Why didn’t he? On the one hand, I think there is an historical reason. It seems clear to me that the psalm was likely composed when Israel was in captivity and awaiting a new exodus, a new return to the land. What the psalmist may be saying is that even during their exile the priesthood remains—and that their presence is a sign of Yhwh’s abiding and perpetual loyalty (or loyal-love) to Israel.

But perhaps we should take a closer look at Phineas. During the exodus, at the instigation of Balaam, the Israelites were tempted into inter-marrying with Moabites and Midianites, thereby bringing down a plague on the camp due to its Torah violation. As a result, Phineas “consumed with zeal”, drove a spear through an Israelite man and Midianite woman while they were having sex. His act caused the plague to stop as well as reorienting Israel away from its idolatry to Baal of Peor. What is curious about this in relation to the psalm is that the psalm describes his act in a way closely analogous to Moses’—“Phineas stood up in mediation…”. How is his act of killing the Israelite and Midianite an act of “mediation”? I think what the psalmist means is that Phineas acted as a ‘true Israelite’ and, thus, acted in their stead. The story describes Phineas’ “zeal” as turning away Yhwh’s “zeal”, and thereby inaugurating a “covenant of peace”.

Phineas is the “one who maintains justice and does what is right all the time” (vs. 3). Here is where we find the particular virtue or quality that the psalmist is seeking to inculcate in his listeners, the quality that will tempt Yhwh out of heaven and act on their behalf. The overriding sin of the psalm is that of willful forgetfulness which, in turn, leads to idolatry. The psalm begins and ends with their ‘forefathers’ refusing to remember Yhwh and his great acts on their behalf. At what point does this lead into idolatry, or is idolatry simply one aspect of this forgetfulness, is not easy to determine. Regardless, when seen through the example of Phineas, the only one who is himself “remembered” by Yhwh, this forgetfulness is a lack of “zeal”. It is Phineas’ zeal which both removes the wickedness from the camp, reinvigorates allegiance to Torah, and removes idolatry. Note the verses that immediately follow the story of Phineas—it describes Israel’s entrance into the land and their “failure to destroy the people…but entered into partnership with the nations and learned to do as they did…” They are guilty of precisely the opposite of Phineas’ virtue. Where Phineas kills not just one of “the people” but an Israelite—they fail to the “destroy the people.” And, whereas Phineas kills the man and the woman because they were “becoming one”, Israel “enters into partnership with the nations”. The entire story is one of faithless harlotry.

What is important to see in all of this is how, once Israel is ‘consigned to sin’, and when that sin is characterized as willful forgetfulness, then “zeal” is characterized as the remedy. As with Phineas, there would have been other avenues, other virtues, other people to lift up. But, for this psalmist and for those who were in exile, zeal is understood to be engine that “stands in the breach” between Yhwh and his wrath. Zeal is what heals that breach, diverts Yhwh’s own “zeal” and establishes a “covenant of peace”. It participates in the “forever of Yhwh”, of his “enduring loyal-love”. This becomes a subterranean river, of sorts, flowing down into the future and shaping the lives of those who are surrounded by a world that is sold into idolatry.