The narrative of Phinehas’ meritorious good work in Num 25 (cf. Psa 106:30-31), one that actually propitiated God’s wrath(!) is problematic to Reformed theology as it soundly refutes imputed righteousness and their denial good works can be meritorious, and not the fruit of being in a saved state merely. For a discussion, see:
Response
to a Recent Attempt to Defend Imputed Righteousness (cf. John
Murray on Genesis 15:6 and Psalm 106:31)
Commenting on the actions of Phinehas,
Protestants E. Randolph Richards and Richard James offered the following cultural
context to Phinehas’ actions:
ENFORCING VALUES BY GUARDING BOUNDARIES
Why enforce values?
Why guard boundaries? Because to do so protects the group’s identity. A
collectivist would say, “The boundaries keep us us.” We individualists
might say, “The values keep us us.” For collectives, these are ways of
saying the same thing, because guarding boundaries protects identity. The term
for leaving Judaism, leaving the community, was “casting off the yoke.” A yoke
tied oxen together and helped them to work together, to pull in the same
direction. In people’s minds, a yoke helped the oxen be better. So also a
group’s identity and boundaries made their group better.
Phinehas enforces the
boundaries. During the exodus, while staying in Shittim, the Israelite men began to
“indulge in sexual immorality” (Num 25:1) with the local Moabite women. It is
unclear in the story whether Israelite men were marrying Moabite women and
adding their gods and practices to their household, or whether they were
participating in the religious festivals of the Moabite people. Either way, God
considered it “to play the harlot” (Num 25:1 NASB), while the common prophetic
image of Israel as God’s bride. We are told the Moabites seized this
opportunity to deceive the Israelites and lead them astray to join in with the
Moabites’ sacrificial meals and to bow down before their gods. The Moabites
were trying to change the boundaries. They were trying to incorporate Israel
into their group, their community. The Moabite strategy was that once Israel
was us, then there would be no more war.
Their plan is
working. The people of God begin to follow Baal of Peor (Num 25:1-3). They are
being absorbed into another people, which means absorbing their values and
their gods. All Israel is at risk of losing us and becoming them.
The Lord’s anger burns against these Israelite men. Moses is standing there
delivering the story news to Israel’s leaders; everyone is weeping at the
entrance to the tent of meeting. Just then, “an Israelite man brought into the
camp a Midianite woman right before the eyes of Moses and the whole assembly of
God” (Num 25:6). He is forcing a critical moment. If nothing is said, the
assembly’s silence will be endorsement. It will be approval for everyone. The
boundary between us and them will be gone. The Midianites and the Israelites
will be one, just as the man and woman are becoming one.
An Israelite called Phinehas
sees this. He wanted to keep Israel Israel, so he needs to reinforce Israel’s
boundaries. Phinehas “left the assembly, took a spear in his hand and followed
the Israelite into the tent. He drove the spear into both of them, right
through the Israelite man and into the woman’s stomach” (Num 25:7-8). We are
told this gruesome detail to let us know what the man and woman were doing.
Their act of becoming one was the very risk to the group. God’s judgment
against the man uniting with the woman is symbolic of God’s judgment against
Israel uniting with the Midianites. It is important to note how public are the
actions of both the man and Phinehas. It is decision time for all of Israel.
Phinehas is protecting the boundaries.
Later Israelites took
Phinehas as an example of someone zealous to preserve the boundaries of God’s
people. Biblically, the word zeal came to refer to the use of violence
to guard and enforce boundaries and so to preserve the values (and identity) of
the people of God. In 167 BC, when Mattathias killed a fellow Israelite for
publicly sacrificing to a pagan god, he was praised: “Thus he burned with zeal
for the law, just as Phinehas did against Zimri son of Salu” (1 Macc 2:26
NRSV). Both Phinehas and Mattathias were defending their group’s identity.
Although they killed fellow kinsmen, they thought this violence was necessary
to protect the good of the whole group by guarding the boundaries and so maintain
values: the death of one to save the many. Paul describes his actions in
violently persecuting the early church as zeal (Phil 3:6). This is because he
felt he was defending the boundaries of God’s people. (E. Randolph Richards and
Richard James, Misreading Scripture with Individualist Eyes: Patronage,
Honor, and Shame in the Biblical World [Downers Grove, Ill.: IVP Academic,
2020], 220-22)