come with unusual symptoms, the ecstasy that overpowers and brings
visions before the inward eye, he vaunts his inspiration. There is
no small resemblance to the manner in which the afflatus came to
seers of Israel in after-times; yet the description points more
distinctly to the rapture of one like King Saul, who has been swept
by some temporary enthusiasm into a strain of thought, an emotional
atmosphere, beyond ordinary experience. The far-reaching encampment
is first poetically described, with images that point to perennial
vitality and strength. Then as a settled nation Israel is described,
irrigating broad fields and sowing them to reap an abundant harvest.
Why comparison is made between the power of Israel and Agag one can
only guess. Perhaps the reigning chief of the Amalekites was at this
time distinguished by the splendour of his court, so that his name
was a type of regal magnificence. The images of the wild ox and the
lion are repeated with additional emphasis; and the strain rises to
its climax in the closing apostrophe:--
"Blessed be every one that blesseth thee
And cursed be every one that curseth thee."
So strongly is Israel established in the favour of Shaddai, the
Almighty One, that attempts to injure her will surely recoil on the
head of the aggressor. And on the other hand, to help Israel, to bid
her God-speed, will be a way to blessedness. Jehovah will make the
overflowing of His grace descend like rain on those who take Israel's
part and cheer her on her way.
In the light of what afterwards took place, it is clear that Balaam
was in this last ejaculation carried far beyond himself. He may
have seen for a moment, in the flash of a heavenly light, the high
distinction to which Israel was advancing. He certainly felt that
to curse her would be perilous, to bless her meritorious. But the
thought, like others of a more spiritual nature, did not enter
deeply into his mind. Balaam could utter it with a kind of strenuous
cordiality, and then do his utmost to falsify his own prediction.
What matter fine emotions and noble protestations if they are only
momentary and superficial? Balak's open jealousy and hatred of Israel
were, after all, more complimentary to her than the high-sounding
praises of Balaam, who spoke as enjoying the elation of the prophet,
not as delighting in the tenor of his message. Israel was nothing to
him. Soon the prosperity to which she was destined became like gall
and wormwood to his soul. The encampment roused his admiration at the
time, but afterwards, when it became clear that the Israelites would
have none of him, his mood changed towards them. Ambition ruled him
to the end; and if the Hebrews did not offer in any way to minister
to it, a man like Balaam would by-and-by set himself to bring down
their pride. Weak humanity gives many examples of this. The man who
has been an expectant flatterer of one greater than himself, but is
denied the notice and honour he looks for, becomes, when his hopes
have finally to be renounced, the most savage assailant, the most
bitter detractor of his former hero. And so strong often are the
minds which fall in this manner, that we look sometimes with anxiety
even to the highest.
XXI
_THE MATTER OF BAAL-PEOR_
NUMBERS xxiv. 10-xxv. 18
The last oracle of Balaam, as we have it, ventures into far more
explicit predictions than the others, and passes beyond the range of
Hebrew history. Its chief value for the Israelites lay in what was
taken to be a Messianic prophecy contained in it, and various bold
denunciations of their enemies. Whether the language can bear the
important meanings thus found in it is a matter of considerable doubt.
On the whole, it appears best not to make over-much of the prescience
of this _mashal_, especially as we cannot be sure that we have it in
the original form. One fact may be given to prove this. In Jeremiah
xlviii. 45, an oracle regarding Moab embodies various fragments of the
Book of Numbers, and one clause seems to be a quotation from chap.
xxiv. 17. In Numbers the reading is, "and break down וְקַּרְקַר, all
the sons of tumult שֵׁת;" in Jeremiah it is, "and the crown of the
head וְקָדְקֹֽד of the sons of tumult שָׁאוֹן." The resemblance leaves
little doubt of the derivation of the one expression from the other,
and at the same time shows diversity in the text.
The earlier deliverances of Balaam had disappointed the king of Moab;
the third kindled his anger. It was intolerable that one called to
curse his enemies should bless them again and again. Balaam would
do well to get him back to his own place. That Jehovah of whom he
spake had kept him from honour. If he delayed he might find himself
in peril. But the diviner did not retire. The word that had come to
him should be spoken. He reminded Balak of the terms on which he had
begun his auguries, and, perhaps to embitter Moab against Israel,
persisted in advertising Balak "what this people should do to his
people in the latter days."
The opening was again a vaunt of his high authority as a seer, one who
knew the knowledge of Shaddai. Then, with ambiguous forms of speech
covering the indistinctness of his outlook, he spoke of one whom he saw
far away, in imagination, not reality, a personage bright and powerful,
who should rise star-like out of Jacob, bearing the sceptre of Israel,
who should smite through the corners of Moab and break down the sons
of tumult. Over Edom and Seir he should triumph, and his dominion
should extend to the city which had become the last refuge of a hostile
people. Of spiritual power and right there is not a trace in this
prediction. It is unquestionably the military vigour of Israel gathered
up into the headship of some powerful king Balaam sees on the horizon
of his field of view. But he anticipates with no uncertainty that Moab
shall be attacked and broken, and that the victorious leader shall even
penetrate to the fastnesses of Edom and reduce them. A people like
Israel, with so great vitality, would not be content to have jealous
enemies upon its very borders, and Balak is urged to regard them with
more hatred and fear than he has yet shown.
The view that this prophecy "finds its preliminary fulfilment in
David, in whom the kingdom was established, and by whose victories
the power of Moab and Edom was broken, but its final and complete
fulfilment only in Christ," is supported by the unanimous belief of
the Jews, and has been adopted by the Christian Church. Yet it must
be allowed that the victories of David did not break the power of
Moab and Edom, for these peoples are found again and again, after his
time, in hostile attitude to Israel. And it is not to the purpose to
say that in Christ the kingdom reaches perfection, that He destroys
the enemies of Israel. Nor is there an argument for the Messianic
reference worth considering in the fact that the pseudo-Messiah in
the reign of Hadrian styled himself Bar-cochba, son of the star.
A pretender to Messiahship might snatch at any title likely to
secure for him popular support; his choice of a name proves only
the common belief of the Jews, and that was very ignorant, very far
from spiritual. There is indeed more force in the notion that the
star by which the wise men of the East were guided to Bethlehem is
somehow related to this prophecy. Yet that also is too imaginative.
The oracle of Balaam refers to the virility and prospective dominance
of Israel, as a nation favoured by the Almighty and destined to be
strong in battle. The range of the prediction is not nearly wide
enough for any true anticipation of a Messiah gaining universal sway
by virtue of redeeming love. It is becoming more and more necessary
to set aside those interpretations which identify the Saviour of the
world with one who smites and breaks down and destroys, who wields a
sceptre after the manner of oriental despots.
In Balaam's vision small nations with which he happens to be
acquainted bulk largely--the Kenites, Amalek, Moab, and Edom. To
him the Amalekites appear as having once been "the first of the
nations." We may explain, as before, that he had been impressed on
some occasion by what he had seen of their force and the royal state
of their king. The Kenites, dwelling either among the cliffs of
Engedi or the mountains of Galilee, were a very small tribe; and the
Amalekites, as well as the people of Moab and Edom, were of little
account in the development of human history. At the same time the
prophecy looks in one direction to a power destined to become very
great, when it speaks of the ships of Chittim. The course of empire
is seen to be westward. Asshur, or Assyria, and Eber--the whole
Abrahamic race, perhaps, including Israel--are threatened by this
rising power, the nearest point of which is Cyprus in the Great Sea.
Balaam is, we may say, a political prophet: to class him among those
who testified of Christ is to exalt far too much his inspiration and
read more into his oracles than they naturally contain. There is no
deep problem in the narrative regarding him--as, for instance, how
a man false at heart could in any sense enter into those gracious
purposes of God for the human race which were fulfilled by Christ.
* * * * *
Balaam, we are told, "rose up and returned to his own place";
and from this it would seem that with bitterness in his heart he
betook himself to Pethor. If he did so, vainly hoping still that
Israel would appeal to him, he soon returned to give Balak and the
Midianites advice of the most nefarious kind. We learn from xxxi. 16,
that through his counsel the Midianite women caused the children of
Israel to commit trespass against Jehovah in the matter of Peor. The
statement is a link between chaps. xxiv. and xxv. Vainly had Balaam
as a diviner matched himself against the God of Israel. Resenting his
defeat, he sought and found another way which the customs of his own
people in their obscure idolatrous rites too readily suggested. The
moral law of Jehovah and the comparative purity of the Israelites
as His people kept them separate from the other nations, gave them
dignity and vigour. To break down this defence would make them like
the rest, would withdraw them from the favour of their God and even
defeat His purposes. The scheme was one which only the vilest craft
could have conceived; and it shows us too plainly the real character
of Balaam. He must have known the power of the allurements which he
now advised as the means of attack on those he could not touch with
his maledictions nor gain by his soothsaying. In the shadow of this
scheme of his we see the diviner and all his tribe, and indeed the
whole morality of the region, at their very worst.
The tribes were still in the plain of Jordan; and we may suppose
that the victorious troops had returned from the campaign against
Bashan, when a band of Midianites, professing the utmost friendliness,
gradually introduced themselves into the camp. Then began the
temptation to which the Midianitish women, some of them of high rank,
willingly devoted themselves. It was to impurity and idolatry, to
degradation of manhood in body and soul, to abjuration at once of
faith and of all that makes individual and social life. The orgies
with which the Midianites were familiar belonged to the dark side of
a nature-cultus which carried the distinction between male and female
into religious symbolism, and made abject prostration of life before
the Divinity a crowning act of worship. Surviving still, the same
practices are in India and elsewhere the most dreadful and inveterate
barriers which the Gospel and Christian civilisation encounter. The
Israelites were assailed unexpectedly, it would appear, and in a time
of comparative inaction. Possibly, also, the camp was composed to some
extent of men whose families were still in Kadesh waiting the conquest
of the land of Canaan to cross the border. But the fact need not be
concealed that the polygamy which prevailed among the Hebrews was an
element in their danger. That had not been forbidden by the law; it
was even countenanced by the example of Moses. The custom, indeed, was
one which at the stage of development Israel had reached implied some
progress; for there are conditions even worse than polygamy against
which it was a protest and safeguard. But like every other custom
falling short of the ideal of the family, it was one of great peril;
and now disaster came. The Midianites brought their sacrifices and slew
them; the festival of Baal-peor was proclaimed. "The people did eat and
bowed down to their gods." It was a transgression which demanded swift
and terrible judgment. The chief men of the tribes who had joined in
the abominable rites were taken and "hanged up before the Lord against
the sun"; the "judges of Israel" were commanded to slay "every one his
men that were joined unto Baal-peor."
The narrative of the "Priests' Code," beginning at ver. 6, and
going on to the close of the chapter, adds details of the sin and
its punishment. Assuming that the row of stakes with their ghastly
burden is in full view, and the dead bodies of those slain by the
executioners are lying about the camp, this narrative shows the
people gathered at the tent of meeting, many of them in tears. There
is a plague, too, which is rapidly spreading and carrying off the
transgressors. In the midst of the sorrow and wailing, when the chief
men should have been bowed down in repentance, one of the princes
of Simeon is seen leading by the hand his Midianitish paramour,
herself a chief's daughter. In the very sight of Moses and the people
the guilty persons enter a tent. Then Phinehas, son of Eleazar the
priest, following them, inflicts with a javelin the punishment of
death. It is a daring but a true deed; and for it Phinehas and
his seed after him are promised the "covenant of peace," even the
"covenant of an everlasting priesthood." His swift stroke has
vindicated the honour of God, and "made an atonement for the children
of Israel." An act like this, when the elemental laws of morality are
imperilled and a whole people needs a swift and impressive lesson,
is a tribute to God which He will reward and remember. True, one of
the priestly house should keep aloof from death. But the emergency
demands immediate action, and he who is bold enough to strike at once
is the true friend of men and of God.
The question may be put, whether this is not justice of too rude
and ready a kind to be praised in the name of religion. To some it
may seem that the honour of God could not be served by the deed
attributed to Phinehas; that he acted in passion rather than in the
calm deliberation without which justice cannot be dealt out by man
to man. Would not this excuse the passionate action of a crowd,
impatient of the forms of law, that hurries an offender to the
nearest tree or lamp-post? And the answer cannot be that Israel
was so peculiarly under covenant to God that its necessity would
exonerate a deed otherwise illegal. We must face the whole problem
alike of personal and of united action for the vindication of
righteousness in times of widespread license.
It is not necessary now to slay an offender in order clearly
and emphatically to condemn his crime. In that respect modern
circumstances differ from those we are discussing. Upon Israel, as
it was at the time of this tragedy, no impression could have been
made deep and swift enough for the occasion otherwise than by the
act of Phinehas. But for an offender of the same rank now, there is
a punishment as stern as death, and on the popular mind it produces
a far greater effect--publicity, and the reprobation of all who love
their fellowmen and God. The act of Phinehas was not assassination;
a similar act now would be, and it would have to be dealt with as
a crime. The stroke now is inflicted by public accusation, which
results in public trial and public condemnation. From the time to
which the narrative refers, on to our own day, social conditions
have been passing through many phases. Occasionally there have been
circumstances in which the swift judgment of righteous indignation
was justifiable, though it did seem like assassination. And in no
case has such action been more excusable than when the purity of
family life has been invaded, while the law of the land would not
interfere. We do not greatly wonder that in France the avenging of
infidelity is condoned when the sufferer snatches a justice otherwise
unattainable. That is not indeed to be praised, but the imperfection
of law is a partial apology. The higher the standard of public
morality the less needful is this venture on the Divine right to
kill. And certainly it is not private revenge that is ever to be
sought, but the vindication of the elemental righteousness on which
the well-being of humanity depends. Phinehas had no private revenge
to seek. It was the public good.
* * * * *
It is confidently affirmed by Wellhausen that the "Priestly Code"
makes the cultus the principal thing, and this, he says, implies
retrogression from the earlier idea. The passage we are considering,
like many others ascribed to the "Priests' Code," makes something else
than the cultus the principal thing. We are told that in the teaching
of this code "the bond between cultus and sensuality is severed; no
danger can arise of an admixture of impure, immoral elements, a danger
which was always present in Hebrew antiquity." But here the danger
is admitted, the cultus is entirely out of sight, and the sin of
sensuality is conspicuous. When Phinehas intervenes, moreover, it is
not in harmony with any statute or principle laid down in the "Priests'
Code"--rather, indeed, against its general spirit, which would prohibit
an Aaronite from a deed of blood. According to the whole tenor of the
law the priesthood had its duties, carefully prescribed, by doing which
faithfulness was to be shown. Here an act of spontaneous zeal, done not
"on the positive command of a will outside," but on the impulse arising
out of a fresh occasion,[11] receives the approval of Jehovah, and
the "covenant of an everlasting priesthood" is confirmed for the sake
of it. Was Phinehas in any sense carrying out statutory instructions
for atonement on behalf of Israel when he inflicted the punishment
of death on Zimri and his paramour? To identify the "Priestly Code"
with "cultus legislation," and that with theocracy, and then declare
the cultus to have become a "pedagogic instrument of discipline,"
"estranged from the heart," is to make large demands on our inattention.
* * * * *
In the closing verses of the chapter another question of a moral
nature is involved. It is recorded that after the events we have
considered Jehovah spake unto Moses, saying, "Vex the Midianites,
and smite them; for they vex you with their wiles, wherewith they
have beguiled you in the matter of Peor, and in the matter of Cozbi,
the daughter of the prince of Midian, their sister, which was slain
on the day of the plague in the matter of Peor." Now is it for the
sake of themselves and their own safety the Israelites are to smite
Midian? Is retaliation commanded? Does God set enmity between the one
people and the other, and so doing make confession that Israel has no
duty of forgiveness, no mission to convert and save?
There is difficulty in pronouncing judgment as to the point of view
taken by the narrator. Some will maintain that the historian here,
whoever he was, had no higher conception of the command than that it
was one which sanctioned revenge. And there is nothing on the face of
the narrative which can be brought forward to disprove the charge.
Yet it must be remembered that the history proceeds on the theocratic
conception of Israel's place and destiny. To the writer Israel is of
less account in itself than as a people rescued from Egypt and called
to nationality in order to serve Jehovah. The whole tenor of the
"Priests' Code" narrative as well as of the other bears this out.
There is no patriotic zeal in the narrow sense,--"My country right or
wrong." Scarcely a passage can be pointed to implying such a sentiment,
such a drift of thought. The underlying idea in the whole story is
the sacredness of morality, not of Israel; and the suppression or
extinction of this tribe of Midianites with their obscene idolatry is
God's will, not Israel's. Too plain, indeed, is it that the Israelites
would have preferred to leave Midian and other tribes of the same low
moral cast unmolested, free to pursue their own ends.
And Jehovah is not revengeful, but just. The vindication of morality
at the time the Book of Numbers deals with, and long afterwards,
could only be through the suppression of those who were identified
with dangerous forms of vice. The forces at command in Israel were
not equal to the task of converting; and what could be achieved was
commanded--opposition, enmity; if need were, exterminating war.
The better people has a certain spiritual capacity, but not enough
to make it fit for what may be called moral missionary work. It
would suffer more than it would gain if it entered on any kind of
intercourse with Midian with the view of raising the standard of
thought and life. All that can be expected meanwhile is that the
Israelites shall be at issue with a people so degraded; they are to
be against the Midianites, keep them from power in the world, subject
them by the sword.
Our judgment, then, is that the narrative sustains a true theocracy
in this sense, exhibits Israel as a unique phenomenon in human
history, not impossible,--there lies the clear veracity of the Bible
accounts,--but playing a part such as the times allowed, such as the
world required. From a passage like that now before us, and the
sequel, the war with Midian, which some have regarded as a blot on the
pages of Scripture, an argument for its inspiration may be drawn. We
find here no ethical anachronisms, no impracticable ideas of charity
and pardon. There is a sane and strenuous moral aim, not out of keeping
with the state of things in the world of that time, yet showing the
rule and presenting the will of a God who makes Israel a protesting
people. The Hebrews are men, not angels; men of the old world, not
Christians--true! Who could have received this history if it had
represented them as Christians, and shown us God giving them commands
fit for the Church of to-day? They are called to a higher morality
than that of Egypt, for theirs is to be spiritual; higher than that
of Chaldea or of Canaan, for Chaldea is shrouded in superstition,
Canaan in obscene idolatry. They can do something; and what they
can do Jehovah commands them to do. And He is not an imperfect God
because His prophet does not give from the first a perfect Christian
law, a redeeming gospel. He is the "I Am." Let the whole course of
Old Testament development be traced, and the sanity and coherency of
the theocratic idea as it is presented in law and prophecy, psalm and
parable, cannot fail to convince any just and frank inquirer.
* * * * *
The end of Balaam's life may be glanced at before the pages close
that refer to his career. In xxxi. 8, it is stated that in the battle
which went against the Midianites Balaam was slain. We do not know
whether he was so maddened by his disappointment as to take the
sword against Jehovah and Israel, or whether he only joined the army
of Midian in his capacity of augur. F. W. Robertson imagines "the
insane frenzy with which he would rush into the field, and finding
all go against him, and that lost for which he had bartered heaven,
after having died a thousand worse than deaths, find death at last
upon the spears of the Israelites." It is of course possible to
imagine that he became the victim of his own insane passion. But
Balaam never had a profound nature, was never more than within sight
of the spiritual world. He appears as the calculating, ambitious man,
who would reckon his chances to the last, and with coolness, and what
he believed to be sagacity, decide on the next thing to attempt. But
his penetration failed him, as at a certain point it fails all men of
his kind. He ventured too far, and could not draw back to safety.