Question: Which plainly stated Covenant in the Bible is most often neglected?
The answer is the covenant which the LORD made with Phinehas in the Book of Numbers.
The circumstances surrounding this covenant centers around the doctrine of Balaam as it was realized at Baal Peor (Cf. Num.31:16; Rev. 2:14). Amid the idolatry and fornication a Simeonite by the name of Zimri openly brought a Midianite woman into the camp of Israel and took her into his tent to have sexual relations with her. This happened even while Israelites were “weeping at the door of the tabernacle of meeting.” (Num. 25:6).
Phinehas, who was Aaron’s grandson, witnessed this brazen act of “sexual liberation” and struck the man and the woman through with a javelin (25:8). This act of priestly zeal stopped a plague which had broken out within the camp which had claimed the lives of twenty-four thousand people. God’s response to this act was to initiate a “covenant of peace” with Phinehas and his descendents. This is said to be “a covenant of an everlasting priesthood.” (25:13).
Some centuries later, the Psalmist, in recounting some of the most memorable moments of Israel’s history, referred to the incident at Baal of Peor (Psa. 106:28-31). In verses 30 and 31 it says,
Then Phinehas stood up and intervened, and the plague was stopped. And that was accounted to him for righteousness to all generations forevermore.
This covenant of peace between God and the descendents of Phinehas comes after the mention of a “covenant of salt” given to the Levites “as an ordinance forever” (Num. 18:19). The ordinance has to do with eating from the heave offerings. The exact relationship between these two covenants is not easy to pin down, although they are certainly complementary. I shall say a little more about this further on.
The descendents of Phinehas the son of Eleazar (Exod. 6:23) include Zadok, who is identified as “of the sons of Eleazar” in 1 Chronicles 24:3. During the attempted usurpation of the throne by Adonijah (1 Ki. 1:7-8), Abiathar deserted David. The aged king responded with having Abiathar removed from the priesthood, thus ensuring that Zadok’s line (the descendents of Phinehas), kept the High Priesthood (1 Ki. 2:26-27). This becomes important when we get to Ezekiel.
The Witness of Jeremiah
Jeremiah wrote during some of the most turbulent times in Israel’s history. Chapters 30 through to 34 (and even possibly 35) form a sort of thematic scholia on the covenants. Among the main prophetic teaching in the section is the prediction about “the time of Jacob’s trouble” in 30:7 (cf. Mk. 13:19-20), a forecast about Israel serving “divid their king, whom I will raise up to them” (30:9), God’s overtures of covenant steadfastness towards Israel in 31:1-4, with the LORD even calling the families of Israel “O Virgin of Israel!” in 31:4 and 21. Then there is New Covenant language in 31:11-12, which goes on to include the line,
I will satiate the soul of the priests with abundance… (31:14a).
This comes before the famous New Covenant promise of 31:31-37. The next chapter is about Jeremiah purchasing “poor” real estate amid promises of future peace and prosperity (32:14-15, 36-42). Next comes the great (and much neglected) thirty-third chapter. First we get a description of the tearing down of the houses to serve as fortifications against the Babylonians (33:4-5), but it quickly turns in outlook to more prosperous times to come, including cleansing from sin (see 33:8). Then comes the passage in 33:14-26 which cites or alludes to four covenants within a New Covenant setting (This highlights my contention that the New Covenant is needed for the [literal] fulfillment of these other covenants). Coupled with the promise to fulfill the Davidic Covenant in 33:17-18 and 21-22 are promises that God will also preserve the Levites to minister to Him. The latter passage reads,
Thus say the Yahweh: If you can break My covenant with the day and My covenant with the night [which I take as a reference to the Noahic Covenant in Genesis 8:22], so that there will not be day and night in their season, then My covenant may also be broken with David My servant, so that he will not have a son to reign on his throne, or with the Levites, the priests, My ministers. As the host of heaven cannot be numbered, nor the sand of the sea measured [a clear allusion to the Abrahamic Covenant], so will I multiply the descendents of David My servant and the Levites who minister to Me.
The type of ministry which the Levites are promised is described as offering “burnt offerings…to kindle grain offerings, and to sacrifice continually” (33:18).
While nobody disbelieves the Davidic Covenant in Jeremiah 33, the same cannot be said for the covenant with the Levites mentioned in the same breath.
More to come…
10 comments On The Forgotten Covenant (Pt.1)
So you will deal with the Covenant of Salt in the next installment? I await with bated breath.
Pingback: Christ Through The Bible: Genesis 12-22. The Covenant With Abraham - iForeignAffairs ()
Reblogged this on beliefspeak2 and commented:
Over the next 4 days I am reblogging Dr. Henebury’s posts on the priestly covenant made with Phinehas. This is an important section for understanding bible interpretation and shows how the scriptures can be taken at face value (unless obvious metaphorical language is used).
The chief priests of Israel went to trial before Pilate. The express purpose of their attendance was to get the Husband of Israel executed. In that trial, the chief priests forsook their covenant with the Lord. They said, “We have no king but Caesar”, and, turned against what God had in mind for David’s Seed.
Then, there was the darkness that followed. Levites broke their covenant with the Lord and the lights went out. Ominous.
In fact, this was the end of the nation of Judah where the last two tribes of Israel the whereabouts of which were known (Benjamin and Levi) resided. The other nation of Israel (the northern ten tribe one) had degenerated and ceased to be a people about 750 years before.
By doing what they did, the Levites handed the kingdom of the Jews to Pilate. Pilate turned around and gave it to Jesus by putting that as the reason Jesus was being killed.
Guess what. Right after that Jesus drank the fruit of the vine on the cross, ratified the New Covenant (to which His disciples had recently committed themselves, thus, making them the heirs of the kingdom of the Jews), and He gave up the spirit.
The Levites, having broken their covenant with the Lord, were no longer able to offer sacrifices that would atone for, either themselves or any other Jewish sinner. Since Jesus was the only Jew for which no sacrifice for sin was needed, He became the singular Abraham’s Seed of which Paul spoke in Galatians.
Whatever your real name is,
I shall respond to your comment at a convenient time, although it appears that you have not even bothered to study what I have argued in these posts. Dogmatism is, in my experience, a symptom of ignorance. You are displaying yours by not interacting with the specifics of my argument. But perhaps you could tell me just how the Levites could break the covenant of Num. 25:10-13 & Jer. 33:15-22?
We will see
Luk 22:44 And it was about the sixth hour, and there was a darkness over all the earth until the ninth hour.
Worldwide darkness means the day and the night did not happen in their season. That was the Lord’s stated condition of proof that the covenant with the day and the covenant with the night were broken. They just were.
Now, if it makes you feel better, many priests became believers and joined the royal priesthood high priest over which is our Lord Jesus.
And, it was a better priesthood.
No my friend, this is another dogmatic assertion which evades the question you were asked. This is not a forum for your doctrinaire opinions. You may disagree, but you are required to interact with the argument. Try answering the question you were asked. That will show me whether you are sincere or just grandstanding. Last chance.
Regarding the oft-repeated, but unbiblical notion that ten tribes were forever lost, see this section from a commentary on Revelation which highlights the Biblical evidence against this fable.
Another useful treatment on this is The History of the Ten “Lost” Tribes by David Baron.
Thanks Tony,
I think this guy isn’t interested in answers other than his own. Others will benefit though.
P
Reblogged this on memoirandremains.