Phinehas, the son
of Eleazar, the son of Aaron the priest, hath turned my wrath away from the
children of Israel, while he was zealous for my sake among them, that I
consumed not the children of Israel in my jealousy. Wherefore say, Behold, I
give unto him my covenant of peace: and he shall have it, and his seed after
him, even the covenant of an
everlasting priesthood; because he was zealous for his God, and made an
atonement for the children of Israel (Num. 25:11-13).
NOTE:
Reformed
theology, in the defense of infant baptism, holds that there is only one covenant of grace taught throughout
Scripture, as opposed to the Baptist/Dispensationalist position which holds
that there are two or more covenants. That there is only one covenant is proved by the fact that God’s covenant is described
in many places as “everlasting” (i.e. forever/unending). By definition, there
can only be one everlasting covenant.
However, Baptists
and Dispensationalists (as well as proponents of “New Covenant Theology”)
respond to this position by claiming that the word rendered “everlasting” in the
Authorized Version (KJV), doesn’t always mean “unending” or “forever” but can
rather mean simply “a long period of time” (something that can come to an end).
Numbers 25:13 is
appealed to in support of this claim. The argument is that the Levitical
priesthood only lasted a short period of time and was replaced by Christ, our
High Priest—and yet, the text speaks of an “everlasting priesthood” seemingly being
promised to Phinehas as a reward for his heroic and godly deed of slaying the
fornicators who publicly and brazenly committed their act of fornication in the
sight of the nation of Israel.
So how do we
view the word “everlasting” in this text, in the light of the abolishing of the
Levitical priesthood in the New Testament age? What is this promise of a “covenant
of an everlasting priesthood”?
The short answer
to this apparent ‘conundrum’ is that the words ‘covenant of an
everlasting priesthood,’ ultimately apply only to Christ, of whom Phinehas,
in his zeal, is undoubtedly a type;
and that it is very bad exegesis to
read the ‘temporary earthly Levitical priesthood’ into the text as a sort of
interpretive key in order then to twist and mangle a word (i.e. ‘everlasting’)
which usually means elsewhere, in abundant places, “never-ending.”
(I)
Prof. Herman C. Hanko
[Source: Covenant
Reformed News, vol. 10, no. 8]
[As]
well as Malachi 2:4-5 there is another place in Scripture where God’s choice of
the priesthood of Levi is called a covenant which He establishes. I refer to
the heroic and godly deed of slaying the fornicators who publicly and brazenly
committed their act of fornication in the sight of the nation. This was at the
time when the daughters of Moab, at the suggestion of Balaam, tempted the men
of Israel to join in the sacrifices and fornications of Moab’s idolatry.
Phinehas slew a prince of Simeon named Zimri and the Moabite woman he took into
his tent.
God’s
word was:
Phinehas, the son of Eleazar, the son of
Aaron the priest, hath turned my wrath away from the children of Israel, while
he was zealous for my sake among them, that I consumed not the children of
Israel in my jealousy. Wherefore say, Behold, I give unto him my covenant of
peace: and he shall have it, and his seed after him, even the covenant of an everlasting
priesthood; because he was zealous for his God, and made an atonement for the
children of Israel (Num. 25:11-13).
Notice
that the covenant with Phinehas is described as everlasting, something not
possible with Phinehas himself; and thus a reference to Christ.
Second,
Christ is the fulfilment of all the priests of the tribe of Levi as the great
High Priest sent from God to make perfect atonement for sin. He is the
realization of God’s covenant with Phinehas. Christ is the perfect fulfilment
because He offers the perfect sacrifice for sin and thus fulfils all the
sacrifices specifically mentioned [throughout Scripture]. Although this is one
of the great themes in the book of Hebrews, it is specifically taught in
chapter 10:1-14—which passage our readers are urged to look up and read. In
Christ, therefore, the promise of God concerning the Levites is fulfilled.
-----------------------------------------------
(II)
(II)
Homer C. Hoeksema (1923-1989)
[Source: Unfolding Covenant
History: An Exposition of the Old Testament, vol. 4 (RFPA, 2003), p.
224]
These
words [of Numbers 25:11] are uttered first with reference to Phinehas. But in
the final instance, as they make mention of ‘the covenant of an everlasting
priesthood,’ they can ultimately apply only to Christ, of whom Phinehas, in his
zeal, is undoubtedly a type.
-----------------------------------------------
(III)
(III)
Anon.
IF the objector is right that ‘everlasting’ does
not necessarily mean ‘never-ending’ but can simply mean ‘for a long specified
time’ how would he argue this regarding God’s ‘covenant,’ given the repetition
of this term in Scripture, the nature of the covenant as friendship with God,
its continuing into the new creation (Rev. 21:3), etc.?
If I prove that word X doesn’t always mean its main
meaning, it is still incumbent on me to argue from the context, etc., that it
doesn’t mean that in a particular place.
Why not argue that since X usually means everlasting, it should be taken to mean everlasting unless there are good reasons in a particular case to the contrary?
This is simple logic and common sense. We don’t even need to know the Hebrew or
consult a lexicon to understand this.
-----------------------------------------------
(IV)
(IV)
More to come! (DV)
No comments:
Post a Comment