The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Phinehas' Intercessory Prayer: A Rabbinic and Targumic Reading of the Baal Peor Narrative
Abstract
A number of Rabbinic texts, along with Targum Pseudo-Jonathan, portray Phinehas as interceding with God, through prayer, on Israel’s behalf, in the aftermath of the Baal Peor apostasy, recounted in Numbers 25 and Psalm 106. This tradition constitutes an exegetical innovation, as nowhere in scripture is Phinehas represented in the act of prayer. The Phinehas-prayer nexus is explored, with attention to the creative reading of the verb פּﬥﬥ in Ps. 106:31; the significance of prayer in the Rabbinic and Targumic worldview; and the changing role of the priesthood in a post-Temple environment. The article also considers the implications of intercessory prayer as an aspect of Phinehas’ zealotry.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Citations
Cited by
Metadata
- Authors
- Bernat, D. A.
- Affiliations
- Wellesley College (US)
- Corresponding author
- Bernat, David A.
- Venue
- Journal of Jewish Studies
- Publisher
- Liverpool University Press
- Published
- 2007-10
- Volume
- 58
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 263-282
- ISSN
- 0022-2097 (ISSN-L)
- 2056-6689
- OpenAlex
- W2329486323
- Semantic Scholar
- a3d2b641f8da44d077eac31521c2ae943341a40b
- Cited by
- 1
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2014: 1
- FWCI
- 0.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Jewish Studies (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Religious studies › Biblical Studies and Interpretation
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Religious studies › Religion, Theology, History, Judaism, Christianity
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Religious studies › Qur’anic Interpretation Studies
- Keywords
- Phinehas, intercessory prayer, Numbers 25, Psalm 106, Targum Pseudo-Jonathan, rabbinic interpretation, priesthood, fanaticism, apostasy
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
