BALAAM (NUMBERS 22-24)

Many years ago I was asked to fill in one Sunday at the pulpit of a small country church in upstate New York since they were in between pastors. I had only preached a few times before and was never really any good at it. But I did have one sermon that I thought was a real homiletic gem, and so I decided to wow the congregation with that one. The subject was the power of God's word, and I was about half way through my delivery when I realized that the congregation seemed to be in a sort of daze. Perhaps it was because up to that point I had required them to do some simple calisthenics at my prompting and to already know the plot of The Wizard of Oz and The Scarlet Letter as well as having a basic knowledge of classic German literature and nuclear physics.

In any case, I was using the story of Balaam and his donkey. When I said that God can speak to us even through a jackass, one of the men in the audience suddenly boomed out “AMEN!” I don't know which took me aback the most: the fact that someone in the congregation would actually say something during the sermon (It turned out that they were a charismatic group) or my deep suspicion that the man was referring to me as the jackass.

I relate this story to point out that even if churchgoers may not know much about German literature or nuclear physics, they probably are acquainted with the story of Balaam and his donkey. But there is much more to Balaam than that; after all, there are three chapters in Numbers devoted to him as well as references in the New Testament and elsewhere in the Old Testament. So below is a quick review of Balaam's not so illustrious career.

One Story or Two?

When looking at Numbers 22-24, the first question to face is whether the incident of Balaam and the donkey even belongs with the rest of the story. For example, a footnote in the Jerusalem Bible states, “Ch. 22-24 combine in one narrative materials (sometimes inconsistent) from two traditions.” Similarly, D.P. Wright says that 22:22-35 “comes from a tradition different from the foregoing, as indicated by God's anger at Balaam (v. 22) after having given permission to go (v. 20); by the seer's apparent blindness to divine will which was not the case in vv. 7-21; and the redundancy in vv. 20 and 35.”

Then there is the mediating position, such as that advocated by Ira Clark: “There seems little doubt that the tale-teller spliced two separate introductory accounts of Balaam's bowing to God's will instead of to King Balak's.” But it is done purposely to provide a “structural emphasis on the main issue of a three-part story with a single impact.”

Lastly, we have those many commentators who see no seams in the story whatsoever. For example, Stubbs negatively critiques those source critics above and demonstrates that the donkey episode and the rest of Numbers 22-24 have in common the overall theme of seeing and not seeing. He also notes that the three-fold frustrating of Balaam's intentions are paralleled by Balak's three-fold frustration with Baalam's oracles.

Another way of determining how well 22:22-35 fits into the whole story is to examine the overall literary structure of Numbers 22-24. Although this method does not always give foolproof results, the analysis below may be indicative:

A. Introduction (22:1-4)

    B. God forbids Balaam from cursing the Jews (22:5-21)

        C. God opposes Balaam three times (22:22-40)

        C'. Balaam utters God's three oracles (22:41-24:13)

    B'. God makes Balaam curse other nations (24:14-24)

A'. Conclusion (24:25)

In a way, Balaam's three-fold actions in C' are a sort of undoing of his three-fold disobedience in C, the the same manner that the risen Christ had Peter affirm three times that he loved him to make up for his three-fold denial of the Lord.

The major sub-sections are all arranged in parallel cycles:

B consists of two cycles – 22:5-14 and 22:15-21.

    Each cycle consists of the following elements – Balak sends for Balaam; the emissaries give a message to Balaam; he asks them to stay the night; God speaks to him at night; and the emissaries return to Balak.

        However, the last cycle differs from first one in that God tells Balaam that he can go back with the emissaries.

C consists of three cycles – 22:22-23; 22:24-25; and 22:26-40.

    Each cycle consists of the following elements – an angel stands in the road; the donkey avoids the angel; and Balaam strikes the donkey.

        However, the last cycle differs from the first two in that God opens Balaam's eyes and he repents of opposing God.

C' consists of three cycles – 22:41-23:12; 23:13-26; and 23:27-24:13.

    Each cycle consists of the following elements – Balak takes Balaam to an elevated spot; sacrifices are made on seven altars; Balaam leaves to seek a word from God; he returns and utters an oracle; Balak is upset; but Balaam tells him that he has to speak what God has told him to say.

        However, the last cycle differs from the first two in that Balaam does not need to go away in order to know what God would have him say.

B' consists of four cycles according to most commentators and translators – 24:14-19; 24:20; 24:21-22; and 24:23-24.

    Each cycle is addressed to a different nation or group of people. The first three are, in turn, Moab and Edom; Amalek; and the Kenites.

        However, the last oracle does not really state the group it is against.

Ira Clark notes the intensification in going from groups of two to three to four. And Ackerman also notes the parallel between the events in sections C and C'. Balaam is allowed to see in the third episode of C, and in the third oracle of C' he states that he can see the vision of God. And finally, Ashley sees a parallel to the three increasingly difficult situations the ass finds himself in (Section C) and the increasing pressure that Balaam is in from Balak in C'.

Balaam in the Rest of the Bible

There is only one somewhat positive mention of Baalam elsewhere in Scripture, and that is in Micah 6:5 where the prophet says, “O my people, remember what King Balak of Moab attempted and what Balaam son of Beor said in return.” The rest of the references are uniformly negative although not all of them refer specifically to Balaam's actions in Numbers 22-24:

Numbers 31:8 Moses' troops kill Balaam along with the kings of Midian. The explanation for this action is given in Joshua 13:22. Balaam was killed because he practiced divination. We see indications of this in Numbers 22:7; 23:23; and 24:1 where we learn he is both a diviner and seeker of omens, both activities forbidden to the Jews.

Numbers 31:16 Moses tells the people that it was Balaam who convinced the Midianite women to seduce the Israelite men, as related Numbers 25 though Balaam's name is not mentioned in that account. It may be asked where Balaam comes into that subsequent story since at the end of the previous chapter it appears that he has returned to his home. But it has been pointed out that it only says that Balaam “returned to his place,” which could even refer to his accommodations in King Balak's palace.

The letter to the church at Pergamum in Revelation 2:14 provides more detail regarding Balaam's activity here, saying that he “taught Balak to put a stumbling block in front of the Israelites, so that they would eat food sacrificed to idols and practice fornication.”

Deuteronomy 23:3-6 Here we see the first of several statement that Balaam wanted to curse the Israelites, but God turned his curses into blessings against his will. This accusation is repeated in Joshua 24:10 and Nehemiah 13:2.

A final underlying sin of Balaam is his love of money even if he had to do wrong to obtain it (see II Peter 2:15 and Jude 11). Tiller states: “The account of Balaam's sin is taken directly from postbiblical Jewish traditions, which uniformly make Balaam a greedy villain.” That may be true, but we certainly see hints of this trait in Numbers 22-24 in Balaam's repeated references to the fact that all the king's gold and silver couldn't make him curse the Jews. As at least one commentator has pointed out, it appears that he is protesting too much and may in fact be negotiating with Balak in hopes that he will sweeten the pot. And it certainly appears that Balaam's strange request in Numbers 22:19 for the emissaries to stay for one night in case God has a further word for him is with the vain hope that God will let him go after all so that he can collect his promised fee.

Why was God mad at Balaam?

I have saved the hardest issue for last. If the incidents while Balaam was riding toward King Balak are really part of the original story (as I believe is true, and as the literary structure seems to indicate), then it is seemingly inexplicable that God would send an angel to prevent Balaam from going when he had just given him permission to do so. Here are several possible solutions to this quandary:

    1. God can simply change his mind. Thompson cites Jeremiah 18:1-11 for this general principle. However, that passage says that He can alter his plans in response to changing circumstances. What would those changing circumstances be in this case? Perhaps Balaam is at first sincere in saying that he will only speak God's words. But then as he slept on the situation before leaving on his trip, Balaam may have become fixated on the hefty fee he would collect if went along with the king's wishes instead. At that point, God decided that Balaam needed a strong lesson.

    2. As a variation on that approach, God may have known very well from the start that Balaam was not sincere in his pronouncement but he gave him enough rope to hang himself before bringing him back to spiritual reality.

    3. Perhaps God may have given permission for Balaam to go as a test to see if he really would. In a way, it would like a husband saying to his wife, “It is a wonderful day outside, so I am going to go play a few rounds of golf.” And the wife replies, “That's fine, dear. You go and enjoy yourself while I take care of the kids, do the shopping, and mow the lawn.” Any husband with even an ounce of discernment would immediately back down instead of saying, “I'm glad you approve of my plans.” And if he did go ahead and play golf, you can bet that the wife would have found a way to improve his sense of discernment.

    4. Stubbs is of the opinion that “God is allowing Balaam to go but still wants to communicate his displeasure. Thus the angel's purpose is not to stop Balaam, but rather to inform Balaam and the reader that his path is not good...he will allow Balaam to go to Balak as he desires, but will guide his words and actions in a way that will bring about YHWH's desired result, not Balak's or Balaam's.” Ashley agrees with Stubbs' assessment.

    5. Ashley expresses the opinion that another possible way of removing the contradiction is to translate ki as “when” or “as” in place of the usual “because.” According to this theory, God only become sangry with Balaam (for some unexplained reason) after he was on the road. This appears to be the least likely of the various approaches.