Where Balaam Went Wrong
To many Bible readers Balaam the son of Beor is an enigma. Nothing is known of him except for a brief though highly significant encounter with Israel, but that encounter reveals a disturbing and seemingly contradictory character. Is Balaam a fearless servant of the Lord, defying Balak to bless Israel? Or is he a conniving opportunist, justly slain by Phinehas’s army for collaboration with God’s enemies?
A casual reading of Numbers 22 through 24 might incline us to the former opinion. Despite his rebuke by the donkey, we feel that the man comes off well as he stands up to Balak’s hatred of God’s people. But then we read about Balaam’s death, and Moses explains (31:16) that Balaam is responsible for the tragedy of chapter 25. Did something happen after he “went and returned to his place” (24:25)? Or did we miss something in the preceding record?
Our clearest way to resolving the question is to start with the Lord’s evaluation of Balaam. We can then examine the historical narrative for a complete understanding of his error.
First, Moses, Israel’s prince at the time of the Balaam incident, informs us (speaking as a prophet) that the Lord “would not hearken unto Balaam” (Deut. 23:5). Is this a suggestion that Balaam wanted to curse Israel? Maybe. At least it shows God’s judgment of Balaam to be somewhat less than favorable.
God says the same by Joshua: “I would not hearken unto Balaam … so I delivered you out of his hand” (Josh. 24:10). It seems that the Lord views Balaam as an enemy, his words about Israel notwithstanding.
The New Testament is not any kinder. Peter and Jude claim that he “loved the wages of unrighteousness” (2 Pet. 2:15; cf. Jude 11), and Jesus Christ Himself charges Balaam with leading Israel into idolatry and fornication (Rev. 2:14).
There are three Old Testament references that do not explicitly condemn Balaam, but they add no additional information. We cannot know all the details, but we can say this much: Balaam’s motivation was selfish; he had no real concern for God’s will; he felt no compunction in the end about influencing a nation away from God.
As we turn back through the record in Numbers, can we find these failures in Balaam?
We will not get much help from his prophetic speeches, in which he is only God’s mouth. Nor is anything obviously amiss in his conversations with the king of Moab. “The word that God putteth in my mouth, that shall I speak” (22:38), and he goes on to do just that. If there is a clue to his sin, it must be earlier.
Consider the following sentences from chapter 22: “The elders … came unto Balaam, and spake unto him the words of Balak” (7). “God said unto Balaam, Thou shalt not go with them” (12). Balaam responds to them, “The LORD refuseth to give me leave to go with you” (13). To the second embassy from Balak, he says, “I cannot go beyond the word of the LORD my God, to do less or more” (18). “And God … said unto him, If the men come to call thee, rise up, and go with them” (20). “And Balaam rose up in the morning, and saddled his ass, and went with the princes of Moab. And God’s anger was kindled because he went” (21-22).
Our attention immediately goes to the radical change from verse 12 to verse 20 and then again from 20 to 22. God tells Balaam not to go, then apparently changes His mind but is angry when Balaam does go. That does not make sense. If God gave permission — and verse 20 states it as a command — then surely Balaam was right to go, was he not? His response when he sees the angel is logical enough: “I have sinned; for I knew not that thou stoodest in the way against me: now therefore, if it displease thee, I will get me back again” (34).
When the angel replies, “Go with the men: but only the word that I shall speak unto thee, that thou shalt speak” (35), we guess that the confrontation with Balaam’s ass was simply to drive home the lesson that Balaam must speak only God’s words. That would make sense for a man easily influenced by the king’s gifts.
If that is all the angel is saying, where is Balaam’s fall into sin? The temptation to curse Israel is present, but it does not seem to affect Balaam, who keeps on proclaiming just what the Spirit of God gives him. The Lord did not need the angel or the ass to make Balaam bless Israel; He was going to overcome the prophet by His Spirit anyway. Yes, He reminded Balaam not to tamper with His message; no, that is not the main warning He had for him.
We discover what God is really concerned about by examining how Balaam got to the point at which he needed God’s rebuke. Balak’s messengers came (7). Balaam, rightly, consulted with the Lord (8) and acted according to God’s answer (13). More messengers came (15-17), and Balaam’s initial response seems correct (18).
Then we find his mistake: “Tarry ye also here this night, that I may know what the LORD will say unto me more” (19).
It is a pious desire for further revelation, yes? Or is it, perhaps, a forgetting of the revelation he already had? We now see that where Balaam went wrong was just here, in his deliberate rejection of a direct command from God. He did not need for the Lord to say anything else; he already had His Word. But that was not enough for him. He wanted more. He hoped for something different — and God gave it to him.
Afterwards, when the angel stood in his way, he ought to have said, “I have sinned; for I heeded not the voice of the LORD: now therefore I will get me back again.” Instead he said, “I didn’t know; if you really want, I will turn around; but if not, I will keep going.” With that kind of response, God was not going to tell him to go back. He was obviously not repentant. He was still asking for permission to go ahead. Again, God gave it to him.
From that point, inspired prophecies notwithstanding, it was a very small step to his inciting Balak to cause Israel to sin. We do not know how Balaam did that; probably Balak called him back again after they parted, and God gave up trying to stop him, seeing that his heart was set toward “the wages of unrighteousness.” It is a sobering story as far as Balaam is concerned.
This also is a fearful thought for us: when a person who has received the Word of God refuses to obey it without questioning, God may give that person apparent permission to do just what he wants to do. And that person, telling himself that he is following God’s voice, might set himself (and others) on the way to hell.
The danger surrounds Christians today. “The Bible doesn’t tell me …” “God hasn’t provided specific instructions about …” “I can’t find this in the Bible,” “where does the New Testament talk about … ?” — we worry ourselves with endless details, asking all the questions (sincere enough, no doubt) except for the one we ought to be asking (“What has God told me to do?”), so instead of God’s answer (e.g., Matt. 22:37-40, which covers just about everything in life) we have to come up with our own answers.
We find, to our delighted surprise, that what God wants us to do is just what we ourselves wanted to do. We can clearly see His leading, and He has made it obvious where we should go or what we should do. We have peace about the decision and know that it is God’s will for us. If there are any lingering doubts, we comfort ourselves with the excuse every pastor dreads (“I prayed about it”), and everything is settled.
All the while, we have forgotten that the Bible does contain some very definite commands which, if we busied ourselves with them first, just might have taken care of the other worrisome details.
I do not doubt that Balaam wanted to do right. He also wanted, not unnaturally, to get something out of it. All he had to do was to get God to let him have his way. No, he would never disobey God — far from it! He just wondered — well, what he really wanted was to know whether God had something else to say about this specific situation. It could not hurt to ask, could it? Prayer is never wrong, is it? It was so simple, so easy.
It was too easy. God let him go.
It is just so easy for us, too, if we let our own desires get in the way of our love for God. They will carry us away imperceptibly at first — but who can tell where they will end?
Our only hope is in a love for God that eliminates any concern for self, that makes Him all in our hearts: the kind of love that starts and ends with God’s Word, that can pray with Bishop Wordsworth:
Lord, be Thy Word my rule:
In it may I rejoice;
Thy glory be my aim,
Thy holy will my choice;
Thy promises my hope,
Thy Providence my guard;
Thine arm my strong support,
Thyself my great reward!
Brendon Johnson is the administrative assistant to the associate dean of the School of Religion at Bob Jones University.