Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadPulpit Commentary - Numbers 22:1 - 22:40
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Num_22:2
Balak the son of Zippor. The name Balak is connected with a word "to make waste," and "Zippor" is a small bird. Balak was, as is presently explained, the king of Moab at this time, but not the king from whom Sihon had wrested so much of his territory (Num_21:26). He seems to be mentioned by name on a papyrus in the British Museum (see Brugseh, ‘Geogr. Inschr.,' 2, page 32). The later Jews made him out to have been a Midianite, but this is nothing but the merest conjecture.
Num_22:3
Moab was sore afraid of the people. While the Israelites had moved along their eastern and north-eastern border, the Moabites supplied them with provisions (Deu_2:29), desiring, no doubt, to be rid of them, but not disdaining to make some profit by their presence. But after the sudden defeat and overthrow of their own Amorite conquerors, their terror and uneasiness forced them to take some action, although they dared not commence open hostilities.
Num_22:4
Moab said unto the elders of Midian. The Midianites were descended from Abraham and Keturah (Gen_25:2, Gen_25:4), and were thus more nearly of kin to Israel than to Moab. They lived a semi-nomadic life on the steppes to the east of Moab and Ammon (cf. Gen_36:35), supporting themselves partly by grazing, and partly by the caravan trade (Gen_37:28). Their institutions were no doubt patriarchal, like those of the modern Bedawin, and the "elders" were the sheiks of their tribes. As the ox licketh up the grass of the field. The strong, scythe-like sweep of the ox's tongue was a simile admirable in itself, and most suitable to pastoral Moab and Midian.
Num_22:5
He sent messengers therefore. It appears from Num_22:7 that Balak acted for Midian as well as for Moab; as the Midianites were but a weak people, they may have placed themselves more or less under the protection of Balak. Unto Balaam the son of Beer. áÄÌìÀòÈí is derived either from áÈÌìÇò , to destroy or devour, and òÈí , the people; or simply from áÈÌìÇò , with the terminal syllable ÎÈí , "the destroyer." The former derivation receives some support from Rev_2:14, Rev_2:15, where "Nicolaitans" are thought by many to be only a Greek form of" Balaamites" Νικόλαος , from νικάω and λαός ). Beor ( áÀÌòåÌø ) has a similar signification, from áÈÌòÈø , to burn, or consume. Both names have probable reference to the supposed effect of their maledictions, for successful cursing was an hereditary profession in many. lands, as it still is in some. Beer appears in 2Pe_2:15 as Bosor, which is called a Chaldeeism, but the origin of the change is really unknown. A "Bela son of Beer" is named in Gen_36:32 as reigning in Edom, but the coincidence is of no importance: kings and magicians have always loved to give themselves names of fear, and their vocabulary was not extensive. To Pother, which is by the river of the land of the children of his people. Rather, "which is on the river," i.e; the great river Euphrates, "in the land of the children of his people," i.e; in his native land. The situation of Pethor is unknown. Here is a people come out of Egypt. Forty years had passed since their fathers had left Egypt. Yet Balak's words expressed a great truth, for this people was no wandering desert tribe, but for all intents the same great organized nation which had spoiled Egypt, and left Pharaoh's host dead behind them. They abide over against me îÄîËÌìÄé . Septuagint, ἐχόμενός μου . This would hardly have been said when Israel was encamped thirty miles north of Arnon, opposite to Jericho. The two embassies to Balaam must have occupied some time, and in the mean while Israel would have gone further on his way. We may naturally conclude that the first message was sent immediately after the defeat of Sihon, at a time when Israel was encamped very near the border of Moab.
Num_22:6
I wot that he whom thou blessest is blessed, and he whom thou cursest is cursed. This was the language of flattery intended to secure the prophet's services. No doubt, however, Balak, like other heathens, had a profound though capricious belief in the real effect of curses and anathemas pronounced by men who had private intercourse and influence with the unseen powers. That error, like most superstitions, was the perversion of a truth; there are both benedictions and censures which, uttered by human lips, carry with them the sanction and enforcement of Heaven. The error of antiquity lay in ignorance or forgetfulness that, as water cannot rise higher than its source, so neither blessing nor cursing can possibly take any effect beyond the will and purpose of the Father of our souls. Balaam knew this, but it was perhaps his misfortune to have been trained from childhood to maintain his position and his wealth by trading upon the superstitions of his neighbours.
Num_22:7
With the rewards of divination. ÷ÀñÈîÄéí , "soothsayings." Septuagint, τὰ μαντεῖα . Here the soothsayer's wages, which St. Peter aptly calls the wages of unrighteousness. The ease with which, among ignorant and superstitious people, a prophet might become a hired soothsayer is apparent even from the case of Samuel (1Sa_9:6-8). That it should be thought proper to resort to the man of God for information about some lost property, and much more that it should be thought necessary to pay him a fee for the exercise of his supernatural powers, shows, not indeed that Samuel was a soothsayer, for he was a man of rare integrity and independence, but, that Samuel was but little distinguished from a soothsayer in the popular estimation. If Samuel had learnt to care more for money than for righteousness, he might very easily have become just what Balaam became.
Num_22:8
Lodge here this night. It was therefore in the night, in a dream or in a vision (cf. Gen_20:3; Num_12:6; Job_4:15, Job_4:16), that Balaam expected to receive some communication from God. If he had received none he would no doubt have felt himself free to go.
Num_22:15
More, and more honourable than they. Balak rightly judged that Balaam was not really unwilling to come, and that it was only needful to ply him with more flattery and larger promises. The heathens united a firm belief in the powers of the seer with a very shrewd appreciation of the motives and character of the seer. Compare the saying of Sophocles, τὸ μαντικὸν γὰρ πᾶν φιλάργυρον γένος .
Num_22:18
I cannot go beyond the word of the Lord my God. Balaam's faith was paramount within its own sphere of operation. It did not control his wishes; it did not secure the heart obedience which God loves; but it did secure, and that absolutely, outward obedience to every positive command of God, however irksome; and Balaam never made any secret of this.
Num_22:22
And God's anger was kindled because he went, or, "that he was going." ëÄÌéÎäåÉìÅêÀ äåÌà . Septuagint, ὅτι ἐπορεύθη αὐτός . There can be no question that the ordinary translation is fight, and that God was angry with Balaam for going at all on such an errand. It is true that God had given him permission to go, but that very permission was a judicial act whereby God punished the covetous and disobedient longings of Balaam in allowing him to have his own way. God's anger is kindled by sin, and it was not less truly sin which prompted Balaam to go because he had succeeded in obtaining formal leave to go. The angel of the Lord stood in the way. The same angel of the covenant apparently of whom Moses had spoken to the Edomites (see on Num_20:16).
For an adversary against him. ìÀùÈÒèÈï ìåÉ . Septuagint, διαβαλεῖν αὐτόν , Not so much because Balaam was rushing upon his own destruction as because he was going to fight with curses, if possible, against the Israel of God (cf. 2Ki_6:17; Psa_34:7).
Num_22:23
And the ass saw the angel of the Lord. This was clearly part of the miracle, the σήμειον which was to exhibit in such a striking manner the stupidity and blindness of the most brilliant and gifted intellect when clouded by greed and selfishness. It is nothing to the point that the lower animals have a quicker perception of some natural phenomena than men, for this was not a natural phenomenon; it is nothing to the point that the lower animals are credited by some with possessing "the second sight," for all that belongs to the fantastic and legendary. If the ass saw the angel, it was because the Lord opened her eyes then, as he did her mouth afterwards.
Num_22:25
She thrust herself unto the wall. Apparently in order to pass the angel beyond the reach of his sword; when this was clearly impossible she fell down.
Num_22:28
And the Lord opened the mouth of the ass. On the face of it this expression would seem decisive that an audible human voice proceeded from the ass's mouth, as St. Peter beyond doubt believed: ὑποζύγιον ἀφωνον ἐν ἀνθρώτου φωνῇ φθεγξάμενον . It is truly said, however, that a passing illusion of this kind, while it testifies that the Apostle understood the words, like all his contemporaries, in their most natural and simple sense, does not oblige us to hold the same view; if he was mistaken in this matter, it does not at all affect the inspired truth of his teaching. Two theories, therefore, have been proposed in order to avoid the difficulties of the ordinary belief, while vindicating the reality of the occurrence. It has been held by some that the whole affair took place in a trance, and resembled St. Peter's vision of the sheet let down from heaven (Act_10:10), which we rightly conceive to have been purely subjective. This is open to the obvious and apparently fatal objection that no hint is given of any state of trance or ecstasy, and that, on the contrary, the wording of the narrative as given to us is inconsistent with such a thing. In Num_22:31 Balaam's eyes are said to have been opened so that he saw the angel; but to have the eyes open so that the (ordinarily) invisible became visible, and the (otherwise) inaudible became audible, was precisely the condition of which Balaam speaks (Num_24:3, Num_24:4) as that of trance. According to the narrative, therefore, Balaam was in an ecstasy, if at all, after the speaking of the ass, and not before. By others it has been put forward, somewhat confusedly, that although Balaam was in his ordinary senses, he did not really hear a human voice, but that the "cries" of the ass became intelligible to his mind; and it is noted that as an augur he had been accustomed to assign meanings to the cries of animals. If instead of "cries" we read "brayings," for the ass is endowed by nature with no other capacity of voice, being indeed one of the dumbest of "dumb" animals, we have the matter more fairly before us. To most people it would appear more incredible that the brayings of an ass should convey these rational questions to the mind of its rider than that the beast should have spoken outright with a man's voice. It would indeed seem much more satisfactory to regard the story, if we cannot accept it as literally true, as a parable which Balaam wrote against himself, and which Moses simply incorporated in the narrative; we should at least preserve in this way the immense moral and spiritual value of the story, without the necessity of placing non-natural constructions upon its simple statements. Supposing the miracle to have really occurred, it must always be observed that the words put into the ass's mouth do nothing more than express such feeling's as a docile and intelligent animal of her kind would have actually felt. That domestic animals, and especially such as have been long in the service of man, feel surprise, indignation, and grief in the presence of injustice and ill-treatment is abundantly certain. In many well-authenticated eases they have done things in order to express these feelings which seemed as much beyond their "irrational" nature as if they had spoken. We constantly say of a dog or a horse that he can do everything but speak, and why should it seem incredible that God, who has given the dumb beast so close an approximation to human feeling and reason, should for once have given it human voice? With respect to Balaam's companions, their presence need not cause any difficulty. The princes of Midian and Moab had probably gone on to announce the coming of Beldam; his servants would naturally follow him at some little distance, unless he summoned them to his side. It is very likely too that Balaam was wont to carry on conversations with himself, or with imaginary beings, as he rode along, and this circumstance would account for any sound of voices which reached the ears of others.
Num_22:29
And Balaam said unto the ass. That Beldam should answer the ass without expressing any astonishment is certainly more marvelous than that the ass should speak to him. It must, however, in fairness be considered—
1. That Balaam was a prophet. He was accustomed to hear Divine voices speaking to him when no man was near. He had a large and unquestioning faith, and a peculiar familiarity with the unseen.
2. Balaam was a sorcerer. It was part of his profession to show signs and wonders such as even now in those countries confound the most experienced and skeptical beholders. It is likely that he had often made dumb animals speak in order to bewilder others. He must indeed have been conscious to some extent of imposture, but he would not draw any sharp line in his own mind between the marvels which really happened to him and the marvels he displayed to others. Both as prophet and as sorcerer, he must have lived, more than any other even of that age, in an atmosphere of the supernatural. If, therefore, this portent was really given, it was certainly given to the very man of all that ever lived to whom it was most suitable. Just as one cannot imagine the miracle of the stater (Mat_17:27) happening to any one of less simple and childlike faith than St. Peter, so one could not think of the ass as speaking to any one in the Bible but the wizard prophet, for whom—both on his good and on his bad side—the boundary lines between the natural and supernatural were almost obliterated.
3. Balaam was at this moment intensely angry; and nothing blunts the edge of natural surprise so much as rage. Things which afterwards, when calmly recollected, cause the utmost astonishment, notoriously produce no effect at the moment upon a mind which is thoroughly exasperated.
Num_22:31
The Lord opened the eyes of Balaam, and he saw the angel. As on other occasions, the angel was not perceptible to ordinary sight, but only to eyes in some way quickened and purged by the Divine operation. This explains the fact that Balaam's companions would appear to have seen nothing (cf. Act_9:7).
Num_22:32
Because thy way is perverse. éÈøÈè , an uncommon word, which seems to mean "leading headlong," 1.e. to destruction.
Num_22:33
Unless … surely. àåÌìÇéÎÎÎëÄÌé . It is somewhat doubtful whether this phrase can be translated as in the Septuagint ( εἰ μὴ … νῦν οὗν )and in all the versions; but even if the construction of the sentence be broken, this is no doubt the meaning of it. And saved her alive. Compare the case of the ass of the disobedient prophet in 1Ki_13:24. It is plainly a righteous thing with God that obedience and faithfulness should be respected, and in some sense rewarded, even in an ass.
Num_22:35
Go with the men. It may be asked to what purpose the angel appeared, if Balaam was to proceed just the same. The answer is that the angel was not a warning, but a destroying, angel, a visible embodiment of the anger of God which burnt against Beldam for his perversity. The angel would have slain Balaam, as the lion slew the disobedient prophet, but that God in his mercy permitted the fidelity and wisdom of the ass to save her master from the immediate consequences of his folly. If Balaam had had a mind capable of instruction, he would indeed have gone on as he was bidden, but in a very different spirit and with very different designs.
Num_22:36
Unto a city of Moab, or, "unto Ir-Moab" ( àÆìÎòÄéø îåÉàÈá ), probably the same as the Ar mentioned in Num_21:15 as the boundary town of Moab at that time.
Num_22:39
Kirjath-huzoth. "City of streets." Identified by some with the ruins of Shian, not far from the supposed site of Ai.
Num_22:40
Balak offered oxen and sheep. Probably these sacrifices were offered not to Chemosh, but to the Lord, in whose name Balaam always spoke. Indeed the known fact that Beldam was a prophet of the Lord was no doubt one of Balak's chief reasons for wishing to obtain his services. Balak shared the common opinion of antiquity, that the various national deities were enabled by circumstances past human understanding to do sometimes more, sometimes less, for their special votaries. He perceived that the God of Israel was likely, as things stood, to carry all before him; but he thought that he might by judicious management be won over, at least to some extent, to desert the cause of Israel and to favour that of Moab. To this end he "retained" at great cost the services of Balaam, the prophet of the Lord, and to this end he was willing to offer any number of sacrifices. Even the resolute and self-reliant Romans believed in the wisdom of such a policy. Thus Pliny quotes ancient authors as affirming "in oppugnationibus ante omnia solitum a Romanis sacrdotibus evocari Deum, cujus in tutela id oppidum esset, promittique illi eundem aut ampliorem apud Romanos cultum," and he adds, "durat in Pontificum disciplina id sacrum, constatque ideo occultatum, in cujus Dei tutela Roma esset, ne qui hostium simili modo agerent." And sent, i.e; portions of the sacrificial meats.
I. The character and position of Balaam with regard to God and man;
II. The policy of Balak in sending for Balaam;
III. The conduct of Balaam when asked and urged to come to Balak;
IV. The incidents, natural and supernatural, of Balaam's coming.
I. THE CHARACTER OF BALAAM, AND HIS POSITION WITH REGARD TO GOD AND MAN. Consider under this head—
1. That Balaam had a true knowledge of the most high Cod. He was not in any sense a heathen as far as his intellectual perception of Divine things went. And it was not merely Elohim, the God of nature and creation, whom he knew and revered, but distinctly Jehovah, the God of Israel and of grace. Speculatively he knew as much of God as Abraham or Job.
2. That Balaam had an unquestioning faith in the one true God. Whatever difficulties it may create, it is obviously true that Balaam walked very much by faith, and not by sight. The invisible God, the will of God, the power of God, the direct concern of God with his doings, were all realities to Balaam, strong realities. God was not a name to him, nor a theological expression, but the daily companion of his daily life.
3. That Balaam had an undoubted prophetic gift from God. He was not an ordinary servant of the true God; he held as it were a very high official position in the service of God. He enjoyed frequent and direct intercourse with him; he expected to receive supernatural intimations of the Divine will; he professed to speak, and be did speak, words of inspired prophecy far beyond his own origination.
4. That at the same time Balaam's heart was given not to God, but to covetousness. He loved the wages of unrighteousness. Not perhaps in the lowest sense. He may have valued influence, power, consideration even more than mere money; but money was necessary to all these.
5. That Balaam was a soothsayer. He practiced magical arts and sought for auguries. He traded on the superstitions of the heathen, and even sought to prostitute his prophetic powers to excite astonishment, obtain power, and make money. He hired himself out to curse the enemies of those who employed him. And note that Balaam's fall in this respect was accountable enough; for we may naturally conclude
(1) that Balaam had an hereditary position as seer which it was his interest to keep up at any cost;
(2) that the ignorant people put strong pressure upon him to play the soothsayer. How easily Samuel might have become the same if he had been covetous! How constant is the temptation to abuse spiritual powers in order at once to gratify others and to exalt oneself! (cf. 1Sa_9:6-8; Jer_5:31)
II. THE POLICY OF BALAK, AND HIS ERROR. Consider under this head—
1. That Balak was afraid of Israel, because he was mighty, and had overthrown the Amorites. Yet he had no cause to fear, for Israel had not touched him, and did not mean to. Men are afraid of the Church of God because it is a great power in the world, albeit it is a power for good, and not for evil.
2. That Balak was afraid of the God of Israel. He rightly judged that Israel's success was due to his God; but he wrongly thought that the Lord was but a national deity who was victorious at present, but might be turned aside or bought off.
3. That Balak put his trust in Balaam because he was a prophet of the Lord, and might be expected to use his influence to change the purposes of the Lord; perhaps even to counterwork those purposes. How often do people seek the aid of religion against God! How often do they seek for religious support and solace in doing what they must know is contrary to the moral law of God!
4. That Balak professed, and no doubt felt, a profound belief in the efficacy of Balaam's benedictions and maledictions, even as against the people of Balaam's God. Here was the very essence of superstition, to suppose that anything whatsoever can have any spiritual efficacy contrary to, or apart from, the will of God; most of all, that the word of God, as officially employed by his ministers, can be made to work counter to the declared mind of God. As though Peter could ban whom Christ hath blessed. Yet note that Balak's superstition was the depraving of a great truth. Balaam had no doubt authority to censure or to bless in the name of God; and his censures or blessings would have had validity if pronounced with a single eye to the glory of God and the good of souls, and in clear dependence upon the higher knowledge and necessary ratification of Heaven.
5. That Balak sought to obtain supernatural aid from Balaam by means of flatteries, gifts, and promises; and thought, no doubt, to buy over the powers of the world to come. He rightly gauged the character of the man; he was utterly deceived as to the worth of his alliance. How often do shrewd and worldly men make the same mistake! Because they see through the selfishness and worldliness of the human ministers of religion, they fancy they can command the services, and employ in their own behalf the powers, of religion itself.
III. THE COMING OF BALAAM. Consider under this head—
1. That Balaam was solicited to come for a purpose which he must have felt sure was wrong. To curse any people was an awful thing, and only to be done with sorrow if commanded by God. To curse Israel, of whose history Balaam was not ignorant, was on the face of it treason towards God. When men are invited to lend their aid in opposing or destroying others, how careful should they be to make sure that such hostile action is a matter of duty; for we are called unto blessing (1Pe_3:9).
2. That Balaam was tempted through his love of money and of good things. A true-hearted prophet would have been ashamed to receive gifts and promises for the use of his spiritual powers, and he would have vehemently suspected such as offered them, even with flattery and deference. If anything appeals to our cupidity and promises advantage in this world, we ought all the more to turn against it, unless it is irresistibly proved to be right. With what just scorn does the world regard the universal propensity of religious people to exercise their gifts and throw their influence where and as it pays the best!
3. That Balaam was forbidden to go, for the plain and unalterable reason that he could not possibly do what he was wanted to do without flying in the face of God. If he went, he must either act dishonourably towards Balak by taking his money for nought, or he must act treasonably towards God by cursing his people. And this was perfectly clear to Balaam. The moral law of God is plain enough in its broad outlines, and if men loved righteousness more than gain they would have little practical difficulty.
4. That Balaam's outward conduct was consistently conscientious. He would not go without leave; he refused to go when forbidden; when allowed to go, he repeatedly protested that he could and would say nothing but what God told him to say. And no doubt his protestations were sincere. He had no intention of rebelling against God; it was a fixed principle with him that God must be obeyed.
5. That Balaam's inward desire was to go if possible, because it promised honour and gain to himself. He obeyed God, but he obeyed grudgingly; he obeyed God, but he gave him clearly to understand that he wished it might be otherwise; he respected the definite command not to go, but he paid no heed to the reason given—because Israel was not to be cursed. The only obedience which God really cares for is obedience from the heart (Rom_6:17; Eph_6:6). How many are strict in not violating the moral law (as they understand it), but not in order to please God, not because they love the will of God! To how many are the commandments of God formal barriers which they do not overleap only because they dare not! But for such these barriers are sooner or later done away, that they may have their own way.
6. That Balaam did not get credit for the conscientiousness he did possess. He said that God refused to give him leave, which was true, although not expressed in a proper spirit, whereas the messengers reported that he refused to come; and Balak believed that he only wanted more pressing. So it is with men who do what is right, yet not from the true motive; they do not get credit even for the good that is in them; they are always tempted afresh, because they are felt to be open to temptation; the world sees that their heart is with it, and puts their hesitation down to mere self-interest. There is no safety for the man whose heart is not on the side of God.
7. That Balaam, when he referred the matter again to God (as if it were still open), was allowed to go. This is the very essence of tempting God—to cast about for ways and means to follow our own will and compass our own ends without open disobedience. How many treat the rule of God as a disagreeable restraint which must indeed be respected, but may be thankfully avoided if possible! Such men find themselves able to go with a clear conscience into circumstances of temptation which are presently fatal to them. If thou hast once had a clear intimation of what is right, cleave to it with all thy heart, else shalt thou be led into a snare.
8. That Balaam's going, though permitted, was controlled; and this not in his own interest (for he should not have gone),but in the interest of Israel. When men will go into evil they are judicially permitted to go, and the law of God ceases so far to constrain their conscience; but the consequences of their inward disobedience are overruled that they may not be disastrous to God's own people.
IV. THE JOURNEY OF BALAAM. Consider under this head—
1. That God was angry with Balaam for going, although he had given him leave to go. For it was sin which made Balaam wish to go if possible; and it was his wish to go on an evil errand for gain which obtained him leave to go. Even so if men are inwardly desirous to do what is wrong, God will suffer them to persuade themselves that it is not actually wrong, and they will go on with a clear conscience; but God will be angry with them all the same. How many very religious people find it permissible to walk in very crooked ways for the sake of gain, and are yet resolute not to do a wrong thing! But God is angry with them, and they have forfeited his grace already.
2. That the destroying angel stood in the way as an adversary to him. Even so destruction awaits us in every way wherein greed leads us contrary to the will of God. God himself is an adversary to us (Mat_5:25), and is ready at any moment to fall upon us and cut us asunder. It is useless to say that we have done nothing wrong; if our motives be corrupt, the sword of Divine justice is drawn against us.
3. That Balaam saw not the angel, but the ass did; and this although Balaam was a "seer," and prided himself on "having his eyes open," and on being familiar with the unseen things of God. Even so the "religious" and "spiritual" man, who has great "experiences," and yet is secretly led by greed and self-interest, is often much blinder than the most carnal and unenlightened to perceive that he is rushing upon destruction; the most stupid person has often a clearer perception of moral facts and situations than the most gifted, if this be blinded by sin.
4. That the ass by her fidelity and instinct of self-preservation saved her master. Even so are men, wise in their own eyes often indebted to the most despised and neglected agencies for preservation from the consequences of their blind folly.
5. That Balaam was enraged with the ass, and ill-treated her. Even so foolish men are often very angry with the very circumstances or persons which are really saving them from destruction.
6. That the ass was Divinely permitted to rebuke her master, and to teach him a lesson if he would learn it; for she had been faithful, and docile, and had never played him false ever since she had been his; while he had been and was unfaithful, obstinate, and disloyal to his Master in heaven. Even so do the very beasts teach us many a lesson by their conduct; and those whom we account in some sense worse than the beasts—the heathen, and men who have no religion at all—will often put us to shame by the strong virtues which they display where we perhaps fail.
7. That then Balaam saw and knew his danger. Even so do men complacently walk in the road which leads to destruction, and have not the least idea of it, but are angry with any that thwart them, until some sudden influence opens their eyes to their awful danger.
8. That he offered there to go back, if necessary, and acknowledged that he had done wrong (perhaps sincerely), but was not permitted to go back. Even so when men have, as it were, insisted upon taking a line which is unwise, dangerous, and wrong, it is often impossible for them to turn back. They are committed to it, and God's providence compels them to go on with it, even though it brings awful peril to their souls; for God is a jealous God, and the judicial consequences of our own (albeit inward and disguised) disobedience cannot be got rid of in a moment.
9. That he was met by Balak with honour and ceremony and religious rites; and no doubt all that happened by the way faded like a dream from his mind. Even so when men walk after their own covetousness they may receive the most solemn and (at the time) impressive warnings, but amidst the converse of the world, and the honour received of men, and the outward ceremonies even of religion, these warnings have no lasting effect, and are as though they had never happened.
Consider again, as to the broad lessons to be drawn from Balaam's character and history—
1. That there may be in a man high spiritual gifts without real goodness. Balaam was a veritable prophet, and had in a remarkable degree the faculty both of understanding' the hidden things of God and of announcing them to men. Yet, as in the case of Saul (1Sa_10:11; 1Sa_19:24) and Caiaphas (Joh_11:51), his prophetic gifts were not accompanied by sanctification of life. Even so many in all ages and lands have great spiritual gifts of understanding, of interpretation, of eloquence, &c; whereby others are greatly advantaged, but they remain evil themselves.
2. That a man may have a true and strong religious faith, and yet that faith shall not save him, because it does not affect his heart. That Balaam had a strong faith in the Lord God is evident; on the intellectual side it was as strong as Abraham's; he walked with God as truly as any in the sense of being constantly conscious and mindful of God's presence and concern with him. No definition of religious faith could be framed with honesty which should exclude Balaam and include Abraham. Yet he was not saved, because his faith, although it largely mingled with his thoughts and greatly influenced his actions, did not govern his affections. Even so it is useless, however usual and convenient, to deny that many men have strong religious convictions and persuasions—in a word, have religious faith—who are not saved by it, but fall into deadly sins and become castaway. This is not a matter of theology so much as of facts; the combination of strong religious feelings, and of power to realize the unseen, with deep moral alienation from God, is by no means uncommon.
3. That a man may do much and sacrifice much in order to obey God without receiving any reward. Balaam repeatedly crossed his own inclinations, and forewent much honour and emolument from Balak, from a conscientious motive; and yet he was all the time on the verge of destruction, and was miserably slain at last. Even so many men do much they do not like, and give up much they do like, because they feel they ought to; and yet they have no reward for it either here or hereafter, because their self-restraint is grounded on some lower motive than love of God and the desire to please him.
4. That a man's conduct may be to all appearance irreproachable, and yet be displeasing to God. No one could have found distinct fault with any one step in Balaam s proceedings; each could be singly justified as permissible; yet the whole provoked the Lord to anger, because it was secretly swayed by greed. Even so many men are careful, and to ordinary eyes irreproachable, in their doings, because no act is by itself without justification; yet their whole life is hateful because its governing motive is selfishness, not love. It is not enough to be able to justify each step as we take it, neither will a mere resolve to keep straight with God insure his favour.
5. That a man may have profound religious insight, and yet be very blind to his own state. Balaam justly prided himself upon his intelligent and spiritual religion as compared with the follies and mummeries of the heathen around, yet he was more blind than his own beast to the palpable destruction on which he was running. Even so many of those who are most enlightened, and most removed from ignorance and superstition, are most blind to their own entire moral failure, and to the terrible danger they are m. They, e.g; who most denounce idolatry are often utterly blind to the fact that their whole lives are dominated by covetousness, which is idolatry.
Consider again, with respect to the miracle of the dumb beast speaking with human voice—
1. That the lower animals, of which we reck so little, save as a matter of gain, have often great virtues by which they teach us many a lesson. How much more faithful are they to us than we to our Master! It is their pride and study to observe and follow, almost to anticipate, the least indication of our will. How inferior are we in that respect!
2. That God is not insensible to their virtues, as we very generally are, but at times at least gives them a certain recompense of reward (see on verse 33). Since they seem to have no future state, it is a duty laid upon us to remember and reward their fidelity in this world.
3. That to be enraged with dumb animals when their conduct vexes us is sin and folly. Sin, because we have no right to be angry except with sin (Jon_4:4); folly, because they are less in the wrong with us than we are with God; sin and folly, because such anger surely blinds the mind and leaves us a prey to temptation.
4. That God delights to choose "the foolish things of the world to confound the wise," and "things which are despised" and "things which are not" (as the intelligible voice of an ass) "to bring to nought things that are. Even so are we often rebuked and reproved in our madness by things most contemned and familiar, by those whom we regard as brutish and senseless, and standing upon a lower level than ourselves.
I. BALAAM'S LOFTY POSITION AND PRIVILEGES.
II. THE SECRET OF BALAAM'S HUMILIATING FALL.
I. (1) He had a knowledge of the true God. Among the heathens of Mesopotamia he retains a knowledge of the God revealed "from the creation of the world." He was like the evening star, showing in which direction the sun of truth had set (Rom_1:21), and reflecting some of its light. His knowledge may be illustrated by his lofty utterances respecting God and his people; e.g; Num_23:10, Num_23:19; and according to some interpreters, Num_6:8.
(2) He enjoyed the gift of inspiration by God. Though there were no Scriptures, God was not left without witnesses, and among them was Balaam "the prophet" (2Pe_2:16). He expected Divine communications, and was not disappointed. No wonder then that
(3) he enjoyed wide-spread fame. It extended hundreds of miles away, to Moab and Midian, whence more than once an embassy crossed the desert with such flattering words as those in Num_6:6. Yet we know that Balaam was a bad man who came to a bad end. Thus we have lessons of warning for ourselves, who have a fuller knowledge of God than Balaam, and may enjoy gifts, if not as brilliant, yet more useful than his. All of these may avail nothing for our salvation, but may be perverted to the worst ends. Illustrations:—Hymenoeus and Alexander, the companions of St. Paul (1Ti_1:19, 1Ti_1:20); Judas, the apostle of Jesus Christ (cf. Mat_7:21-23; Mat_11:23; 1Co_13:1, 1Co_13:2).
II. Balaam's name mentioned in the New Testament only three times, and each time it is covered with reproach (2Pe_2:15; Jud 2Pe_1:11; Rev_2:14). His root sin was the ancient, inveterate vice of human nature, selfishness. He knew God, but did not love him, for "he loved the wages of unrighteousness." He did not follow the Divine voice, but "followed after" reward. God taught him sublime truths; he "taught Balak" base arts of seduction. His selfishness was shown in—
(1) Ambition. There was nothing of the self-forgetfulness of such prophets as Elijah, Elisha, Jeremiah, or Balaam's contemporary, Moses. He is esteemed as a great man, and he takes good care he shall be so esteemed. He knows divination has no power with God, but to magnify himself among the heathens of Moab, he resorts to it. He constantly aspires to the "very great honour" to which Balak offers to promote him (cf. Psa_131:1-3; Jer_45:5).
(2) Covetousness. He would be rich, and therefore fell into temptation, &c. (1Ti_6:9; 2Pe_2:15). His words were fair (verse 18), yet suspicious, like those of a venal voter boasting his incorruptibility. Balaam coveted the offered honour and wealth. How could be gain them while God was keeping him back? Two ways were possible. He might get God to change his mind. He wanted to get permission from God to do what was at present a sin. He might have known from the first, as he says (Num_23:19). But he struggles to conquer God, as though the fact was not that God cannot change, but that God will not change. Hence his repeated changes of place and new sacrifices. At length it was clear that this way was closed against him. He is constrained to bless Israel again and again. At the close of the narrative (Num_24:10-24) he seems to be taking his place boldly as an ally of the people of God. But it was only a temporary impulse, not a true conversion. Greedy for the wages of unrighteousness, he allies himself with hell. ("Flectere si nequeo superos, Acheronta movebo.") What a contrast between his fair promises (verse 18) and this wicked deed l The reason is that in trying to "bend" God he was miserably perverting himself (like a weak tool used to move a great weight), while seeking permission to sin he was growing less sensitive to sin (see next Homily). Learn then from the fall of this great and gifted prophet to what a depth of infamy selfishness, that mother of sins, and its offspring, ambition and covetousness, may lead us. Warned by the selfishness of Balaam, may we copy the unselfishness of Christ (Rom_15:3; Php_2:3-8).—P.
Num_22:13
1. When the first embassy came, his knowledge of God and of Israel's history should probably have led to a decisive refusal. But if we assume that he needed direction, it is clear that the rewards of divination made him anxious to go. Not that he had a desire to curse Israel; he would just as soon have blessed them for reward. Yet he had no intention then to disobey. If a prophet could have shown him that evening his future career, he might have shrunk in loathing from the self that was to be. The will of God is declared (Num_22:12), and the struggle between conscience and covetousness begins. At first conscience prevails, but the form of refusal (Num_22:13) indicates double-mindedness. In contrast to Joseph (Gen_39:9), Balaam lays himself open to fresh temptations. If we give Satan a hesitating "No," instead of a "Get thee behind me," he will understand that we would like to sin, but dare not, and will try us with more honourable embassies and costlier gifts.
2. The ambassadors leave, but lingering regrets keep the fire of covetousness smouldering in Balaam's heart. It flames up afresh on the arrival of the second embassy (Num_22:16, Num_22:17). Fair professions (Num_22:18) reveal his weakness, for what "more" (Num_22:19) could he want God to say unless it was to give him permission to sin? God gives him leave not to sin, but to go. (Illustrate this act by similar Divine proceedings: e.g; allowing the Israelites, under protest, to elect a king; a wild youth receiving reluctantly permission to carry out his determination to go to sea.)
3. Balaam went, and God is angry, not because he went, but because he went with a wicked purpose. When he found the ways of transgressors hard, and offers to return (Num_22:34), God knows that he would only carry his body back to Pethor, and leave his heart hankering after the rewards of Balak. May we not suppose that if he had shown real repentance in the future, and heartily entered into the Divine purposes: though he lost Balak s rewards, he would have received God's blessing? But he ran greedily after reward, and found, as sinners still find, under God's providence, that it is hard to retrace false steps. Therefore, "enter not," &c. (Pro_4:15).
4. Balaam meets with a flattering reception, yet renews his good professions (Num_22:38). He means them, for he still hopes to gain God's consent to his purpose. His use of enchantments to impose on the heathen is one sign of unconscientiousness. His first attempt to curse is a failure (Num_23:7-10), but the struggle with conscience and God is not abandoned. ("No sun or star so bright," &c; Keble's ‘Christian Year,' Second Sunday after Easter.) Three times he persists in this "madness," trying to change or circumvent the will of God. At length he seems to give up the struggle, but is probably only "making a virtue of a necessity;" at the best it is but a passing impulse, followed by a relapse, and by the infamous act by which he clutched his wages and brought God's curse on Israel (Num_25:1-18). He thus shows that he has renounced God, has entered thoroughly into Balak's schemes, and even outstripped him in wickedness. His perverted conscience does not keep him even from such unutterable baseness. His triumph is brief, and his "end is destruction" (Num_31:8; Psa_34:21). Learn from this the guilt and danger of resisting and thus corrupting conscience. (Explain process of this corruption, and note natural analogies to a conscience dulled by persistence in sin.) To try and bribe conscience is like seeking permission to sin. (Illustrate by story of Glaucus inquiring at the oracle of Delphi whether he might keep stolen money—Herodotus, 6:86.) Conscience, like a railway signal-lamp, is intended to warn against danger or direct in the path of safety. If through negligence the lamp is put out or shows a wrong light, the consequences may be fatal (Isa_5:20; Mat_6:23). A healthy conscience accuses of sin and warns of danger only that it may be a minister to lead us to Christ.—P.
Num_22:15-17
(1) conscience. Away with childish scruples in a man of the world who has to see to his own interests. Nor
(2) considerations of mercy to others. Balaam was required to curse and, if possible, ruin a nation that had done him no harm. Selfishness is bidden to make any sacrifice at its shrine. E.g; ambitious rulers, dishonest traders or trustees, heartless seducers. Nor
(3) the will of God; for who can be sure whether God has really revealed his will, or will enforce it (Gen_3:1-5). Nor
(4) the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ in dying that he might save from the ruin of sin; for though you sin, grace will abound. Nor
(5) the fear of judgment; for after all the threats of judgment may be old wives' fables, or you may make all right before you die. Thus speaks the tempter, bidding us make riches and honour "the prize of our calling," and overleap or break down every barrier that God has set up to hinder us from ruining ourselves and others. (Illustrate from the case of Judas, and the barriers he broke through at the call of Satan, and contrast the impregnability of Jesus Christ when offered the wealth and honour of the world.) Christ himself, the motives supplied by his cross when applied by his Spirit, are the greatest hindrances to keep us from yielding to the tempter.—P.
Num_22:32
I. THE WRONG DONE TO THE CREATURES
II. THE EFFECTS ON OURSELVES.
I. 1. They are our inferiors, therefore magnanimity and sympathy should protect them.
2. They are often helpless to defend themselves; cruelty is then unutterably mean.
3. Some of these animals are part of our property, and of great value to us, though absolutely within our power.
4. If they are not "wont to do so" when they provoke us, some good reason may exist which we should seek to discover. Therefore—
5. When tempted to harshness, short of cruelty, it is our duty to consider whether they need it, and in this sense deserve it. For—
6. Past misconduct of ourselves or of others may have occasioned their present obstinacy, through timidity or some other cause.
7. Animals suffer too much already, directly or indirectly, through men's sins (war, famines, &c.) without the addition of gratuitous cruelties.
8. No future life for them is revealed, so that we have the more reason for not making them miserable in this life.
II. 1. It fosters a despotic habit of mind, as though might and right were identical.
2. It hardens the heart and tends to nurture cruelty to men as well as brutes. E.g; the child Nero delighting in killing flies.
3. It still further alienates us from the mind of Christ, the character of "the Father of mercies."
4. It is a sign of unrighteousness (Pro_12:10), against which God's wrath is revealed, and from which we need to be saved by Christ (Rom_1:18; 1Jn_1:9).—P.
II. THE CONSEQUENT DISQUIETUDE OF MOAB. The Amorites had conquered Moab, but Israel had conquered the Amorites. The presumption then was that Israel, having the power, would as a matter of course advance to treat Moab in the same fashion; just as an Alexander or Napoleon goes from one conquered territory to conquer the next; just as a fire spreads from one burning house to its neighbour. It was therefore excusable for Moab to be sore afraid; but though excusable, it was not reasonable. The alarm came from knowledge of some things, mixed with ignorance of things more important. The alarm then was groundless. General as that alarm was, Moab had really nothing to fear. Its way of reasoning was utterly erroneous. If Moab had known the internal history of Israel half as well as it knew the present external appearance and recent triumphs, it would not have been alarmed because of the children of Israel, and because they were many. The children of Israel had been commanded to cherish other purposes than those of conquering Moab, and the mind of their leader was occupied with things far nobler than military success. Besides, as God had remembered the kinship of Israel and Edom, so he remembered that of Israel and Moab (Deu_2:9). Moab was afraid of the people because they were many. What a revelation of their craven and abject spirit in the past he would have had if he had seen them threatening to stone Caleb and Joshua (Jos_14:1-15). And though they were many, he would have seen that all their numbers availed nothing for success when God was not with them (Num_14:40-45).
III. MOAB'S CONCLUSION WITH REGARD TO HIS OWN RESOURCES. He could no more resist Israel than the grass of the field resist the mouth of the ox. This expresses his complete distrust of his own resources, and was a prudent conclusion, even if humiliating, as far as it went, and always supposing that Israel wished to play the part of the ox. The fall of Sihon had taught nothing to Og, the self-confident giant, but the fall of Sihon, and next the fall of Og, had taught Moab this at least, that in the battlefield he could do nothing against Israel. If a man refuses to go in the right path, it is not, therefore, a matter of little consequence which of the wrong paths he chooses. One may take him swiftly in the dark to the precipice; another, also downward, may afford more time and occasions for retrieval. It was a wrong, blind, useless course to send for Balaam, but at all events it was not so immediately destructive, as to rush recklessly into the field of battle against Israel.—Y.
Num_22:5, Num_22:6
I. A TESTIMONY TO THE POWER OF RELIGION. Balak cannot find sufficient resources in nature, therefore he seeks above nature. When men, who in their selfishness and unspirituality are furthest from God, find themselves in extremity, it is then precisely that they are seen turning to a power higher than their own (1Sa_28:1-25). Man has a clinging nature, and if he cannot lay hold of the truth as it is in Jesus, he must find some substitute. Balak did not know God as Moses knew him; he knew nothing of his spiritual perfections and holy purposes. But still he recognized the God of Israel as really existent, as a mighty potentate; he felt that Balaam had some power with him; and thus even in his ignorance he believes. It is a long, long way to pure atheism, and surely it must be a dreary and difficult one. May not the question be fairly raised whether there are any consistent atheists, those whose practice agrees even approximately with their theory? There are men without God in the world, i.e; lacking conscious and happy connection with the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ; but even so they may bear testimony unthinkingly to their need of him. The witnesses to the power of religion are not only many, but of all sorts, giving testimony often when they least suspect it.
II. A TESTIMONY TO THE EM