Balaam (Hastings' Dictionary)

Nu 22-24. 31»-'«, Dt 2.3 (Neh 13-), Jos 13, 24''- '", Mie 0», 2 P 2", Jude v.", Rev 2". BALAA^I BALAAM 233 The subject of a very remarkable story in con- nexion with the \van(lerinj;s of the Israelites in the wiiderness. The present narrative has arisen from the combination of several more or less ancient traditions. According to the latest, emliodied in tlie Priestly Code (P), and contained in Nu SI- '" (eorap.

Rev 2"), Halaam was a Midianitish coun- sellor, who persuaded his people to seduce tlie Israelites by means of certain immoral rites. This is probably to be connected with the great sin of Buil-p^or (Nu 2.")), or, to be more accurate, with the affair of Cozbi (25*'-), whicli has been combined with the story of Baalpeor {2.V'^}, the former being connected with the Midianitea, the latter with the Moabites.

In revenge for this, Balaam was after- wards slain with the princes of Midian (Nu 31*, Jos IS-^). It has been conjectured that this story arose partly out of a difliculty on the part of the priestly narrator in conceiving ot a heathen bein^jan inspired prophet of God, partlj' from the need of accounting tor the great sin of the Israelites. It is, however, very doubtful whether this story belongs to tlie earliest form of P, and it is by Kuenen assigned to the very latest redactor.

It is significant tliat Rev 2" definitely connects the immorality with sacrificial rites to neat hen gods,— a fact implied, but not distinctly stated by V. The more ancient and far more picturesque story is that contained in Nu 22, 24. According to this, Balaam is a prophet from Pethor, wliich is by the Euphrates, a place otherwise unknown, who is bribed by Balak, king of Moab, to come and pronounce a curse on the Israelites.

Bahiam earnestly endeavours to carry out Balak's wislies, but by divine in.spiration pronounces a blessin" instead of a curse. He is disiuis.sed by Balak, ana returns to his home, and is heard of no more. It is obvious that this story has no point of contact with that of P, and can be reconciled with it only by modifying or eliminating 24". If Balaam had returned to his home he could not be in the Midianitish camp immediately afterwards.

It is generally admitted that Nu 22, 24 belongs to the composite narrative known as JE. But there is some ditl'crence of opinion as regards the critical analj'sis of the [jsussage. Some, having regard to its general unity of purpose and sentiment, have a.ssigned it in its totality to J ; others refer only the episode of Balaam'.s journey to J and the rest to E. It is probable, however, that here, as elsewhere, there has been a more continuous interweaving of the two sources.

The sacrificial rites of 22<''-23^ seem to i)oint to E, and the symmetry of that section seems to require that it Should be referreil in the main to one source. On the other hand, the episode of Bala.ani's journey, with little doubt, belongs to J. There are also signs of composite authorship in other parts. Thus 22" and 2?"' are evidently duplicates, so are w. and **". A helpful criterion is the distinction of divine names in certain verses of ch. 22, esp.

• and " ; where, as in 23^, an anthroi)onior])hic character is assigned to God Himself as contrasted with the anjjel of J" of v.^ etc. It seems therefore right to assign vv."- "• '" and '" to E, but these pretty clearly carry with them vv."- "■'». It matters little how we assign the remaining verses, as both accounts must have contained statements of the same kind. But if J is the fundamental account, w.*"' will belong to it. Ch. 24 involves a further question. If the prophecies of ch.

23 belong to E, it is jirobablc that these belong to J. But they are believed to have undergone a very considerable revision and expansion by a later reviser, either before or after the union of .) and E. The pa.ssage esp. assigned to a late date is vv.-, which refers to the period of A.ssyr. ascendency. The insertion of 'the elders of Midian' in 22-' is probably the work of a much later re^^se^, who thereby thought to connect the story more closely with that of P.

If this analysis is in the main correct, there will be found a considerable diti'erence of character in the stories of J and E. According to the first, Balaam makes no ditliculty about going, nor does he receive any revelation forbidding it, but of his own accord he intimates to Balak that as a prophet he is entirely under the control of J". Balaam dis- covers his sin in going, only by the intervention of 'the angel of J",' and at once jnoposes to return.

For the first time he is permitte<i to go, Imt only on the condition that he does not attem])t to resi.sl the inspiration of God. 22^ is indeed referred by some to the reiser of JE, but some such limited permission is at anj rate imjilied in v.^. When Balaam arrives at Kiriath-huzoth, he is shown the whole company of the Israelites dwelling according to their tribes. The spirit of God conies upon him, and he bursts into a rhapsody of praise, suggested in its form by the sight before tiim.

The chief thought is the splendour of the huge encampment in its ordered array — ' As gardens b.v the river side, As Ugn-aloes which J" hath planted. As cedar trees beside the waters.' What Balaam, according to the story, foretells, is the increa.se in the multitude of the people and the power of their king.

This provokes Balak's anger; he smites his hands together, and would have dis- missed Balaam at once ; but with great dignity the latter justifies himself, and, regardless of Balak's «Tath, he proceeds to predict the destruction, first of Moab, then of Edom, at the hand of the king of Israel. Balak himself seems overawed by the torrent of inspired rhetoric, and he has nothing more to say to the prophet, who inimediatelj' retires.

J's narrative is terse and vigorous throughout, full of quaintness, yet always dignified and iiicturcsque without grandiloquence. Wliat remains of E's narrative falls distinctly below it in point of literary merit. It is more ornate, but less really beautilul. There is a tendency to what ai)pears like an artificial repetition of similar incidents. Balak twice apppeals to Balaam, who twice in his turn appeals to God, and twice receives an answer from Him.

Thrice Balak builds for Balaam seven altars, and offers a bullock and a ram on every altar, and the language in wliich Balak's command is given and carried out is rejieated each time. We might add that thrice Balaam pronounces a blessing instead of a curse, only that the third blessing of E has disajipeared in ch. 24 to make way for the blessing of J. There is, moreover, besides its anthropomorphism, a want of sjiontaneity and naturalness about the story.

We feel this in the way that Balaam [jarleys with God (2.'t'). He tells Him that he has prepared the seven altars, and olfcred a bullock and a ram on every altar, and im|>lies therefrom a hope that He will grant his wish : and there is an almost mechanical view of insi)iration in the thought of the word put in Balaam's mouth (2'!°). What a dilference between this and the thought of J (24'-'), that the Sjiirit so takes pos.

session of him that his whole nature is aglow I Then again, how unnatural comparatively Balak's conduct is ! How strange that lie shoulj have put up with Balaam's utterances so com- jilaccntly, and contented himself with a mild remonstrance. (See IIkxatkucii, Nu.MiiKlis;.) But the most important difference in the stories is the contrast which they present in the character of Balaam. In J there is nothing rejiroachful in his conduct. He acts up to his light with perfect consistency.

But the Balaam of E is of a much lower order. He has imlced a higher perception of the moral beauty of righteous 234 BALAH BALDNESS ness. He can say with all sincerity, ' Let me die the death of the righteous, and let my last end be like his ' (23'°).

This can hardly at so early a date mean, ' May I in some future state have the rewards, even without the reality, of a righteous life here,' but, 'May I in my last moments have the satisfaction of feeling that I have lived a righteous life to the very end.' But, in spite of such noble sentiments, the Balaam of £ is a selfish, grasping man.

He covets the rewards of Balak, and is restrained from taking them only by a sordid fear of God, who could make the conse- quence of so doing worse than losing them. He is not content to know God's will, but tries by every means in his power to cajole God into changing His mind, or, in other words, makinj' wrong right. Five times he attempts to obtain God's consent, and always fails.

It may be thought that this estimate of Balaam's character as portrayed in E assumes a higher view of God and morality than E may be supposed to have had. The God of 1 S 15-^ was not 'a man, that he should repent.' But could this be said of the God of E ? Probably not ; but, at any rate, Balaam's persistence is evidently due to selfishness and greed.

Some regret may be felt on the ground that such a critical analysis of Balaam's story destroys its value as the study of an instructively composite character. But this is not so much so as ajjpears at first sight. The great sermon of Bp. Butler, for example, depends almost entirely on the nar- rative of E. His allusion to P's story as part of Balaam's career does not affect his main argument much more than the words of Mieah (6'''^) erro- neously put by him into Balaam's mouth.

The real value of his sermon arises out of his insight into human nature and motive. On the other side, it is only fair to state that the critical process removes at least one very serious moral ditticulty, that, as the narrative now stands, God allows Balaam to go on certain conditions, and before the conditions have been violated is angry, and punishes him for acting on this permission. The date and origin of the Balaam story cannot be determined with certainty.

The reference to the subjugation of Moab (24"), if we suppose that these are prophecies only in a literary sense, seems to point, for the Jahwistic narrative, to a date jjosterior to David's Moabitish war (2 S 8) ; and It is hardly likely to be much later— indeed it is highly probable that the story is based on a much earlier le";end. The speaking of animals is a common feature of the early folk-lore of many nations, and this incident has its obvious parallel in the Jahwistic story of Paradise.

Among some of the Norwegian peasantry the belief that bears could speak, and refrained from doing so only from fear of man, continued down to comparatively recent times. LlTERATURB. — The fltory and character of Bala-am have been the subject of a large number of treiitises and sermons. By far the beat known, and generally acknowledged to be the most valuable, is the great sermon of Bp. Butler upon the charai^ter of Balaam. Among those of more recent date may be mentioned the sermons of F. D.

Maurice and Isaac Williams. F. H. Woods. BALAH (.17?), Jos IQ*. — A town of Simeon, perliaps the same as Bealoth, and apparently the Bilhah of a parallel passage 1 Ch 4-". None of the.se is known. C. R. CONUER.