"He has not beheld misfortune in Jacob, nor has he seen trouble in Israel" (Numbers 23:21).

From the occasions when God blessed Israel through him, Balaam likely figured out what it would take for Israel to be cursed: they would need to be enticed to sin against God. That is apparently what he advised the Moabite and Midianite leaders to do (compare Numbers 31:16). So we read that while Israel lived in Shittim, the people began to be unfaithful with the daughters of Moab, who invited them to the sacrifices of their gods; the people ate and bowed down to their gods, and Israel yoked itself to Baal of Peor, and the anger of the Lord was kindled against Israel (a paraphrase of Numbers 25:1–3).

Twenty-four thousand Israelites died without a single arrow being shot by Moab or Midian. They died because they sinned against God. God was not bound to Israel in a way that would make Him overlook their sin; rather, their lives were bound to God. God's unconditional covenant could remain in force even through a single Israelite. Remember that God offered to make Moses the father of a new nation while destroying that stubborn and rebellious generation. Moses declined, but the possibility was there. And unlike finite humanity, God has all the time in the world.

Friends, let us never imagine that God is beholden to us. We are beholden to Him. God is beholden only to Himself. Like Israel of old, we do not cling to our righteousness but to the promises of God.

My wife and I have been keeping a daily couple's journal for the past three years. One of its questions appeared only now, because this is a leap year and it is February 29. It asked something like, "What is a risk you don't mind taking?" I answered, "To believe and follow the Bible with all my heart." My wife asked, "How is that a risk?" I answered something like, "I don't know everything. There's a place for faith."

Paul wrote, "work out your own salvation with fear and trembling" (Philippians 2:12). I believe the word "trembling" leaves room for doubts and insecurities about the integrity of our faith. I am saved, and I believe it, but I tremble before a holy God who will judge the world. This is also why I hold so firmly to the doctrine of God's unconditional election. I have little confidence in the integrity of my faith if it is truly my own and not His gift to me.

If I had lived in the days of Noah, could I really say that I would have been like Noah and not like the multitudes who perished in the Flood? How many people in the nations outside Israel truly knew the Lord so as to be saved? Even Abraham was called out of idolatry. Could I really say I would have been like Abraham? Who am I to think I would not have sided with the ten spies who advised against taking the Promised Land? The rest of Israel did. There is little chance I would have been like Joshua or Caleb, the only two of that generation who trusted God and entered the land. We have too high a view of ourselves.

Dear friends, I can boast of nothing regarding my salvation. Jesus is truly both the founder and perfecter of my faith (Hebrews 12:2) — before its beginning and after its end, in its means and in its goal, in agency and in content. I am wholly saved by His grace.

AI-Expanded Reflection

Balaam's oracles in Numbers 23–24 contain some of the most glorious blessings on Israel in the Old Testament — "How lovely are your tents, O Jacob" (24:5), and the promise of "a star... out of Jacob" (24:17). Yet the very next chapter records Israel's fall at Baal-peor, and Numbers 31:16 reveals that it was "on Balaam's advice" that the Midianite women led Israel into sin. Revelation 2:14 remembers him for exactly this: he "taught Balak to put a stumbling block before the sons of Israel." What he could not accomplish by cursing, he attempted through temptation — a sobering picture of how spiritual attack often works.

The comment's humility is well grounded; Paul says the same of himself (1 Corinthians 15:10; 1 Timothy 1:15–16). Christians differ on how God's grace relates to human choice in salvation (see #1779, #1933, #2142) and on how many will ultimately be saved (see #2068). What all share is the comment's conclusion: no one can boast, and faith that rests in Christ rather than in itself is secure. The "trembling" of Philippians 2:12 is often understood as reverent awe, set alongside the assurance of the very next verse — "for it is God who works in you."

From the rocky peaks Balaam sees Israel, a people who live apart and do not count themselves among the nations. Who can count the dust of Jacob or number a fourth of Israel? "Let me die the death of the upright, and let my end be like his!" (a paraphrase of Numbers 23:9–10).

I very much like this prayer and praise. Be a person not of this world — as C. S. Lewis suggested, like a fish surprised by water, not made for this world. Jesus lived up to this: "Let me die the death of the upright, and let my end be like his!"

Balaam was perhaps speaking figuratively of the noble death and noble end of a righteous person, but we have a more complete picture through Jesus Christ. Die doing what is right, as Jesus did. Know what your end will be, as Jesus knew His.

Live life in the hands of God, and even die the death of the upright, having joy in the hands of God — being glorified and perfected, holy and righteous forever, like Jesus.

How awesome the future will be for those in Jesus!

AI-Expanded Reflection

The irony in Balaam's line is one of the sharpest in the Pentateuch. He prays to die the death of the upright — and then, a few chapters later, he is killed among the Midianites (Numbers 31:8). Numbers 31:16 reveals why: it was Balaam's counsel that led Israel into the sin at Baal-Peor in chapter 25, immediately after these oracles. The man who could see Israel's blessedness so clearly from the mountaintop did not choose the life that leads to the death he wished for. The New Testament remembers him for exactly this — loving the wages of wrongdoing (2 Peter 2:15; Jude 11; Revelation 2:14).

That makes the comment's move to Christ more pointed. Balaam wanted the ending without the path. Jesus walked the path — "he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death" (Philippians 2:8) — and so the upright death and its vindication belong to Him, and through Him to those who follow.

The phrase "a people who live apart" also has a long afterlife. It describes Israel's calling to be distinct, which Peter applies to the church as a people belonging to God, living as sojourners and exiles (1 Peter 2:9–11). The comment's call to be "not of this world" draws on the same thread Jesus used in John 17:14–16.

I have heard often from the pulpit that God changes his will or mind according to our prayers. It sounded good to me in the beginning because it gave me a certain level of comfort that as long as I perform well and show my zeal for Him, I will get what I think and believe is right. The more I read and meditate on the Word, however, the more convinced I have become that's not what the Scripture says about God. God is immutable because He foresees everything, ordains and appoints all the events of our lives. Balaam tried three different times to change God's mind by offering bulls and rams at different locations as if God could be pleased by changing the location of sacrifice. We may think that it is such an absurd thing to do. But isn't that what even Christians of modern days do? We often say that it wouldn't have been this way if we prayed harder, offered larger monetary contributions to church, or went to early morning service without missing one. I could only imagine that God's purpose and plan would be undone because of our ill performance. I am not disapproving of or belittling our religious zeal, but we should do all those with the right mindset. God will do and accomplish the purpose of His will no matter what, and we are just simply called to obey Him. Once again I am reminded that I must simply pray that His will be done instead of thinking that I can change God's mind by prayer as if He were at my disposal.

AI-Expanded Reflection

Stephen identifies a temptation that can hide beneath impressive devotion: treating prayer, giving, or attendance as the price of a desired outcome. Balaam's repeated sacrifices make that temptation visible. Changing the setting does not change the Lord's declared purpose. Religious activity cannot turn God into a manageable power. The story exposes the difference between approaching God to receive his word and approaching him to secure an answer already chosen.

This insight brings real freedom. If every disappointment were evidence that we had failed to pray intensely enough, ordinary suffering would become an endless audit of our spiritual performance. We would carry responsibility for outcomes Scripture never places under our control. Trust in God's faithfulness allows believers to obey without imagining that his whole purpose depends on their flawless execution of religious duties. The Father's care is not purchased by perfect attendance or the size of a contribution.

Yet the alternative to manipulation is not prayer stripped of particular requests. Jesus teaches his disciples to ask for daily bread, forgiveness, and deliverance in the same prayer that seeks the Father's will. In Gethsemane he asks that the cup pass while submitting to the Father. Specific desire and genuine submission can coexist. A request is not an attempt to seize control merely because the person praying deeply wants the answer. The distinction lies in whether we receive God as Lord or claim that our effort obligates him to comply.

Scripture also depicts prayer as effective within God's purposes. James 5 encourages believers to pray for one another and uses Elijah as an example of consequential prayer. Philippians 4:6 invites requests with thanksgiving. Those passages should not be neutralized by saying that prayer changes nothing outside the person praying. From a theological perspective that affirms comprehensive divine sovereignty, prayer can be understood as one of the means God appoints, alongside the outcomes he purposes. Other Christian accounts explain providence differently, but none should turn the biblical invitation to ask into a pretense.

Balaam's situation is not identical to every unanswered Christian prayer. He is involved in an effort to curse a people God has blessed. A parent praying for a sick child or a believer seeking employment is not thereby attempting the same rebellion. We should apply the warning to coercive expectations without treating vulnerable petitioners as manipulators. Lament, repeated requests, and tears can be expressions of dependence rather than resistance.

A practical discipline is to pray honestly about the desired outcome, ask for wisdom about the next responsible action, and name the commitment to obey even if the answer differs from expectation. Generosity can then arise from gratitude, worship from love, and perseverance from trust. “Your will be done” becomes a posture that shapes specific prayer, not a phrase used to silence it. We approach a faithful Father who invites us to speak, while relinquishing the claim that our devotion places him in our debt.

God is not a man, that He should lie, Nor a son of man, that He should repent; Has He said, and will He not do it? Or has He spoken, and will He not make it good? (Numbers 23:19)

Alas, who can live except God has ordained it? (Numbers 24:23).

Even though these words come through the mouth of one, who may not have been a true prophet of God, the Scriptures teach that God used him to convey prophetic truth. I highlight the above pronouncements because they affirm what we should already understand about God:

(1) He does not lie (cf. 1 Samuel 15:29; 2 Samuel 22:31; Psalm 12:6; Psalm 33:4).

(2) He does not repent (i.e. He does not change His ways) (Numbers 23:19–20; 1 Samuel 15:29).

(3) He does what He says.

(4) He determines destiny (i.e. He determines life and eternal life).

The sometimes confusing thing here is that there are passages where, for instance, God sends a lying spirit, or that the Bible says He changes His mind about carrying out a certain judgment. There are also passages that speak of God's arms and hands, even though the Bible also makes it clear that God is spirit (cf. John 4:24). What are we to make of all these apparent contradictions?! They are NOT contradictions, but they are anthropomorphisms, giving human qualities to God, so that we might better relate and believe in God. As Jesus says to Nicodemus, "If I told you earthly things and you do not believe, how will you believe if I tell you heavenly things?" (John 3:12). So, when God asks Adam and Eve, "Where are you?" (Genesis 3:9), it is not as though God, who created the universe, did not know where they were hiding.

Friends, I have only given a brief snippet of perhaps a larger discussion. But I am hoping that each of you will search these things out for yourselves. I have discovered that Christians fall short in their understanding because they give up too soon in their search for truth. This is true of people who believe in other religions as well, even atheists and agnostics. It is not so much that they reject truth, but they only have some of it and not enough of it to make a right judgment. This is a matter of eternal consequence, in light of which our earthly lives are but a drop in the bucket; therefore, I believe it is worthy of at least a life-long pursuit.

Make your ear attentive to wisdom, Incline your heart to understanding; For if you cry for discernment, Lift your voice for understanding; If you seek her as silver And search for her as for hidden treasures; Then you will discern the fear of the Lord And discover the knowledge of God (Proverbs 2:2–5).

Let us seek wisdom, understanding, and discernment. Let us seek truth as for hidden treasure. I believe that, of all pursuits, this is the most worthwhile. Solomon, who wrote a whole book on the vanity of every other pursuit in life (i.e. the Book of Ecclesiastes), writes, "Now all has been heard; here is the conclusion of the matter: Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the duty of all mankind” (Ecclesiastes 12:13). And here in Proverbs 2 he writes that by pursuing truth as for hidden treasure we "will discern the fear of God and discover the knowledge of God."

AI-Expanded Reflection

Balaam's declaration about God's truthfulness answers a specific pressure: Balak wants a prophetic curse to overturn the blessing God has given Israel. The oracle insists that God cannot be manipulated into behaving like an unreliable human patron. His word will not become false because a king changes the location of an altar or increases the apparent religious seriousness of his request. Numbers 23:19 therefore establishes covenantal reliability before it becomes part of a broader discussion of divine immutability.

That context helps us read passages in which God relents from an announced judgment. Scripture does not describe every warning as an unconditional prediction. Jeremiah 18:7–10 explicitly explains that announced judgment may be withheld when a nation turns from evil, and announced benefit may be withdrawn when it turns to disobedience. God's response to changed human conduct can express a consistent moral purpose. His faithfulness is not the inflexibility of an impersonal mechanism. He truly addresses, warns, receives repentance, and judges people within the relationship his word establishes.

First Samuel 15 is especially instructive because it contains both divine regret over Saul and an affirmation that God does not lie or relent like a human being. The narrative itself places those statements together. We should therefore resist resolving the tension by treating one as meaningful and the other as merely decorative language. Descriptions of divine grief communicate something true about God's opposition to sin, even though his knowledge and life are not limited like ours. Christians differ over the philosophical account of these passages; the shared exegetical responsibility is to honor both God's constancy and the seriousness of his responses.

The lying spirit in 1 Kings 22 requires another distinction. That scene portrays judgment upon Ahab through prophetic deception, while Micaiah publicly reveals the heavenly scene and warns the king. It cannot be adequately explained simply by labeling the whole event an anthropomorphism. The difficult question concerns God's sovereign judgment and the agency of deceptive messengers, not merely whether God has a physical body. The narrative neither permits human dishonesty nor portrays God's revealed warning through Micaiah as false. Ahab's preference for flattering prophecy forms part of the setting of his judgment.

Numbers 24:23 is also narrower than a complete statement about individual eternal destiny. Translations commonly present it as a cry about surviving what God is about to do in the conflicts described by the oracle. The wording retained in the original reflects one translation, but the verse should not bear more systematic weight than its context supports. Compare the translations of Numbers 24:23.

The call to seek wisdom is therefore well placed. Diligence includes comparing contexts, admitting unresolved questions, and distinguishing what a passage establishes from what a theological system infers. We should not assume that everyone who disagrees has simply stopped searching too soon. Patient inquiry can deepen conviction while increasing humility. God's trustworthiness gives us reason to pursue difficult questions carefully rather than fear them or force premature solutions.

The LORD told Moses to take the leaders who had joined themselves to the Baal of Peor and put them to death publicly, so that the LORD's fierce anger would turn away from Israel. Moses relayed this to Israel's judges. While the assembly was weeping at the entrance to the tent of meeting, an Israelite man brought a Midianite woman into the camp in full view of Moses and the whole assembly. When Phinehas son of Eleazar, the son of Aaron the priest, saw this, he left the assembly, took a spear, and followed them into the tent, and drove the spear through both of them. Then the plague against the Israelites stopped, though those who died numbered 24,000 (a paraphrase of Numbers 25:4–9).

I quote the passage at length because I don't want the sequence missed. God is furious with leaders who have joined Moabite women in worshiping Baal. He commands their execution. Moses assembles the judges to give the order, and they begin weeping for the men they would have to put to death. While this solemn assembly is underway, an Israelite man walks in front of the whole group with a Midianite woman — who, we later learn, was the daughter of a Midianite clan leader. Phinehas notices.

AI-Expanded Reflection

This is one of the passages readers find hardest to sit with, and the difficulty should not be smoothed over. Phinehas is commended in the text, and the covenant of peace given to him afterward is real. Understanding why requires the context: the episode is not about interethnic marriage as such — Moses himself married a Midianite — but about a coordinated campaign, described later in Numbers 31:16, to draw Israel into Baal worship through sexual and religious entanglement, at a moment when a plague was actively killing thousands. The act is presented as a national emergency in a covenant community under direct theocratic government, and it stops the plague.

That said, several things need saying clearly. Phinehas is commended for zeal, not established as a template. Scripture itself later treats zeal-driven violence with real caution — Jacob curses Simeon and Levi's zeal for their sister as cruelty (Genesis 49:5–7), and Jesus rebukes James and John for wanting to call down fire on a Samaritan village (Luke 9:54–55). Paul, who had been zealous enough to hold coats at a stoning, describes that zeal as ignorance he needed mercy for (Romans 10:2; 1 Timothy 1:13). And the New Testament is explicit that the church does not wield the sword for religious ends: our weapons are not of the flesh, vengeance belongs to God, and the standing instruction is to love enemies and bless persecutors.

This matters because the Phinehas passage has a documented history of being invoked by people justifying religious violence, including in the modern era. A devotional treatment of it should name that plainly rather than leave the inference open. The narrative describes what God commanded within a specific covenant order; it does not authorize any believer today to act on private zeal, and Scripture's own trajectory runs firmly the other way.

Balak knew he couldn't defeat Israel militarily, so he called on Balaam to try defeating them supernaturally through a curse. When that failed, he resorted to an even more deceptive strategy — letting Israel fall out of God's favor through their own sin. The sequence matters here: entice the men into sexual activity first, and let that physical fall lead to a deeper fall away from God entirely.

While staying in Shittim, Israel's men began indulging in sexual immorality with Moabite women, who invited them to sacrifices for their gods; the people ate the sacrificial meals and bowed down before these gods, yoking themselves to the Baal of Peor, provoking the LORD's anger (a paraphrase of Numbers 25:1–3). This marks a critical turning point in Israel's history — the first recorded instance of being led astray through intermingling with neighboring peoples. Sadly, it's only the beginning.

We later learn in Numbers 31 that this was all done on Balaam's own advice, enticing Israel into unfaithfulness at Peor, resulting in a plague among God's people (a paraphrase of Numbers 31:16) — it seems Balak did eventually get his money's worth after all. In the middle of a plague that kills 24,000, one Simeonite man flagrantly brings a woman into the camp for everyone to see. Phinehas kills them both, and the plague stops immediately, purely because one man stood up for God. Psalm 106 says this act was credited to Phinehas as righteousness (remember — the same language used of Abraham's faith in Genesis 15:6) — Israel yoked themselves to Baal, ate sacrifices offered to lifeless gods, provoked the LORD's anger with their wicked deeds, and a plague broke out among them; but Phinehas intervened, and the plague was checked, an act credited to him as righteousness for generations to come (a paraphrase of Psalm 106:28–31).

Because of one man's righteousness, the whole nation of Israel was spared further consuming wrath. Likewise, we're spared God's wrath because of Christ's own righteousness.

Thank You, LORD, for showing us what one righteous, zealous person can accomplish for Your honor. As Pastor Steve mentioned last Sunday, let's remember God has already given us the divine power to live a godly life.

AI-Expanded Reflection

The specific sequence this comment identifies — physical enticement leading to spiritual compromise — matches a warning pattern that shows up again much later in Israel's history, when Solomon's foreign wives are described as turning his heart after other gods (1 Kings 11:1–4), following the exact same progression from intimate relationship to idolatrous worship. Numbers 25 and 1 Kings 11, separated by centuries and involving completely different circumstances, describe the identical mechanism at work — which suggests this wasn't a one-time vulnerability unique to the wilderness generation, but a recurring pattern Israel's leadership kept failing to guard against across its entire national history.

Interesting and confusing at the same time! What do you all think was on God's mind, using a pagan diviner to bless Israel and speak prophecy, when divination itself was abominable to Him? Was it because Balaam was already famous among the nations for his reputation, so God used him specifically to put fear in Israel's enemies? God's blessing was already on His people regardless of whether Balaam could curse or bless them. I think God was making a declaration to many nations that He alone is the Almighty God of Israel.

Either way, here's what today's reading meant to me. Balaam made three separate attempts to curse Israel, but the words kept coming out as blessings instead. This reminds me of what Paul writes in Romans — who can bring any charge against those God has chosen, since it's God Himself who justifies? Who is left to condemn, since Christ Jesus died, was raised to life, and now sits at God's right hand, interceding for us? What can separate us from Christ's love — trouble, hardship, persecution, famine, nakedness, danger, or sword? As it's written, we face death all day long, considered as sheep to be slaughtered — yet in all these things, we're more than conquerors through Him who loved us. Nothing — death or life, angels or demons, present or future, any power, height or depth, or anything else in all creation — can separate us from the love of God found in Christ Jesus our Lord (a paraphrase of Romans 8:33–39).

We have an accuser bringing charges against us day and night. Just as Israel rebelled in the wilderness, so do we, every day. Our enemy plots evil schemes to destroy us — but as today's text proves, they'll never succeed. Whatever or whoever it is in our lives, it can never outweigh His faithfulness and love. Blessed be Jesus our Lord, the author and perfecter of our salvation!

AI-Expanded Reflection

The parallel this comment draws between Balaam's failed curses and Paul's list of things that can't separate believers from God's love is a genuinely apt one, since both passages share the exact same underlying logic — a determined, external attempt to overturn what God has already decided to bless, met with total failure regardless of how many separate angles are tried. Balaam attempts the curse three separate times, from three different vantage points (Numbers 23:1–12, 13–26; 24:1–9), each attempt failing identically; Paul similarly runs through an exhaustive list of potential separating forces, each one dismissed in turn. Both passages seem to be making the same rhetorical point through sheer repetition and thoroughness: it isn't just that one particular threat fails, it's that no conceivable threat, tried from any angle, can succeed against what God has already secured.

A prophet named Balaam prophesies for the wicked king Balak of the nation of Moab. Balak wanted Balaam to curse the Israelite nation in hopes that Israel would fall to Moab. Balaam prophesies:

In poetic form, Balaam describes seeing a coming ruler not yet present — a star marching forth out of Jacob, a scepter rising out of Israel, one who will crush Moab and possess the territory of Israel's enemies, a ruler from Jacob who will finish what he starts (a paraphrase of Numbers 24:17–19).

The Moabites were one of the Canaanite-adjacent nations that God told Moses and the Israelites they would drive from the land. Balaam prophesies that a king will rise from Jacob and will destroy Moab and Edom. This is fulfilled later in 2 Samuel, as King David drives out these nations from Canaan.

Balaam is actually a prophet for hire, and is chastised by an angel of God for selling prophecy for money. Ultimately, God finds a way to use this unscrupulous man to fulfill His plan and purpose. This is a reminder to me that God uses both bad and good to fulfill His purpose. God desires us all to follow and obey, but even when we choose our own path, it does not change God's plan.

Yujin adds... Just a little correction: Moab was actually a relative of Israel. Moab was the son of Lot, the nephew of Abraham — born out of the incestuous union of Lot with his daughter after the destruction of Sodom. God actually told Israel not to destroy Moab, because He had given their land to them as an inheritance (cf. Deuteronomy 2:9), just as He did for Moab's brother Ammon. Later they would be destroyed, not because they were one of the Canaanite nations, but because they were proud, idolatrous, and hostile toward their brother nations Edom and Israel (cf. Isaiah 15–16; Jeremiah 48; Amos 2:1–2; Zephaniah 2:8–9).

AI-Expanded Reflection

The "star out of Jacob" line has had a long afterlife beyond this single prophecy. Centuries later, the leader of a Jewish revolt against Rome in the 2nd century AD took the name Bar Kokhba — literally "son of the star" — a deliberate claim to be fulfilling this exact oracle as Israel's coming deliverer. Whether or not that claim was accurate, it shows how deeply this particular image embedded itself in later messianic expectation. Matthew's account of a star leading visitors to a newborn king in Bethlehem (Matthew 2:2) may well be drawing on the same ancient well — a prophecy spoken by a foreign diviner-for-hire, over enemy territory, somehow still echoing centuries later at the actual birth it was pointing toward all along.

In this reading, Balaam is with Balak and is requested to curse the Israelites. Repeatedly, Balaam speaks to the Lord and tells Balak that the Lord has blessed the Israelites, and repeatedly Balak tells Balaam to try again.

I find it interesting that Balak was told that the Israelites were blessed but still insisted on cursing them, so that he would not be defeated. Perhaps, had he embraced the Israelites rather than opposing them, things would have turned out differently for the Moabites.

We too have desires that we will pursue even if they are in direct opposition to the Lord's will.

AI-Expanded Reflection

This story left enough of an impression that a later prophet uses it as shorthand for God's faithfulness. In Micah 6:5, God tells Israel to remember specifically "what Balak king of Moab counseled, and what Balaam son of Beor answered him" as evidence of His righteous acts on their behalf. Centuries after the events in Numbers, the whole strange episode — a pagan king's repeated, stubborn attempts to buy a curse that never came — had become a standing reminder of a simple point: no amount of persistence can override what God has already decided to bless.

Towards the beginning of the Balaam/Balak story, we read that God told Balaam he could go, then we read that God was angry that he went. Is this similar to when we read that David was told by God to do a census, only to have clarity later that it was the devil? How is this resolved?

Yujin replied... Numbers 22:32 indicates that the Angel of the LORD opposed him and considered killing him because his way was "reckless" (or "perverse" in the KJV and ESV). He appeared to obey God by going with the messengers of Balak; however, his heart may have been intent on evil. In the New Testament, we are told that he "loved the wages of wickedness" (2 Peter 2:15). He becomes a byword for those who teach others how to stumble (Revelation 2:14). Even though here he blesses Israel, later in Numbers we are told that he showed Balak the way to harm Israel by causing them to sin against God (cf. Numbers 31:16; Revelation 2:14).

But why the talking donkey story? It appears that God was showing the stubborn madness of Balaam. 2 Peter 2:16 is very informative: Balaam was rebuked for his wrongdoing by a donkey — a beast without speech — who spoke with a man's voice and restrained the prophet's madness. Balaam should have been amazed by the miracle of a talking donkey. This is why Peter emphasizes that the donkey was a beast without speech, and that it spoke with a man's voice. Yet Balaam's stubbornness kept him from seeing the obvious miracle. Peter calls it Balaam's "madness." And it was indeed mad that Balaam would consider opposing God — and we discover that even after all of God's revelations and wonders, Balaam still stubbornly continues on his wicked path against God's people, stubborn like a donkey but without a donkey's wisdom.

AI-Expanded Reflection

The David/census comparison this question raises is worth answering directly, since the reply focused mainly on Balaam's specific case. Both stories share the same underlying pattern: 2 Samuel 24:1 says the LORD moved David to take the census, while 1 Chronicles 21:1, describing the same event, says Satan incited him to do it. Scripture doesn't treat these as contradictory — the standard way this has been understood historically is that God's sovereign permission and a person's own culpable choice can sit in the same event without cancelling each other out. In Balaam's case specifically, God's permission ("go with them," Numbers 22:20) didn't erase what was actually driving Balaam's heart in wanting to go — the reward Balak was offering. The permission was real; so was the accountability for what the permission revealed about Balaam's own desires.