Balaam and the Donkey

gawker

So, I noticed a reference to a talking donkey in the Bible on another thread on boards.ie and could not help to google it. There verse is:

"The donkey said to Balaam, "Am I not your own donkey, which you have always ridden, to this day? Have I been in the habit of doing this to you?" "No," he said."
(Numbers 22:30)

Now, I seriously am not trying to troll you all here. I just really have to ask: do you as a Christian believe a donkey talked?

It's a simple question, and I really hope it is not taken as a dig. I just really need to know if people believe this. I googled it and found a document explaining to teachers (or homeschool teachers, not sure) how to explain the story to kids. They definitely told the kids the donkey really talked.

Do you believe this, and if so why? Or is it taken as an old legend trying to explain a sentiment rather than as literal truth? Thanks.

homer911

Because God can do anything (he created the Universe after all), I certainly believe that he could have made the donkey talk, or could have talked through the donkey (God spoke to Moses through a burning bush and nobody seems to find this hard to believe)

georgieporgy

Let's not forget Eve and her chat with a snake. And I've heard lots of people say a little birdie told them something. However I think the Balaam story is pretty clear in the bible and I can't see why anyone could have difficulty with it. Here is what wikipedia has to say about it:


The main story of Balaam occurs during the sojourn of the Israelites in the plains of Midian, east of the Jordan River, at the close of forty years of wandering, shortly before the death of Moses, and the crossing of the Jordan. The Israelites have already defeated two kings on this side of the Jordan: Sihon, king of the Amorites, and Og, king of Bashan. Balak, king of Moab (Numbers 22:2), consequently becomes alarmed, and sends elders of Midian and his messengers (Numbers 22:4-5), to Balaam, son of Beor, to induce him to come and curse Israel. Balaam's location is simply given as his people in the masoretic text and the Septuagint, though the Samaritan Pentateuch, Vulgate, and Syriac Pe****ta all identify it as Ammon.

Balaam and the angel. Nuremberg Chronicle (1493).


Balaam sends back word that he can only do what YHWH commands, and God has, via a nocturnal dream, told him not to go. Moab consequently sends higher ranking priests and offers Balaam honours; Balaam, in his coveteousness, continues to press God, and God finally gives him over to his greed and permits him to go but with instructions to say only what he commands. Balaam thus, without being asked again, sets out in the morning with the princes of Moab and God becomes angry that he went, and the Angel of the Lord (Numbers 22:22) is sent to prevent him. At first the angel is seen only by the donkey Balaam is riding, which tries to avoid the otherwise invisible angel. After Balaam starts punishing the donkey for refusing to move, it is miraculously given the power to speak to Balaam (Numbers 22:28), and it complains about Balaam's treatment. At this point, Balaam is allowed to see the angel, who informs him that the donkey is the only reason the angel did not kill Balaam. Balaam immediately repents, but is told to go on.

PDN

Yes, I certainly believe that God made a donkey to talk. It seems quite an easy thing compared to creating the universe out of nothing.

gawker

PDN wrote: »

Yes, I certainly believe that God made a donkey to talk. It seems quite an easy thing compared to creating the universe out of nothing.

If God created the universe, why didn't he give donkeys vocal chords if he wanted them to talk at any point? Or the ability to learn a language?

I mean, it seems to me that believing god created the world gives people license to suspend all reason when it suits them, this verse being a case in point.

Would the Catholic point of view be that it is a myth or legend, out of interest?

PS. I know threads like this must pop up alot and annoy some. Maybe there should be an "Ask a Christian" thread!

Onesimus

gawker wrote: »

If God created the universe, why didn't he give donkeys vocal chords if he wanted them to talk at any point? Or the ability to learn a language?

I mean, it seems to me that believing god created the world gives people license to suspend all reason when it suits them, this verse being a case in point.

Would the Catholic point of view be that it is a myth or legend, out of interest?

PS. I know threads like this must pop up alot and annoy some. Maybe there should be an "Ask a Christian" thread!

It's obvious he didnt want to. and so what? Why does it matter?:) He can do what he wants. He is God after all.

I'm Catholic and no the Catholic teaching is that this is not myth. There may be liberal Catholics out there who would venture to call it a myth but it aint and it's just their false opinion on the matter.

Onesimus

PDN

gawker wrote: »

I mean, it seems to me that believing god created the world gives people license to suspend all reason when it suits them, this verse being a case in point.

And how does believing that God is powerful enough to work a miracle if He wishes equate to suspending all reason?

The Quadratic Equation

gawker wrote: »

If God created the universe, why didn't he give donkeys vocal chords if he wanted them to talk at any point? Or the ability to learn a language?

It's quite simple, this particular Donkey was merely the selected medium used for a one off message.
Quite effective. I think anyone would pay a great deal of attention to such a message, it's clever on quite a few levels.

Fanny Cradock

"Balaam's donkey" is a story that I find very challenging. It's not that I can't conceive that God could talk through a donkey, a wall, a puddle, a burning bush or whatever other medium of his choosing. Rather, I find Balaam's initial reaction to his talking donkey (verse 29) to be a challenge up to the point of incredulity. I would have thought that "Arghhhhh!" would have been more likely.

Slav

Numbers chapter 22 is not about talking donkeys or a human having an argument with an animal. It's about the conversation between God and Balaam. It does not matter whether you believe the literal donkey literally talked, or God made Balaam to experience some sort of a hearing hallucinations, or the donkey is a literary trope (e.g. donkey = Balaam's soul; BTW not only it resolves Fanny's confusion about the Balaam's reaction but also brings a whole new dimension to the story), or have no thoughts at all about the nature of that donkey's speech - in any case the message of Numbers 22 remains the same.

Peregrinus

gawker wrote: »

Would the Catholic point of view be that it is a myth or legend, out of interest?

Onesimus wrote: »

It's obvious he didnt want to. and so what? Why does it matter? He can do what he wants. He is God after all.

I'm Catholic and no the Catholic teaching is that this is not myth. There may be liberal Catholics out there who would venture to call it a myth but it aint and it's just their false opinion on the matter.

I’m also Catholic, but I have a different take on this from Onesimus.

There is no formal Catholic teaching either that this is, or that this is not, a historical event.

And I think the Catholic perspective on this is that to focus on the historicity of this text is to focus on the wrong question. Our culture is hung up on the distinction between the natural and the supernatural, and is intensely concerned with the distinction between things that are explicable and things that must be miraculous, but that just reflects our preoccupations. The culture which produced this text, and the culture for which is was produced, made no distinction between natural and supernatural - everything was laid at God’s door - and was comfortable with the idea that the world was full of phenomena that they could not explain or account for.

There’s no doubt that God could make a donkey talk, if he chose. He could make all donkeys talk. (I refrain at this point from making a lame joke about politicians.) Once you accept that, the question of whether he did, on a particular occasion, make a donkey talk is of lesser significance. As can be seen from the rather dull things that the donkey says (it apparently never occurs to him to say “there’s an angel blocking the road”, which is something you might think deserved mention), and as can be seen from Balaam’s matter-of-fact reaction to the talking donkey, the point of this story is not that “Wow! Donkeys talk! How mighty is our God!”. The point is:

(a) the unusual circumstance of a talking donkey points to the great significance of the events being narrated; and

(b) the donkey is the embodiment of servility and slow-wittedness and stubbornness, and yet he discerns what Balaam can not.

Those points are made equally well whether the donkey actually talked, or the talking donkey is a literary device adopted by the author/compiler/redactor/editor of the text. Hence, the Catholic church has found no need to insist either that the donkey talked or it did not. But, either way, you bloody well better ask yourself why the donkey is talking!

PDN

God made a prophet out of an ass in order to make an ass out of a prophet.

ISAW

gawker wrote: »

So, I noticed a reference to a talking donkey in the Bible on another thread on boards.ie and could not help to google it.

Probably the A&a forum. Baalam's Ass and Talking snakes and reference to dragons and unicorns are usually used to suggest the Bible is silly. At the same time references to "paper tigers" by Mao or Marx's theoretical atheism.

Numbers 22:30

Now, I seriously am not trying to troll you all here. I just really have to ask: do you as a Christian believe a donkey talked?

PDN wrote: »

Yes, I certainly believe that God made a donkey to talk. It seems quite an easy thing compared to creating the universe out of nothing.

I don't think this is a necessary conclusion.

PDN wrote: »

And how does believing that God is powerful enough to work a miracle if He wishes equate to suspending all reason?

I don't think Christianity suggests God ever suspends reason.

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

"Balaam's donkey" is a story that I find very challenging. It's not that I can't conceive that God could talk through a donkey, a wall, a puddle, a burning bush or whatever other medium of his choosing. Rather, I find Balaam's initial reaction to his talking donkey (verse 29) to be a challenge up to the point of incredulity. I would have thought that "Arghhhhh!" would have been more likely.

I think you have to consider what the donkey represents not whether it talked.
I mean Wisdom and all sorts of other things are personified in the Bible.
Balaam was a magician.
Seven books refer to him.
Some call him the Judas of the Old testament.
I'm thinking as a quazi Don Quixote the donkey maybe was his Sancho Panza

Slav wrote: »

Numbers chapter 22 is not about talking donkeys or a human having an argument with an animal. It's about the conversation between God and Balaam. It does not matter whether you believe the literal donkey literally talked, or God made Balaam to experience some sort of a hearing hallucinations, or the donkey is a literary trope (e.g. donkey = Balaam's soul; BTW not only it resolves Fanny's confusion about the Balaam's reaction but also brings a whole new dimension to the story), or have no thoughts at all about the nature of that donkey's speech - in any case the message of Numbers 22 remains the same.

This would be closest to my interpretation.
It is a bizarre story from bizarre times!
An angel praises the donkey and not Balaam although Balaam was respected as a magician and later as a prophet. But he later reverts to opposing God and is killed in an Israelite raid in 31:8. He couldn't manipulate the Israelite god so he manipulated the Israelites instead with sex an false gods resulting in the death of 24,000 people (25:9)

The Israelites were embarking on a journewy into a land where sorcery and magic were WMD. god's spokesman Balaam is both a Magician and a pagan and the false gods and magic are eventually thwarted.

Peregrinus wrote: »

I

And I think the Catholic perspective on this is that to focus on the historicity of this text is to focus on the wrong question. Our culture is hung up on the distinction between the natural and the supernatural, and is intensely concerned with the distinction between things that are explicable and things that must be miraculous, but that just reflects our preoccupations. The culture which produced this text, and the culture for which is was produced, made no distinction between natural and supernatural - everything was laid at God’s door - and was comfortable with the idea that the world was full of phenomena that they could not explain or account for.

Also close to my interpretation.
Baalam is from this other land. the ass can be seen as the people who do the toil and (30) "carried" Balaam. The donkey is wise enough to see some of the truth in recognising the angel of the Lord but Balaam does not see it. Pagans can have some truth and decency in their unenlightened beliefs, as St Patrick discovered.

As can be seen from the rather dull things that the donkey says (it apparently never occurs to him to say “there’s an angel blocking the road”, which is something you might think deserved mention), and as can be seen from Balaam’s matter-of-fact reaction to the talking donkey, the point of this story is not that “Wow! Donkeys talk! How mighty is our God!”. The point is:

(a) the unusual circumstance of a talking donkey points to the great significance of the events being narrated; and

(b) the donkey is the embodiment of servility and slow-wittedness and stubbornness, and yet he discerns what Balaam can not.

It reminds me of the horse in Orwell's Animal Farm . I have never heard the atheists having a go at Orwell but the atheistic Stalinism banned Animal Farm and was the closest to Orwell's 1984

i would say the new pagan lands had people with some insight. It also had people like Balaam with more knowledge and skills than others but without insight or wisdom. Balaam eventually acquires this but decides to later use it for his own selfish reasons.

the Catholic church has found no need to insist either that the donkey talked or it did not. But, either way, you bloody well better ask yourself why the donkey is talking!

I prefer to concentrate on what the donkey represents and what the Israelites and the Moabites and elsewhere had to learn from that. Moses also didn't listen to god and disobeyed God (but didn't do it for selfish reasons) and because of that Moses never got to the promised land (27:14).

The basic lesson seems to be "There is a path. There is a plan. When you see it please follow it. There are consequences to following the wrong one."

Skyking

OH ,I believe it, one of the Torah Portions{week 40} is dedicated to this very subject
The Teaching of Balaam

http://lionlamb.net/v3/YAVOHHeisComing/2004/04
Balak
http://bereansonline.org/enews/5771-40.pdf

we tend to get and stay in trouble when we question why or the methods of delivery...

The Quadratic Equation

Skyking wrote: »

OH ,I believe it, one of the Torah Portions{week 40} is dedicated to this very subject
The Teaching of Balaam

http://lionlamb.net/v3/YAVOHHeisComing/2004/04
Balak
http://bereansonline.org/enews/5771-40.pdf

we tend to get and stay in trouble when we question why or the methods of delivery...

Shalom and Welcome to boards.ie

Skyking

The Quadratic Equation wrote: »

Shalom and Welcome to boards.ie

Shalom yourself and thanks

im invisible

I dont know, but if was wandering around a desert for 40 years, i wouldnt be surprised if i encountered a few talking animals...

wolfsbane

gawker wrote: »

So, I noticed a reference to a talking donkey in the Bible on another thread on boards.ie and could not help to google it. There verse is:

"The donkey said to Balaam, "Am I not your own donkey, which you have always ridden, to this day? Have I been in the habit of doing this to you?" "No," he said."
(Numbers 22:30)

Now, I seriously am not trying to troll you all here. I just really have to ask: do you as a Christian believe a donkey talked?

It's a simple question, and I really hope it is not taken as a dig. I just really need to know if people believe this. I googled it and found a document explaining to teachers (or homeschool teachers, not sure) how to explain the story to kids. They definitely told the kids the donkey really talked.

Do you believe this, and if so why? Or is it taken as an old legend trying to explain a sentiment rather than as literal truth? Thanks.

Yes, I believe it. I believe it because it is delivered as part of historical narrative, not the prophetic or poetical writings of the Bible.

To deny its plain sense gives licence to make any part of the Scripture mean anything. The Virgin Birth - is it just a metaphor? The resurrection of Christ - a reference to the continuing power of His example, rather than any physical return to life?

Honesty demands we accept the meaning proper to the genre. We may or may not believe what it says, but we cannot pretend it does not mean what it says.

******************************************************************
Romans 4:20 He did not waver at the promise of God through unbelief, but was strengthened in faith, giving glory to God,

gawker

Thanks for the honest replies everyone. I can't say I quite understand, but at least now I know where the Christian stance on it seems to lie.

Ciaran0

Is it definitely God speaking through the donkey? Does he actually say "It's me, your god, I'm just using this donkey." Are we to discount the possibility that it was merely a talking donkey? Or perhaps that all donkey are in fact capable of speech, they're just very quiet creatures.

Also, I much prefer the translation where it ends as ""Nay," he said."

wolfsbane

Ciaran0 wrote: »

Is it definitely God speaking through the donkey? Does he actually say "It's me, your god, I'm just using this donkey." Are we to discount the possibility that it was merely a talking donkey? Or perhaps that all donkey are in fact capable of speech, they're just very quiet creatures.

Also, I much prefer the translation where it ends as ""Nay," he said."

God was not speaking through the donkey. God enabled the donkey to speak its objection to mistreatment and in doing so point out the folly of Balaam:
2 Peter 2:15 They have forsaken the right way and gone astray, following the way of Balaam the son of Beor, who loved the wages of unrighteousness; 16 but he was rebuked for his iniquity: a dumb donkey speaking with a man’s voice restrained the madness of the prophet.

********************************************************************
Numbers 22:28 Then the LORD opened the mouth of the donkey, and she said to Balaam, “What have I done to you, that you have struck me these three times?”
29 And Balaam said to the donkey, “Because you have abused me. I wish there were a sword in my hand, for now I would kill you!”
30 So the donkey said to Balaam, “Am I not your donkey on which you have ridden, ever since I became yours, to this day? Was I ever disposed to do this to you?”
And he said, “No.”
31 Then the LORD opened Balaam’s eyes, and he saw the Angel of the LORD standing in the way with His drawn sword in His hand; and he bowed his head and fell flat on his face. 32 And the Angel of the LORD said to him, “Why have you struck your donkey these three times? Behold, I have come out to stand against you, because your way is perverse before Me. 33 The donkey saw Me and turned aside from Me these three times. If she had not turned aside from Me, surely I would also have killed you by now, and let her live.”