Balaam's Doctrine

Most Christians are familiar with the story of Balaam’s talking donkey. The doctrine or teaching of Balaam, mentioned in II Peter 2, Jude 1, and Revelation 2, is far less familiar. Briefly the story, found in Numbers 22-24 is as follows.

Balak , king of Midian wanted to prevent Israel from conquering Midian. Since he didn’t believe his army was sufficient, he offered riches and prestige to Balaam if he would pronounce a curse against Israel. Balaam wanted the rewards, so he distorted what God directed him to do, leading to the incident in which his donkey spoke to him.

In Numbers 22:5 Balaam was directed to speak only the words God told him. The first two attempts to please Balak by cursing Israel, Balaam sought what God directed him to say. The third attempt, Balaam didn’t bother to ask God, apparently assuming he knew what God wanted. The Spirit came on him in Numbers 24, and he gave a prophecy of the future.

Midian sent their women into Israel’s camp to tempt the men to sexual sin, resulting in the death of twenty four thousand of Israel in Numbers 25. Numbers 31:16 credits Balaam with having taught the Midianites to cause Israel to sin. While there is no evidence of his having deliberately told them to do so, in his statements in Numbers 23, he went beyond what God had told him to appease Balak, and explained that Israel was blessed because God found no sin in them. The Midianites inferred that If they could cause Israel to sin, God would curse them. Balaam’s doctrine was that it was okay to change God’s word a little to accomplish his own purpose.

Each of the New Testament references to Balaam warn of the danger of his doctrine, associating him with other false teachers. The church at Thyatira is said to have those who believe that doctrine in it, echoing II Peter 2. That doctrine is exhibited in various other doctrines in our day. To illustrate the pervasive and insidious nature of the doctrine, I’d like to look at several prevalent doctrines that have resulted in our day. It is probable you have been exposed to one or more. Each starts with a scriptural statements, but changes them by adding to, detracting from or modifying meanings of words to accomplish some human goal.

One example is the teaching that if you give, God will give more back, based on Luke 6:38. They neglect to warn that Proverbs 22:6 says that giving to the rich will cause a man to be poor. Giving must be properly directed.

We hear a lot about praying “in Jesus’ name”, that if you use those words, God must give what you ask, based in John 14:14. The teaching ignores what praying in Jesus name means, that we pray by the authority he gives us. As a result they ignore I John 5:14 and Psalm 66:18.

Much teaching about the second coming focuses on trying to set a date when the rapture will occur, despite Jesus’ statement that it is none of our business in Acts 1:7. It has lead to much speculation and false teaching about events prior to and during the tribulation in an effort to galvanize Christians to action.

Many have used I Corinthians 11 as a basis for Requiring women to wear long hair or a hat to church, and forbidding men to wear their hair long, leaving out I Corinthians 11:16, which states that Godly preachers and churches do not set such standards. Such standards have turned away many weak Christians and unsaved people.

Modifying the meaning of the word disciple has enabled publishers to sell thousands of “Discipleship programs,” but it has also resulted in the failure to recognize the need for commitment for salvation, as described in Luke 14:26. It has resulted in distortion of Matthew 28:19-20 that we can only teach those who have made a specific commitment to individual teaching, with the result described in Hebrews 5:12, that most are not properly prepared. The original meaning of ‘to disciple’ was ‘to cause to become a pupil(believer),’ which is exactly what Matthew 28:19-20 says.

I Thessalonians 4:1-6 is sometimes used in an effort to counteract the growing divorce rate among ‘Christians’. The first five verses definitely relate to sexual purity. By including verse six, and modifying the meaning of defraud, they are able to promote a very drastic set of guidelines for betrothal and marriage. To do requires ignoring the statement in verse six that it goes beyond sexual behavior to defrauding in any other matter, such as James 5:4, I Corinthians 6:8, or Matthew 23:14 describe. It also results in perversion of what God teaches about marriage and distortion of the meaning of I Corinthians 7:3-5.

Each of these teachings is a result of the ‘Doctrine of Balaam’, that it is okay to change the Word of God a little. They are not the doctrine, just the results of it.