The theology of the balaam oracles: a pagan diviner and the word of god

is only the presupposition of a naive reader. The expression in Numbers

24:14, moreover, cannot be used to argue for the futurity of the oracles in

their import. For the words "in the days to come" are simply a later gloss,

based on a misunderstanding of the section, That Israel "at the end of days"

should oppress Moab, would certainly be a matter of extraordinary indifference

to Balak--the old Hebrews and the narrators of their history lived in their

world.¹

Consequently, it seems very clear to Mowinckel that the songs

presuppose for their understanding at no point any acquaintance with the

saga of Balaam and Balak--neither in the present form, nor in any form. They

can be understood well enough without acquaintance with the story. Hence,

there is no point of contact to the story of the entrance into Canaan; such

was only part of the poetic style. The illustrations are descriptive of Israel

as a settled agricultural people. The songs are artistic units.^2
1 Ibid., p. 248. ² Ibid.

79

Mowinckel then lists what he terms the unique elements whereby

would be to have the national self-consciousness and signal aspirations of

the Israel of the period, coupled to its political relationships to the neighbor-

ing peoples. (2) A second factor would be found in the old tradition of a real

Balaam ben B^ecor. Concerning this Balaam, there could have been a cycle

of sayings and anecdotes which were becoming known in written form as

well. The figure of Balaam is older than the songs, at any rate.

This Balaam would have been drawn into the songs as a genuine

“Seer” of the old Hebrew and North-Arabic type, a man who receives his

revelation from a higher power. Hence, Gressmann is quite false in claiming

that Balaam is described as a "prophet" of the later Israelite type (a nabi').

The expression, "the Spirit of God comes over him," is a form of mantic (and

magic), related to a thundering orgiastic cultus and piety, manifesting itself

in so-called "exalted ecstasy."¹

As to the fact that the speaker of these oracles, the Edomite

Balaam ben B^ecor, was not a father of one of the tribes; such lends some

objectivity to the blessings. This was thus a means of flattering the national

glory. How great must not the fortune-soul and the inherent blessing of Israel

be, when it forces even a person who is a representative of a strange and

defeated people to such inspired admiration!²

80

For these several reasons, Mowinckel regards Gressmann to

narrative. On the other hand, Mowinckel would agree with Gressmann that

the songs must be dated after David's reign over the nation Israel and his

conquest of Moab and Edom. Yet the songs seem to set forth Israel's domin-

lon as undivided and unweakened as Gressmann argued, and are, therefore,

older than the division of the realm after the death of Solomon (931 B. C.).¹

ment for the J songs. Mowinckel insists that the Balaam-Balak saga must be

younger than the two songs. The songs did not belong to the old traditions

of the entrance of the land of Canaan. The immigration was not really just

one solitary act, however, but a long and fluctuating history. In East Jordan

different Hebrew tribes were detached from one another and the borders seem

to have oscillated here and there for a long time. So, perhaps the passing

of time could allow for the formation of the "historical kernel" of the saga,

in which the Moabites (again?) penetrated northward, or else from the east

or southeast, and immigrated in the tracks of the Israelites. They would then

have been repressed by the Reubenites and the Gadites, and others. Gressmann

suggested the conquest of the Moabite land through Reuban and Gad as the

historical kernel of the saga.^3
1 Ibid. , pp. 250-51. ² Ibid., pp, 251-59.

³ Ibid., p. 251.

81

Mowinckel is very cautious in demonstrating the development

is not afraid to summon the sinister and demonic power of the curse against

Israel. The saga cannot have originated before there was a united Israel

Moreover, there had to have been a united immigration legend in Israel.

So the actual background is to be sought in a warlike confrontation between

Moab and a united Israel.

Now he admits that we do not know strictly when there was the

beginning of a united Israel in the full political sense, but avers that it

cannot have been before the time of Saul and David. We do not know any-

thing about Moses and his time that is positively reliable, he remarks. We

are probably conducted to the time after Saul, for these reasons.¹ On the

other hand, there may have been legends about a king Balak before the

legends developed about Balaam. The possibility remains that the figure

Balak is older than the Balaam-Balak saga.

For an historical occasion, however, it is necessary to turn to

a time when an enemy existed who was to be feared. The presumption of the

saga demands this. Moab had become autonomous perhaps already under

Solomon but at any rate after the division of the kingdom. Omri had con-

quered it again, probably only after severe battles, and at any case he
¹ Ibid., p. 252.

82

annexed to his realm a part of the land between the Arnon and the Zarad.

in these battles the Moabites gave no pardon, according to the description

in the inscription from Mesha. Certainly in the eyes of the Israelites, this

was a curse deed against it and its land.

Israel made the attempt under the kings Joram and Jehoshaphat

to chastise the mutinous vassals, but were repulsed. They received a

frightful impression of the effective curse of the Moabites. It was at this

time that the criticism of Moab would have reached such a point among

Israel that the interpretation of the formation of the Moabite race as incestuous

would have developed (see Genesis 19:30-38). Further, the Israelite folk-

etymology has read in a meaning "arrogant, enemy-of-God-noise" into the

archaic poetic name of Moab, "sons of Seth" (b^ene set). They formed

instead a synonym bene sa'on, "sons of the noisy arrogant." In this con-

nection it is of no consequence what the name set might have as etymology.

Jeremiah 48:45 rather gives the new interpretation: "And it has devoured the

forehead of Moab / and the scalps of the riotous revelers." Here NOxwA yneB;

stands, and sa'on combines in it the meanings, "(mutinous, arrogant) noise,"

"decline," "noise," etc. Hence, we have here a folk-etymology of the name

twe.^2
1 Ibid., pp. 253-54. ² Ibid., p. 254, n. 3.

83

Mowinckel then says that the historical situation is now before

light of this historical situation, we find one line in which they are given in

a nuce. The expression to which he refers is, "Blessed is he who blesses

you, but cursed who curses you." Here we have the fact that an opponent

of Israel, even the curse-worthy Moab, once made an attempt to curse the

people, but itself became subjected to the curse.¹

The legend-moulder had before him the two older songs and he

understood these to have brought about the unwanted result of an unsuccessful

curse-attempt of an evil enemy. Now he had to take this interpretation and

form out of it an expressed aetiological history. The lesson which his fantasy

would state was to give Balaam occasion to utter two blessing oracles. In

other words, he built up the narrative, using two chief scenes. But this is

not to say that the intended curse for Israel dropped out and happened as a

curse to Moab of itself, but rather that this was obviously the work of Yahweh.

Hence, the narrator has the Spirit of Yahweh fall on the seer.²

The addition of the animal motif was to develop dramatic tension

and to retard the movement of the story. In the original story it was Yahweh,

not an angel of Yahweh, who withstood Balaam. The animal comes forth as

84

a helper of man and sees the danger, which the legendary hero does not see,

allels in legends and fables of all times and peoples. Thus in the conception

of primitive man there was the view that in many respects an animal is superior

to man and more wise than he.¹

Yet even beyond this story, as Gressrnann points out, in the

pure form there was not a deity but a rather hostile demon whom the clever

animal discovered and revealed to its lord. The transference to Yahweh of

such is extraordinary [!] Three times he stations himself in the way of

Balaam, and three times the donkey turns aside when it saw him. On the

third time he made Balaam recognize him and turn back.

The question remains, Mowinckel asks, Was the incident of

the speaking of the ass necessary? That the speaking of the animal belongs

to the forelying legendary motif of the narrator has been suggested. But the

point is that Yahweh cannot be revealed by an animal. He must reveal Him-

self. The narrator has thus even rationalized the legendary motif: It was

Yahweh who opened the mouth of the animal in this exceptional instance.²

We are concerned, therefore, with one of the anecdotes which

was a part of the Balaam folk-saga. This was one of the elements which had

made him one of the folk heroes, a famous celebrity. The narrator took the old

account of the demon and the speaking animal and transferred the story to

Yahweh. Further, the narrator could have let Yahweh tell Balaam immediately
¹ Ibid., p. 257. ² Ibid., pp. 257-58.

85

that he should bless the people, but he does not do that. He rather uses the

Then he could let Balak call Balaam a second time, and in that instance not

hinder him from his trip.

Hence, Mowinckel postulates that the Balaam-Balak saga has

become composed of older sagas and anecdotes. The time of the composition

was perhaps under the Omrides, in the time of acute opposition between

Moab and Israel. The older materials were transformed. The songs and the

saga were fused into the same narrative, though they had entirely independent

origins. In contents, there is the stamp of legend. But when it begins to

be related to the historical peoples and a definite historical situation, it

becomes saga.¹

Section seven² of Mowinckel's treatment of the Balaam saga

has to do with the E variant which is used to reshape the J materials. The

variants of the saga which are narrated by the Elohist build entirely and

fully on the Yahwistic materials. But in the E reshaping there is the influence

of a later period in terms of the conception of God and also in other ways of

thinking.

The E variant retains the two trips of Balak after Balaam and

the two blessings that were given instead of cursings. But E varies from

J in that E does not let Balaam speak the two blessings of his own initiative.

86

E has also abbreviated significantly the introductory part in which the episode

spiritual and lofty conception of God in the later period.^l

Balaam is transformed by E as well. He now becomes a man of

God. E has Balaam immediately relating each time that the concept of reward

meant nothing at all to him. But with the loss of the action-slowing motif of

the donkey, E had to use other means to slow down the story. The elements

he uses are the ornamental details. In E there are festival offerings at the

arrival of Balaam. E has solemn cultic ritual preparations for the acts of

cursing: seven altars, secret meetings of Balaam with the deity, choice of

the appropriate places, etc. The use of sevens speaks of the Babylonian

influence during the Assyrian epoch of Judah. Further, in E there is a touch

concerning refined kingly etiquette: Balak shows the manner in which even

a king should honor a prophet.²

The most characteristic element in the E variant, according to

Mowinckel, however, is the religious. The folk-saga has become legend.

Balaam has now become the pious man of God, whereas he had been no more

than a professional seer. Now, in all matters, he waits for the command of

Elohim.

87

dream or semi-awake periods of revelation in the night. No longer is there

The disgraceful expedient of the donkey is dismissed.

So, Mowinckel summarizes, in the E variant there are no new

elements. Rather we are to see in E a "deforming" [read "demythologizing”]

of the J section under the influence of the religious way of thinking of the

later period.¹

E poems. He comments on the inherent differences between these songs as

against the songs of J. In the E songs it is entirely manifest, he says, that

they point directly to the saga in which they are encased. They are therefore

taken to have been composed from the beginning with the intention to build

the narrative.

He argues further that these two songs are dependent on the

two of J, and that they have appropriated isolated thoughts and expressions

from them. For example, the words in 23:9a, "I see him from the top of the

rocks, I behold him from the mountains," must be related to the words of 24:

17a, "I see him, but not quite now, I behold him, but not yet near." Other

similar comparisons are made between 23:24a and 24:9a; 23:24b and 24:8b.3

On the other hand, Mowinckel says that the poet of these newer

songs has left off the archaic expression "whisper of Balaam" that is found in

88

songs. In the time of E such an expression with the name of the

Other transformations in the E songs concern the "prophetic"

elements of the J songs. The hints of Agag and the prophecy concerning David

are lost. This is fitting, he argues, for such references would no longer be

appropriate. David was at that time a hero of the "days of yore." Edom and

Moab had long been independent, and Judah had in no way any grounded hope

to subjugate it again. So, too, the warlike and triumphal mood of the older

songs is softened in the younger. The image of the lion has become stereo-

typed.² Hence, he says that one finds here no concrete prophecies, no

consciousness of recently achieved large towns and acquired victories, no

concretely expressed hope to become lord of other peoples.

What is stressed in the E songs, then? Mowinckel says there

are two items. The first is the stress on the religious and cultural isolation

of Israel. It now has Yahweh in its midst and may hail him always with the

"cry-owed-the-king," In the telling phrase just cited, Mowinckel has the

occasion to turn to a favorite topic of his, the enthronement festival. He says

that in this cry the poet points to a religious festival that was in the later

period of the kings the chief cultic festival. This was the festival in which

the king, representing Yahweh, moved toward his holy shrine in solemn pro-

cession. As he mounted the throne he would be honored by the "rejoicing-

89

owed-the king” of his people. He then refers the reader to his Psalmstudien.¹

cerning the king in the E and J songs: "One notices that Balaam in E cele-

brates the kingdom of God, in J on the contrary the human kingdom."² A

second characteristic of these songs, according to our writer, is in the

emphasis they place on the distinction between the prophets of Israel and

the mantic of the heathen peoples. The latter were practitioners of sorcery

and demonic arts.³

The presentation of God in the Elohistic songs is plainly later

than that of the Yahwist songs in Mowinckel's estimation. In the Yahwist

songs, God is presented in a bull-image, or, with the horns of the wild ox,

a representation which the Israelites had received from the Canaanites. In

the songs by the Elohist, on the contrary, God is all such as is opposite to

man. He is said not to lie, which shows a wiser reflection of God than that

which obtained at the earlier period. Moreover, the distinction Mowinckel

makes between the two groups of songs vis-a-vis the horn image, is possible

only because our author has excised 23:22 from its setting, insisting that it

was an intrusion from 24:8.⁴

All of the above, he avers, shows now unequivocally that the

songs of the Elohist originated from a much later time than those of the Yah-
¹ Ibid., p. 267, n. 3. The reader may now consult his work in

English, The Psalms in Israel's Worship, trans. by D. R. Ap-Thomas (2 vols.,

bound as one; New York and Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1962).

² "Der Ursprung," p. 267. ³ Ibid. p. 268. ⁴ Ibid., p. 269.

90

wist. The tendency to religious isolation and to the unique religious charac-

Book of Deuteronomy. Since, Mowinckel suggests, the Book of Deuteronomy

comes at the earliest in the second half of the seventh century, the viewpoint

of the E songs also must be from that period. A comparison might be made, he

says, between the view of prophecy in the E songs and that in the (late) chapter

18 of Deuteronomy.^l

The allusion to the enthronement festival with the homage it

gives to Yahweh as king points the same direction. Another indicator of date

is to be seen in the use of the word "upright" in 23:10. This occurs in the

so-called Song of Moses of Deuteronomy (cf. 32:15), which can be dated

from the last years of the monarchy at the earliest. Since the song of Moses

is late, so is the song of Balaam. An even later use of the term is to be found

in Deutero-Isaiah (44:2). We cannot date the songs too late, he cautions.

For in them there is no trace of the great catastrophies of 598 B. C. and 587

B. C. Also, there is no concept of the oppressive consciousness of the sin

find the condemnation of the fathers that is so characteristic of later Judaism.²

and songs in the following manner. The two songs in chapter 24 are old, even

older than the saga itself. The two songs in chapter 23 are much younger than
^l Ibid., p. 268. ² Ibid., p. 269. ³ Ibid., pp. 269-70.

91

the others, as they are composed out of the saga, and are dependent on the

Elohist.

and analysis and criteria. Secondly, one may see that the songs transmitted

by the Elohist come from the time of the end of the Assyrian period (approxi-

mately contemporary with the Song of Moses, the Blessing of Moses, and

perhaps Deuteronomy). Lest the reader receive the impression that by "E"

Mowinckel has in mind one specific individual, he states in some detail that

he views "E" as a complex process. "The entire process is what we denote

by the ideogram 'E.’”¹ As for the use of "Yahweh" in 23:21 (an E text),

our author says that this proves nothing, for E uses the name "Yahweh" not

infrequently.²

astray, he says, from all that has gone before, if one fixes the beginning of

the E songs and the E variant in the time of the awakening of the national-

religious self-assurance under King Josiah (whom he dates at B. C. 640-609).

Our evaluation. --Our evaluation of the foregoing material must

begin with an apology to the reader for having taken so much of his time with

92

this antiquated article by Mowinckel. The writer may only suggest that

though” the original. Nevertheless, it was deemed necessary to survey

Mowinckel's work to this extent. This study from more than forty years ago

relates not only to the Balaam narrative, but to an entire methodological

approach to Old Testament studies, in which the Balaam narrative is a test

case, serving "als demonstratives Beispiel."

The so-called "Documentary Hypothesis," which received its

formal exposition in the writings of Wellhausen, Driver, et al.,² is felt

to be demonstrated as "beyond all doubt" by Mowinckel in the treatise sur-

veyed above. His second sentence states confidently this operating pre-