(overview how to reconstruct Num.22 ;
a most interesting read – don’t worry !)
 

 
  … previous exercise was important to have the proper background for these chapters 22-24 ,
  that the enemies are ‘the Ammonites’ and the likely theme is ‘the scroll’ , because the text is
  extremely corrupted and her buildup totally inverted by Esau 
 
  Revelation 2:14
  ofcourse Christ never mentioned ‘Balaam’ thére but Esau saw a related theme and changed
  it into a Balaam connection — and only because we know that the Pergamum church was
  about the Reformation we could expect that the Balaam story is ‘about the scroll’ , as well ;  
  and if we search for candidate roots in this 22 the first one we find in line 5 : Balaam is said
  to come from the town of ‘Pethor’ supposedly 400 miles away at the river Euphrates ,
  but because that makes no Sense whatsoever , the root (-PHEthoR) suspiciously much
  resembles ‘scroll’ (-sEPHeR) — and remember a similar corruption in the Jer.13 chapter ; 
 
  this 22 : Esau’s plausible deniability :
  … most christians remember this story as “a talking donkey” and “the bit silly seer Balaam
  that was asked to go curse Ishral”, right , forgetting how extremely unlikely this scenario is
  since God himself protected the people : therefore nothing from outside cóuld hurt them !
  only a theme from themselves could ,
  akin to how Adam has played the role of traitor – and see what incredible damage he did ! 
 
   a completely inverted story :
  reading through this chapter but remembering the above we need to reconstruct her :
  — is it not much more likely that the Ammonites pretended to be ‘friends’ ?
  — and that they did not “send for some heathen seer Balaam” who was living far away ,
       but instead ‘went into the Ishralite camp to lure a priest of Levi ?
  — and that this priest “Balaam” (or whatever his real name) was spiritually rather Blind ,
       so that he could not discern between the voice of God and a false deity (lines 9-20) ?
  — and therefore he went with the imposters ,
       while taking the scroll to the enemy ?
  — but God would protect his words – hence the angel with drawn sword blocked him ?
       how does this sound please ?
 
… in the intro page we posed that “after Adam’s fire ritual at mt.Horeb now it was Ammon’s turn” 
which is important because that context very much suppórts the above interpretation ;
since the text is so corrupt first we thought “that indéed they gave the scroll to their enemies” 
but that must be rejected because a) : the angel blocking him must have told what it’s about , 
and ofcourse b) : the actual corruption of the scroll happened much later (Alexandria 250 BC) ;
so that the difficult next chapters 23-24 must have been a kind of prophecy about that theme
                                                           

 
  … we still have some unresolved issues first :
a) the person ‘Balaam’ :
(line 5)
(KJV)  “[Balaq-]  sent messengers therefore unto Balaam the son of Beor to Pethor” 
… but remember : sending them into the camp ,
so it can have read : “Balaam (?) – a son of – beor=Aaron (?) (bouR=aRn)     +         [or : ‘a priest of – Levi’ ?] 
                                             (who was) Pethor·ward ward=over the scrolls”                          [‘a keeper of the scrolls’] 
                         — it’s unlikely that an Ishralite was called ‘Baal-am’
                              but since we can’t know what name then , we’ll have to stick with it ;
                         — a “son of Aaron (-the highpriest)” dóes make sense : though his eldest sons had sinned
                               by presenting the strange fire , and had died , he had two other sons ; while interestingly
                               the “spiritual blindness of Balaam” would support that this also was a son of Aaron ;
                               however this priest is not necessarily ‘bad’ considered the rest of the story , just ignorant ;
                         — the “over the scroll” : ofcourse it’s very possible that Esau deleted any ‘keeper of’ ;
                         — while ‘messengers’ may have been “spies” ,
                               for in the same time old-Ishral “espied the land of milk & honey” as proper theme !  
 
b) the Ammon spies pose as friends to Balaam :
(line 6)
(KJV)   “Come now therefore, I pray thee, curse me this people; for they [are]  too mighty for me:”
                 [the spies tell Balaam :] 
                 “and=therefore – come – please ! – now=with [+us]  , 
                 to curse=bless (!) – [..]  this=our – people , 
                 because – he=they (are) – the mighty=brothers (?) of – me=your from=people (mM=oM) ;
 
c) God said … Adam said … :
(lines 12-20)
… because the text shows differences as God (-ieue) and ‘deity’ (-alei) 
the intent may have been “that first God refused him to visit the Ammonites” 
but that the second time “the deity (=Adam) told him that it was okay to visit them” 
[as the spiritual blindness theme]  — and therefore later the angel blocks him while he was on his way ;       
 
d) a ‘donkey’ – or the scroll ? :
(line 20)
(KJV) “And Balaam rose up in the morning, and saddled his ass, and went with the princes of Moab.” ;
               … in Esau’s version the angel (Christ) blocking him “to not go curse the people” makes sense ,
               but now we know what it’s about , the main subject is missing here :
               “and – Balaam – rose up – in the morning ,
               and gathered – the she-donkey=scroll (‘NO match here’) ,
               and went – with – the princes=sons of – the moab=Ammonites” ;
               though “saddling + his donkey” séems okay it is a smart corruption ,
               since the scroll is the reason that the angel appears in next 21 !
but now we have a big problem :
now Esau made the subject “a donkey” here , then how can we know for sure whether in the next lines
indéed the original theme was ‘a donkey’            [=perhaps as underlining “Balaam’s spiritual blindness”?] 
or if he just continued his invention throughout the next lines ?
— the continuation may have been about “a sign” (-ath) instead of “a donkey” (-athn !) ,
— perhaps the donkey story was true
     but that she then also tálks ……. seems a bit too much ;                                                             [‘donkey’ – or not ?] 
— the donkey story itself is “too extensive” (from 23-33) , a full ten lines ,
     as completely out of proportion considered the main theme ;
— there is something corrupt with “three + times” (in 28, 32, 33) :
     it is ofcourse not about “the donkey turning away 3 times , therefore she was hit 3 times” ,
     while ‘times’ is “foot” here and the adjective ‘three’ is in front : so minimum it was tampered with ;
     the only “three” in the rést of the story is about “three times an altar erected” in the next chapters ; 
     so either Esau had that in mind — or it has said something else here (“three – signs” ?) ;
      
e) now the Angel blocks Balaam :
(line 32)
(KJV) “And the angel of the LORD said unto him, Wherefore hast thou smitten thine ass these three times? 
               behold, I went out to withstand thee, because [thy]  way is perverse before me:”    
               .. ofcourse He never said thát ;
               “this=I (ze=ani) (am) – the donkey=sign (!) (see above) of – smitten=IEUE (eki=eiue)      +
               [=to]  (ol=ol) – what=you (mE=athE)      +
               (because-) [+you]  three=took away (SHlsh=SHl) – the feet=scroll (Rgl=sphR) :  
               behold=but – I=you (will) – I=nót (Anki=lA) – bring (-it) forth – to the enemy=Ammonites ,
               because   [ … unknown still …]  
the section appears solid ;
– it makes sense that He says “I am the sign” — so the ‘donkey story’ loses even móre ground ! 
– also here “three + feet” was not only corrupt but also swapped ,
– the KJV term “adversary” shows as (-shthn) “Satan” as corrupt anyway ;
 
f) the Ammonites are angry that Balaam did not bring the scroll with him :
(line 36)
… most is Esau’s deflection since Balaq was right there upon the first available hill ! ;
(line 37)  
(KJV) “And Balak said unto Balaam, Did I not earnestly send unto thee to call thee? 
               wherefore camest thou not unto me? am I not able indeed to promote thee to honour?”
                “and – Balaq – said – unto – Balaam :
                (did) I – not – send=ask [+you]  (SHLch=SHL)     +                                                                                    [37 : sic !] 
               to send=bring – to=with you – [..]  the call=scroll (qR=dbR) – [=unto]  you=us ? ,
               to=so why – (did) you come – unto me=us – not=without [+him]  (La=bLi) ? ;
               ?=because (-now) – I=we (will) – not – (be) áble – to glorify – [+your]  truly=deity ! (AmEn=AlEi) ; 

 
                                                                                       intro to part II 
                                                                  what happened next ?
                                                  did they go ‘upon a hill’ — or ‘into a scribal room’ ?
 
  … line 37 bégs for the continuation “that Balaam is asked to write down (sections of-) the scroll” 
  instead of going up a high mountain to curse the people Ishral , but now we face a real problem
  since the text is so corrupt that finding a solid buildup is almost impossible   —
  2 + 1 events in next chapters 23-24 :
  two times “Balaam builds an altar” (-or whatever it wrote) followed by a speech ,
  but the third time “his eyes are opened” : implying that only then he curses the Ammonites ;
  so that the first 2 times he may have prophecied “the victories of the Ammonites”           [=scroll theme] 
  but the 3d time “that of the sons of Ishral” (and compare the end of Ex.17 !) ,
        
(line 38)
(KJV) “And Balaam said unto Balak, Lo, I am come unto thee: have I now any power at all to say any thing? 
               the word that God putteth in my mouth, that shall I speak.”
               “[=but]  – Balaam – says – to – Balaq :
               behold ! , I (-myself) – (have) come – to you – now :
               (am) I – able=not (AkL=LA) – able – to speak=write down (dBr=kthB) – anything       +
               [w/ swapped :] 
               which – [.. 1x ..]  – [+our]  deity – the·word (=tampered) (has) spoken (DBR=DBR)      +
               in=as the mouth=scroll (PHni=sPHr) of – [..]  [+his]  speak=words (DBR=DBR) ?” ; 
 
(lines 39-40)
(KJV) “And Balaam went with Balak, and they came unto Kirjathhuzoth. And Balak offered oxen and sheep, 
               and sent to Balaam, and to the princes that [were]  with him.”
               “and – Balaam – went – with – Balaq
               and – they came – (to-) the huzoth=sanctuary (chtst=mqdsh) of the city ,
               [=where]  – Balaq – sacrificed – cattle=fire (‘no match’) – [=to]  the flock=adm-man (‘Adam’) (tsan=adm) ;
               [=while]      +
               Balaam – sent=lodges – [=by]  the princes – that (were) with him ;  
that makes sense :
since the whole enterprise of Balaq had to be sanctioned by / connected to Adam ! ,
while he already appeared in this chapter as “the deity that spoke” ;
we don’t know ‘what city’ but it even may have been their capitol Rabbath ;
 
(line 41)
(KJV) “And it came to pass on the morrow, that Balak took Balaam, and brought him up into 
              the high places of Baal, that thence he might see the utmost [part]  of the people.”
               “and it happens – in the morning – [=that]  Balaq – took=calls (iQch=Qr) – Balaam ,
              and brings him (no ‘up’) – (to-) the high place=room (‘place’!) of the baal=scribes ,     [2x no match] 
              [line continues in next 23:1] 
              [corrupt addition :]  and·he-is-seeing from·there outmost-part-of the·people ;
… here ,
– ofcourse “he calls him” for he was in a separate place (confirming 40) ,
– though ‘high places of Baal’ does not match “scribal room” it MUST have been intended 
     also because of the sanctuary and the offering (-making no sense in KJV) ; 
 
          … imagine that bunch of hateful Esau scribes in Alexandria 250 BC ,
          sitting together in their library to start their corrupt Septuagint – then reading this
 
 
 
                                                         continued in Numbers 23     >>>