QT 10 Apr 12, If I wouldn't do it if there was no money involved, then quite probably my motives are wrong

Num 22:36-38 (NIV) When Balak heard that Balaam was coming, he went out to meet him at the Moabite town on the Arnon border, at the edge of his territory. 37 Balak said to Balaam, "Did I not send you an urgent summons? Why didn't you come to me? Am I really not able to reward you?"

38 "Well, I have come to you now," Balaam replied. "But can I say just anything? I must speak only what God puts in my mouth."

NOTE: The reaction of the king and the conversation gives us insight in Balaam's error. First of all, the king is upset that Balaam didn't move more quickly (jump when he called). Balak is used to that treatment as a king, and Balaam in the past has responded according. Secondly his question, "Am I really not able to reward you?" gets at the heart of the issue. Balak paid handsomely for his services. Balaam liked the money he made off of his "gift." Balaam doesn't really respond to Balak, probably because he had been rebuked by God, other than, "I'm here now" and "remember, I can only say what God gives me" (both paraphrased). Balaam is one in a long line of men (and women) who grew rich for their spirituality. They may have started off right, with sincere hearts and unquestioned motives, but the lure of money and the love it caused them to fall into a trap. As Paul writes to his disciple Timothy "People who want to get rich fall into temptation and a trap and into many foolish and harmful desires that plunge men into ruin and destruction. For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil. Some people, eager for money, have wandered from the faith and pierced themselves with many griefs." Peter also wrote of some so-called spiritual leaders, "They have left the straight way and wandered off to follow the way of Balaam son of Beor, who loved the wages of wickedness. But he 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." Peter recognized that it was a madness, this love of money, that causes us to consider evils and even to justify ourselves that it is okay.

When  money is involved, we need to reconsider our motives. Would I still take the action if I was not paid? Would I still take the action if I received only a living wage? By living wage, I am thinking of an amount that is not unreasonable and provides food and shelter but no more. If the answer is yes, then the action, whatever it might be, would seem to be safe. But if the answer is no, then there is a good chance that we may be falling into Balaam's error. Balaam would not even had considered Balak's proposition if it had not been for the money involved.