IS THERE SOMETHING IN THE BIBLE THAT PUZZLES YOU?
If so please EMail us with your question and we will do our best to give you a satisfactory answer.EMailus. (But preferably not from aol.com, for some reason they do not deliver our messages).
FREE Scholarly verse by verse commentaries on the Bible.
THE PENTATEUCH --- GENESIS ---EXODUS--- LEVITICUS --- NUMBERS --- DEUTERONOMY --- THE BOOK OF JOSHUA --- THE BOOK OF JUDGES --- THE BOOK OF RUTH --- SAMUEL --- KINGS --- I & II CHRONICLES --- EZRA---NEHEMIAH---ESTHER---PSALMS 1-73--- PROVERBS---ECCLESIASTES--- SONG OF SOLOMON --- ISAIAH --- JEREMIAH --- LAMENTATIONS --- EZEKIEL --- DANIEL --- --- HOSEA --- --- JOEL ------ AMOS --- --- OBADIAH --- --- JONAH --- --- MICAH --- --- NAHUM --- --- HABAKKUK--- --- ZEPHANIAH --- --- HAGGAI --- ZECHARIAH --- --- MALACHI --- THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW ---THE GOSPEL OF MARK--- THE GOSPEL OF LUKE --- THE GOSPEL OF JOHN --- THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES --- READINGS IN ROMANS --- 1 CORINTHIANS --- 2 CORINTHIANS ---GALATIANS --- EPHESIANS--- PHILIPPIANS --- COLOSSIANS --- 1 THESSALONIANS --- 2 THESSALONIANS --- 1 TIMOTHY --- 2 TIMOTHY --- TITUS --- PHILEMON --- HEBREWS --- JAMES --- 1 & 2 PETER --- JOHN'S LETTERS --- JUDE --- REVELATION --- THE GOSPELS & ACTS
By Dr Peter Pett BA BD (Hons-London) DD
This heading has its own unique importance as underlining the strong tradition of Solomonic proverbs. It is doubtful if anyone would have invented it unless it was considered to be true. It serves to confirm that we can rely on the previous headings. And as we have seen they are remarkably confirmed by comparison with other wisdom literature. From these we find that Proverbs is constructed precisely as we would expect if Solomon caused it to be written. And there are no solid grounds for denying it.
Heading (25.1).
25.1
This new subheading, with what follows, was clearly added to the Solomonic material in the days of Hezekiah (c. 716-686 BC). Hezekiah’s reign was a time of great religious zeal (2 Kings 18.3-6) and a new spirit of independence. The Psalms of David and Asaph were brought into prominence (2 Chronicles 29.30), and it is precisely the time when we would have expected a renewal of interest in the religious teaching of Solomon. ‘The men of Hezekiah’ are otherwise unknown. It claims to be putting together and copying out various proverbs of Solomon (from either oral or written sources), and it demonstrates how numerous his proverbs were.. The verb strictly means ‘to cause to move’.
This collection of proverbs is divided into two:
SECTION 1 (25.2-27.10).
God, The King And His Subjects (25.2-7).
In this subsection God, the king and his subjects are seen in their order of status. Above all is God, hidden and unknowable except in so far as He pleases to reveal Himself (25.2a). Next come kings, the supreme authorities on earth, whose throne is to be a righteous one (verse 5b), but who are subject to God. And finally come their subjects, of whom the unrighteous are to be removed from their presence (verse 5a), and the remainder are to take a lower place and recognise their status and await the king’s promotion (verses 6-7).
The same picture is revealed in the New Testament. God is over all. The ‘powers that be’ have been placed there by God, who are there to establish righteousness, to punish evildoers, and to whom subjection must be given (Romans 13.1-7). And under these are the people, including Christians, who must respond accordingly. The same was true in microcosm of Abraham. God was over all. Abraham was prince of his family tribe (Genesis 23.6), to rule it righteously under God. His people, his ‘household’ (Genesis 14.14), were to be in subjection to him under God.
The status of kings in Israel/Judah was always, at least in theory, subject to the agreement of the people (1 Samuel 10.24; 2 Samuel 2.4; 3.21; 1 Kings 1.39-40; 12.1, 20), as Rehoboam found to his cost (1 Kings 12.3-20). Today we have a greater say in the choice of our rulers, and they can be more easily replaced, but the same principles apply.
The subsection can be presented chiastically:
Note that in A it is the glory of kings to search out matters, and in the parallel is a matter that he searches out. In B the heart of a king is deep, wide and unsearchable, and in the parallel, it is not for a man to discern it by putting himself forward and taking his stand among great men. Centrally in C if you take away the dross from silver you get a new, pure silver vessel, and in the parallel if you remove the unrighteous from before a king, you get a throne established in righteousness.
25.2
Notice the unusual (in Proverbs) use of ‘God (elohim)’ (previously only in 2.5, 17; 3.4) rather than YHWH. He is here the Creator Who rules over all, rather than the personal covenant God, YHWH. In 2.5 the idea was that the knowledge of the transcendent God was being made known through wisdom. In 2.17 it stressed that the woman was a foreigner. In 3.4 it was used in contrast with man to depict the heavenly as opposed to the earthly. Thus it depicts transcendence and universality.
The idea here is that God is far off and unknowable. He is the Creator (3.19-20; 8.27-29), enthroned in glory (Psalm 93.1-2, 4), Lord of the heights of the heavens and the depths of earth (verse 3a). He dwells in hiddenness, in deep darkness as far as we are concerned (1 Kings 8.12; Psalm 18.11 ff.; 97.2), although dwelling in unapproachable light (Psalm 104.2; 1 Timothy 6.16), which the darkness has to conceal when He approaches us. He does not reveal His hand except when he chooses to do so (Deuteronomy 29.29; Isaiah 43.8-10). His ways are basically beyond our understanding (Deuteronomy 29.29; Romans 11.33-36). He rules in His heaven of heavens, and His earthly throne was unapproachable, hidden from men behind a veil, approached once a year, and then only by His own special appointee after careful preparation. He was thus concealed (although partially revealing Himself in the hearts of those who love Him). He ruled through His appointed representatives, kings, priests and prophets which is why they were anointed, symbolising their separation to Him.
In contrast to God are kings. Note that there is only one God but many kings (notice that Solomon carefully avoided using the singular). It is their glory to search out matters on God’s behalf. They are here on earth with a responsibility to act as God’s representatives (Romans 13.1 ff.), to establish a righteous throne (verse 5b), and to keep an eye on things on behalf of God. The same is true of all His appointed representatives.
25.3
Following on verse 2 the idea is that in some ways the king’s heart is as unsearchable as that of God, because he reigns through the wisdom of God (8.15). Just as God is God over heaven and earth, is far above us, and is beyond being searched out, so is the heart of the king acting as His representative, when his wisdom comes from God (2.6; 8.15; 1 Kings 4.29-34). The king searches out matters, but cannot himself be fully searched out. No one can look into his heart, or understand why he does what he does, because he reigns through God’s wisdom (8.15). Indeed he has to search out God’s will and purpose by continual study of His word (Deuteronomy 17.18-20).
The picture is that of ideal kings who look continually to God and then carry out His will. Once kings fell from that exalted position they were soon searched out. It is not saying that kings are above being scrutinised, only that when acting in accordance with God’s instructions their ways may not be fully understandable. Unless they totally fail in their responsibilities they must be given the benefit of the doubt, for men cannot probe their inner thoughts and they are acting in God’s Name. In some ways it is true of us all. We must all live our lives in accordance with what God reveals to us. And in the end we must leave God to be the judge of the hearts and decisions of others (Romans 14.4, 10-11).
25.4-5
Acting as God’s representative the king has to establish his throne in righteousness by removing the unrighteous from his presence. As dross (impure elements) is removed from silver, by a complicated two part process involving the use of furnaces, resulting finally in the production of pure silver, which is then formed into a silver vessel, so must the unrighteous be removed from positions of authority, so as to result in a pure kingship, for a king is known by the quality of his counsellors. So will his throne, that is his rule from that throne, be established in righteousness. It will be firmly based in righteousness (as is God’s - Psalm 89.14; 97.2), watched over by righteous people. His rule will be fair and just, removing the wicked from his presence and upholding the righteous. It is such a king who is in mind in verse 3.
This is not a command addressed to anyone specific, but is simply a general statement without a specific addressee in mind. It is a general proposition.
25.6-7
This is addressed by the king to his subjects, and especially to his courtiers. Life at court, as indeed life elsewhere, was a constant jockeying for position. Each was seeking to obtain the highest possible position. But here they are advised not to put themselves forward in the presence of the king, seeking to attract his notice and suggesting that they are better than they are, even putting themselves in a position that should be occupied by the ‘great’, trying to give the impression that they are great. This will neither impress the king, nor be acceptable to his ‘great men’. Rather they should take a lower position, and wait for the king to raise their status by inviting them into a position of more prominence. That will be much better for them, both practically and emotionally, than that they should be forced to take a lower position in the king’s presence, suffering the humiliation of being humbled.
Jesus said something very similar about seeking precedence at a feast. He pointed out that it was better to start out by taking the lowest place, and then be invited up higher, than to take a prominent place, and then be asked to move to a place of lower status. He was seeking to teach a lesson about humility (see Luke 14.7-10). His words were probably a reinterpretation of this proverb.
The Right Use Of Words (25.8-15).
In this subsection we have proverbs dealing with the right use of words towards our neighbour (verses 8-10); towards those who need reproof (verses 11-12); in respect of our duty (verse 13); with regard to boasting (verse 14); and in dealing with rulers (verse 15). The first five verses (8-12) can be connected with our dealings with our neighbours, the next three (13-15) as being in respect of an envoy. But some of the verses (11-12, 14) also look wider, and should not just be restricted to these situations.
The subsection can be presented chiastically as follows:
B Debate your cause with your neighbour himself, and do not disclose the secret of another, lest he who hears it reviles you, and your infamy does not turn away (25.9-10).
Note that in A there is reference to hasty action, which presumably results in harsh words and a neighbour turned into an enemy, and in contrast in the parallel there is reference to long forbearance which results in a soft tongue, and a persuaded king. In B you have spread lies about your neighbour, and in the parallel a man spreads lies about himself. In C a word fitly spoken is commended, and in the parallel a trustworthy and wise envoy is commended (presumably because of the effect of his fitly spoken words).
25.8
The warning here is not to be too quick in going to court about a neighbour concerning something that you have seen. It may be that you have put a wrong construction on it. Rather you should make sure of your facts. For if you do not you might find yourself put to shame when what he did turns out to have an innocent explanation. You may then be unable to work out what to do next. You will have both made an enemy and made yourself look a fool.
The proverb contains an important warning against jumping to conclusions about something that you see which might turn out to have a reasonable explanation. It is always wise to make sure of your facts.
25.9-10
So rather than having a break up with your neighbour, or even possibly going to court (verse 9), it is better first to discuss your concerns with your neighbour. But whatever you do you should keep it between you and him, and not discuss the matter with others. For the one you reveal it to may well revile you when you lose, and you will then not be able to escape the blot against your name. By misrepresenting your innocent neighbour you will have gained yourself a bad reputation. In other words, if you try to put your neighbour in the wrong in the eyes of others before knowing the facts, it may well rebound on you.
Some take ‘he who hears it’ to refer to the one who hears the case, and utters scathing words against you in court (but this assumes something that is not stated for on its own the proverb has no clear reference to court action). The secret that you have disclosed is then what you saw, and your ignominy is a result of the summing up of the judge concerning those who falsely accuse people on insufficient evidence, or even the punishment brought on you for false witness against another.
25.11-12
If you have a reproof against your neighbour, (or anyone else), then go to him with carefully chosen words, not arrogantly or highhandedly, but in sweetness and reason. For such sweet and reasonable words of wise reproof will be like apples of gold in a silver setting (sweet to the taste but valuable, and apt and beautiful). It may also be that the fitting words are likened to apples of gold, and the recipient’s heart to the setting of silver. Both come together to form something of beauty. And wise reproof given to a responsive ear is like an earring of gold, decorating the ear and making it beautiful, or like a fine gold ornament, being something to be desired.
Jesus applied this thought to Christians when he told us to sort out our differences in private, and if necessary before two or three trusted witnesses, before finally taking the matter to the whole church, which was to be avoided if possible (Matthew 18.15-17).
25.13
One who needs to offer fitting words could be someone who is acting as an envoy on behalf of another, for by his fitting words he can achieve the purpose of his masters. Thus he will be to his masters as the refreshing coolness of iced water during the heat of harvest. (Compare the ‘cold waters to a thirsty soul’ in verse 25). The cold of snow refers to snow and ice which is obtained and stored for the purpose of cooling drinking water.
25.14
On the other hand someone who boasts of his gifts, when he does not possess them, (whether he is an envoy or not), is like clouds and wind without rain. Everyone is expecting refreshing showers, and nothing comes. He is like a damp squib, promising much and giving little. It is a warning against making too much of ourselves.
25.15
Words fitly spoken (verse 11) and great patience are needed by the envoy who has to persuade a ruler about something. But he is assured that if he speaks with a soft tongue, and in a winning way, he will eventually break through and soften him up (break through his hard shell) as long as he is gently persistent. These words could equally be applied to Christian witness.
Proverbs Concerning How People Behave Towards Others (25.16-24).
In this subsection the proverbs are in pairs. Apart from the first proverb they are about how people behave towards each other. The first pair are about not having too much of a good thing. The second pair are about falsity and untrustworthiness. The third pair are about something seemingly incongruous, singing (happy) songs to someone in distress, and giving a hungry and thirsty enemy food and drink. The fourth pair are about unpleasant words and behaviour.
The subsection can be presented chiastically as follows:
In A it is better not to have too much of a sweet thing, and in contrast in the parallel you should avoid having too much of a sour thing (a contentious woman). In B it is better not to force yourself on your neighbour unexpectedly, lest you produce dislike, and in the parallel you should not force unpleasant words on people unexpectedly, lest they become angry. In C the false witness metaphorically beats his victim with a war club, pierces him with a sword, and fires arrows at him, whilst in contrast in the parallel the righteous man feeds and supplies his enemy with drink and thereby metaphorically pours coals of fire on his head. In D putting confidence in an untrustworthy man (bgd) in time (yom) of trouble is incongruous, it is like having a broken tooth or a disjointed foot, and in the parallel singing songs to a heavy heart (in time of trouble) is incongruous like putting off clothes (bgd) in cold weather (yom) or putting vinegar on soda.
It Is Possible To Have Too Much Of A Good Thing (25.16-17).
These first two proverbs in the subsection warn that you can have too much of a good thing, the first referring to sweet things, and the second referring to not forcing yourself on a neighbour. They contrast with the final two proverbs in the subsection which refer to people you are better off having no contact with at all, the backbiter and the contentious (unsweet) wife.
25.16 ‘Have you found honey? Eat as much as is sufficient for you,
This proverb is essentially a warning against greed. On the face of it, it is advising you not to eat too much of oversweet things, on the grounds that they will make you sick. It is good advice on its own. However, Solomon might well have had other situations in mind, and be warning, ‘be careful, you can have too much of a good thing’.
The fact that the honey was ‘found’, no doubt unexpectedly (which partly explains the greedy overeating), demonstrates that this is honey from wild bees (compare 1 Samuel 14.26-27). It is doubtful if at this stage bees had been domesticated in Israel, although they had been in Egypt and among the Hittites.
25.17
In this proverb we have a concrete example of ‘having too much of a good thing’. It is a warning not to intrude too much into your neighbour’s house, lest he get sick of you and resent you. It is saying in effect, do not overdo your visits or outstay your welcome. Every man is entitled to a bit of privacy. It is often better to wait to be invited.
Two Proverbs Concerning Untrustworthy People (26.18-19).
These two proverbs deal with false witnesses and other unreliable people.
25.18
A man who bears false witness against his neighbour (his fellow-Israelite) is likened to a deadly weapon. He metaphorically beats his victim to death, pierces him with his sword, and targets him with his arrow. He is thus the equivalent of a murderer.
False witness was rightly seen as a heinous crime, punishable by the false witness receiving the sentence that he had intended for the accused. A false witness who speaks lies is an abomination to YHWH (6.19). He will not go unpunished or escape judgment (19.5, 9). The man who treats his neighbour so badly is the very opposite of the righteous man in verse 21 who treats his enemy well.
25.19
The second proverb of the two refers to the untrustworthy and unreliable man who makes promises but does not fulfil them. To put confidence in him in time of trouble would be like having confidence in a broken tooth, or a foot that is out of joint, ineffective and painful. He is best totally avoided. He may be a fair weather friend, or worse he may be a true friend who is totally unreliable, whose good intentions do not turn into positive assistance. Either way he should be avoided.
Two Proverbs Which Contrast Someone’s Reaction To Another (25.20-21).
In the first proverb we have the thoughtless reaction of someone who sings merry songs to someone when they are heavy hearted. In the second we have the good reaction of a man who gives food to his hungry enemy.
25.20
The previous proverb had to do with an unreliable friend in a day of trouble, now we have another example of an unreliable friend in a day of trouble, one who sings merry songs to his friend when his friend’s heart is heavy, in other words, someone who is thoughtless and insensitive. Notice that the two proverbs are connected by the use of bgd and yom (day).
It is clear that someone is singing joyous songs (compare Ecclesiastes 22.8) to a downhearted person rather than comforting ones, without having regard to how that person feels. This was in contrast to David who played, and possibly sang, to Saul when he was depressed (1 Samuel 16.23. Although note that Saul regularly cast his spear at David when he was playing). It is one thing to sing to someone when they have requested it, it is quite another to heedlessly inflict it on them when they do not feel like it (compare 2 Samuel 19.35; and see Psalm 137.3-4). Joyous songs as accompanying a heavy heart are seen as incongruous, as the illustrations make clear. No one takes off clothes because the weather has got cold. It would be incongruous and uncomfortable. No one applies vinegar to soda. It would be incongruous (it renders both useless for their purpose), and cause a bad reaction. In the same way singing merry songs uninvited at a time of distress is incongruous.
25.21-22
In contrast to the poor reaction of the man who sings merry songs to someone heavy of heart, is the man who gives food and drink to a needy enemy. Here Solomon tells us that if our enemy is hungry we should feed him. If he is thirsty we should give him water to drink. By doing so we will benefit our enemy, and earn YHWH’s approval and approbation. It is behaving in the very opposite way to the false witness who beats his victim with a war-club (verse 18). The probability is that the hope lying behind it is that the enemy will cease to be an enemy and become a friend.
We have earlier examples of such required conduct in 24.17, ‘Do not rejoice when your enemy falls, and do not let your heart be glad when he stumbles’ as YHWH will be displeased, and in 20.22, ‘Do not say I will recompense evil, but wait on YHWH and He will deliver you’. Compare also 24.29, ‘Do not say, “I will do so to him as he has done to me, I will render to the man according to his actions” ’. There is a Christlike spirit underlying these proverbs, which goes against the idea of reading what follows in anything but a positive way.
In feeding his enemy and satisfying his thirst he will heap coals of fire on his head. There have been a number of suggestions of what this means:
Whichever we decide on, by acting mercifully we can be sure that we will be rewarded by YHWH.
Two Proverbs Dealing With Hurtful And Unpleasant Words (25.23-24).
The first proverb is in respect of someone who passes on innuendoes and rumours secretly, talking behind people’s backs, and arouses enmity (verse 22). The second is in respect of a wife who is openly contentious. But what they both have in common is that their words are hurtful and damaging.
25.23
Just as a north wind brings rain, so does a sly and secret tongue, with its innuendoes and rumours, bring an angry face. In fact, in Israel, rain was expected to result from a west wind (1 Kings 18.41-46; Luke 12.54), while the north wind brought cold (Job 37.9). But wind from the west bringing rain was seen as friendly, for it watered the ground. On the other hand in Ezekiel 1.4 a whirlwind came from the north accompanied by a storm, which was presumably accompanied by rain. So the thought may be of a sudden and unexpected rainstorm, violent in its nature. This would then fit in with a secret tongue which produced a violent reaction, that is, a stormy face.
So the idea is that those who indulge in spreading innuendoes and rumours must expect to reap the consequences. They must expect enmity. In the chiasmus this proverb is paralleled with that of the person who continually calls unexpectedly on his neighbour, making him at last weary. Here the secret whisperer of innuendoes and lies is equally unexpected, and equally causes weariness and a bad reaction.
25.24
The subsection ends with a proverb which is the duplicate of the one in 21.9. It is a rather amusing proverb (but only amusing if you do not have a contentious wife). It visualises a man who is so affected by his wife’s arguing and nagging that he makes himself a home in the corner of the flat roof, regardless of the weather, using the parapet for shelter, rather than living inside with her. The point being made, of course, is of how unbearable such a woman can make life. The house is noisy (or ‘shared’) and he has no other escape. The word for ‘woman’ is not limited to a wife, which was probably deliberate in order to bring the message home to all contentious women.
Palestinian houses had flat roofs with parapets round them (Deuteronomy 22.8), often with grass growing on them (Psalm 129.6). They were approached by means of steps on the outside of the house. It was quite normal to use them as resting places, and even to sleep on them in the hot summers, hoping to benefit from any breeze. But it would not be done in all weathers as here. For here the poor henpecked husband makes it his permanent home. His wife is making his life unbearable. It is paralleled in the chiasmus with the one who finds honey and indulges to such an extent that he is sick. He has too much of a sweet thing. The poor husband here has too much of a sour thing, a sour thing which should have been sweet.
The Proverb provides a warning to parents to be careful of the kind of wife they chose for their son; to men to beware of what kind of wife they marry; and to women not to be continuously nagging and quarrelling. In 19.13; 27.15 the annoyance such a woman causes is likened to that of a leaky roof, continuing and difficult to avoid.
Good And Bad News (25.25-26.2).
This subsection has as an inclusio two examples of good news, the one of a message from a far country, the other of a curse which never arrives. In between we find examples of bad news, a righteous man who gives way before the unrighteous, men who are unrestrained in seeking their own glory, men who are unrestrained at all, and the idea of a fool who receives honour.
The subsection is split into three pairs of Proverbs: the first pair linked by water sources, the second pair by unrestrained people, the third pair by nature illustrations. The first pair contrasts the good news of an unexpected message from a far country, which gives hope, with the news of a righteous man’s failure to stand firm before the unrighteous which destroys hope. The second pair compares the lack of restraint of men who are out for their own glory, with the general lack of restraint of someone who is uncontrollable. The third pair contrasts an undeserved giving of honour, with the undeserved giving of a curse.
It can be presented chiastically as follows:
Notice that in A good news comes from a far country whilst in the parallel a causeless curse does not arrive. In B the righteous man who gives way before the wicked deserves no honour (he is behaving like a fool), and in the parallel a fool deserves no honour. Centrally in C certain men are unrestrained in seeking their own glory, and in the parallel they are compared with some who are unrestrained at all.
Two Proverbs Concerning Water Sources (22.25-26).
25.25
In days when travel was slow, and messages were conveyed over long distances by slow moving caravans, it was rare and unexpected to receive news of someone who was in a distant country. Often a loved one would become weary with waiting. It could even become a burden to them. So to suddenly receive good news on the arrival of a caravan, was like a weary and thirsty person unexpectedly receiving cold waters, a moment of extreme joy and satisfaction and hope.
Travellers would travel for miles drinking warm, stale water sparsely from their waterskins as the heat beat down upon them. What joy then to be unexpectedly provided with a source of truly cold water. Cold waters might be found by such weary travellers coming across an unexpected mountain spring, or by some hospitable wealthy person greeting the arrival of the weary travellers in a town by bringing them water cooled by snow (25.13), or kept cool in earthenware jars (a standard way of cooling and keeping water cool in a hot country. The earthenware absorbs the heat), or from a cool underground spring (compare Genesis 24.1-18). Such a moment was a moment of great pleasure and joy. Weariness fell away and thirst was satisfied. And so it was with the reception of good news from a far country.
25.26
In contrast with the cool water from a clear underground spring, is water which has become befouled by trampling feet (seen as a heinous crime by desert travellers), or the brackish or even poisonous water derived from a polluted spring (compare Exodus 15.23). Here this is compared with a righteous man who gives way before the unrighteous (either responding to their enticing arguments, or yielding to their pressure), and in some way compromises himself by falling short of what he knows his Lord requires. He should be a pure wellspring of water to many (10.11; 13.14; 18.4) but because he has compromised himself he can only offer men muddied water rather than cool, fresh water. Not for him the welcoming of weary people with cool, fresh water. He can only offer them brackish water, unfit to drink. He is despoiling both himself and others of life.
Two Proverbs Concerning Unrestrained People (25.27-28).
25.27
The consequences of eating too much honey were spelled out in 25.16. It has grievous consequences. Now this is compared with men seeking their own glory. That too has grievous consequences, first for others, but finally for themselves.
It is right to have reasonable ambition, but the picture here is of someone whose overweening ambition causes him to behave in an unseemly way. He is trying to obtain too much at the expense of others, and does not care whom he hurts. He thrusts people aside and tramples on them in his aim to get on. He forces himself before kings (25.6). But as with eating too much honey he will vomit in the end. By ‘overeating’ what was good (a desire to get on and achieve one’s potential) he will cause harm to others and himself. For turning good into evil can only result in finally facing the wrath of God.
In 25.2, 6-7 we learned that it was the duty of kings to search out what glory a man should receive, and the dangers of a man trying to search out his own glory. It is a reminder that we should wait patiently for our talents to be recognised rather than pushing people out of the way to get to the top.
Note On 25.27b.
We have in this clause a well known translation problem. RV translates as, ‘so for men to search out their own glory is not glory.’ This seems to give the right sense in terms of the first clause, but the problem is that there is no ‘not’ in the Hebrew text. It strictly reads, ‘searching out their glory is glory’ (rather than ‘not glory’), which does not make sense when compared with the first clause. RV does this on the basis that the negative in the first clause extends its influence into the second clause, which is something that does happen sometimes in Hebrew (e.g. Numbers 23.19a). But the cases are not exactly the same. There is no other example exactly like this. It is therefore a possibility, but no more.
Another possible translation using the Hebrew consonantal text is, ‘but the study of difficult things is glory’. The idea would then be that it is not good to eat too much honey, but that it is good to study difficult things. However, in this part of Proverbs a contrast between two clauses would be unusual. We would expect a comparison. The translation that we have given is based on a doubtful but possible meaning of the word cabowd relating it to cabed).
End of note.
25.28
A city that is broken down and without walls is defenceless, and open to the machinations of anyone who plans evil against it. And so is the one whose spirit is without restraint. He carries on heedless and regardless, never thinking that others might take offence or not like what he is doing, and retaliate accordingly. He is vulnerable because he never thinks of the consequences of his actions. He never thinks of the need for defence. Indeed, like the city with broken down walls he has no defences.
He may like the young man in the Prologue be the victim of uncontrolled lusts, making his way to the house of the enticing woman, and because he lacks wisdom, he has no defence against her wiles, and will eventually come to ruin (5.9-11; 6.32-35; 7.22-27). Or the young man who follows his compatriots into violent ways and theft who will find himself bloodied in the end (1.10-19).
He is possibly even worse than the man with overweening ambitions, who is also to some extent uncontrolled. But whilst the latter schemes his way, the unrestrained man rushes into everything without thought, ignoring the restraining influences of conscience and the advice and restraining hands of others (including his parents), and ends up making a mess of everything. Like the man with overweening ambitions he does not consider the consequences of his actions. In the end people will take advantage of his defencelessness and he will be brought crashing down.
But he is also a danger to others, for his actions can rebound on others. Thus they too might find themselves defenceless because of the consequences of his action. He opens all who associate with him to problems brought about by his uncontrolled ways.
Two Proverbs Illustrated From Nature (26.1-2).
26.1
One thing that above all is not seemly is that an unscrupulous man or an unrighteous man is honoured in the congregation of the righteous. The ‘fool’ is not what we think of as a fool. He is someone who refuses to allow God’s wisdom to affect his life. He rejects the fear of YHWH (1.29). In a godly society (the congregation of Israel), or in the church, honour and position are not due to someone like that. It would be a glorifying of unrighteousness. It would be as unseemly as a righteous man yielding to the unrighteous (25.26). Indeed it would indicate all the righteous yielding to the unrighteous. It is as unseemly as snow arriving in summer, or rain arriving at harvest time. Both can harm the crops and fruit trees. And the influence of such a man on the congregation of the righteous (even if he is rich) would be just as damaging. The decision for God’s people must be made by the godly (1 Timothy 3.2-13; Titus 1.7-8).
The fool is also someone who acts contrary to the wellbeing of his community. He is out for himself. To honour such a person would be folly indeed. Indeed it would encourage him in his folly. Both these consequences would be like snow in harvest or rain in summer, destructive of wellbeing. In 26.8 the honouring of a fool is seen as similar to binding a stone in a sling so that it cannot leave the sling. When the sling is used a lot of effort will be wasted for no purpose at all, because the sling is incapable of fulfilling its function. The same is true of a fool put in a position of honour. He is just a waste of time and effort or even worse.
26.2
The subsection ends, as it began, with good news. A man may curse another, or even a group of others, but if its cause is not just (it is without due cause) it will be ineffective. Sent out ‘into the air’, like a sparrow or swallow in flight, it will never alight. In other words, a curse in God’s name is only effective when the reason for it is reasonable, for God is the Moral Governor of the universe and He cannot be persuaded to act against righteousness.
Ten Proverbs Concerning Fools (26.3-12).
This subsection contains ten proverbs specifically related to the fool, that is, the unrighteous, godless man who has little concern for ethics, giving various warnings concerning the need to avoid such a one. It is, however, noteworthy that, before giving these various warnings about fools, the men of Hezekiah head the ten proverbs with an indication (verse 3), repeated at the end (verse 12), that there is yet hope for a fool if he is given a good beating. Thus hope for a fool acts as an inclusio for the subsection.
The subsection is presented chiastically as follows:
Note that in A the fool is given hope by beating him, answering his folly in such a way so that he will not be wise in his own conceit, and in the parallel this hope for a fool is hinted at, whilst for the man who is wise in his own conceit there is little hope. In B a warning is given against using a fool as an envoy, and in the parallel a warning is given against hiring a fool. In C a parable is useless in the mouth of a fool, and in the parallel it can be positively harmful. Centrally in D is the warning not to honour a fool or give him status and position.
26.3
This proverb and the one in verse 12 stand apart from the others in the subsection by not specifically warning against the fool. They open up for him a bit of hope. In verse 1 honour was not fitting for a fool. Here in verse 3 a beating is very fitting. It may turn him from his folly (22.15). It is one way in which to answer a fool so as to prevent him becoming wise in his own conceit (verse 5; compare verse 12). It is thus a satisfactory introduction to the question of fools. It declares simply that what is fitting for fools (unrighteous, godless, immoral men) is a good beating in order to bring them into line with the thinking of, and under the control of, the community. The illustration demonstrates that the aim of this beating is in order to control their actions. A horse is controlled and made useful by the use of the whip, an ass is controlled and made useful by the use of a bridle, and fools therefore need whipping into line in order to control them and make them useful citizens. What then follows demonstrates the bad effects of socially immoral people on society. It is therefore very important that they be controlled, and even possibly changed.
Western society uses different methods for controlling ‘fools’, for it has more resources than ancient society, where there was no police force and few prisons and no probationary service. Control had to be exercised swiftly by family heads, tribal heads, and finally the king. Punishment had to be short and quick for there was no alternative. It is, however, salutary to note that even in our day, whilst the Isle of Man used the birch it was free from hooliganism. So there was something to be said for the logic of the ancients (even if they often took it too far).
26.4-5
These two proverbs need to be seen together because they appear to be contradictory, although in fact they are clearly complementary. The first is saying ‘don’t respond to a fool by yourself talking and behaving like a fool. Don’t be dragged down to his level, otherwise you are just revealing yourself also to be a fool’. The second is saying, ‘make clear to a fool his folly, lest he continue as a fool because in his self-conceit he thinks that he is in the right and will continue on as a fool’. And one way of doing this was by a beating (verse 3).
So the difference between these two proverbs lies in the approach being taken. If we counter his antisocial behaviour by merely suggesting that he will be materially better off taking another course, and simply leave it there, without bringing home to him the wrongness of his ways, we confirm him in his world view, and if we are not careful begin to think that way ourselves. We are accepting and confirming his viewpoint, and could ourselves eventually become lax about morals. What we have to do is bring home to him that his behaviour is antisocial, is morally wrong, and is contrary to both God and man. The first will simply provide a temporary respite, and confirm him in his view that self-interest is the criteria by which he should judge his acts. If we accomplish the second it will have a permanent effect. He will begin to look on things on the basis of moral right and wrong, Basic to this is the idea of the re-education of the offender. We have to rescue him from being a fool in his whole outlook.
26.6
We now have a warning against using a dishonest and unreliable man as an envoy. Such an envoy not only carried the message, but also argued the sender’s case. (He had no way of getting in touch with the one who sent him during the negotiations). It is thus asking for trouble if you choose an unreliable man as your envoy. It is like cutting off your feet, in other words doing something which prevents your genuine message getting through. Whilst we have our feet we could deliver it ourselves. If we cut our feet off no message will get through. By choosing an unsuitable messenger we have ensured the same effect, we have similarly prevented our message from getting through.
‘Drinking in damage’ may refer either to drinking to a stage of drunkenness, or drinking something that makes us unwell, or even poisons us. Someone in those situations would be totally unsuitable for, or incapable of, properly delivering messages. Using a dishonest and unreliable person as a messenger would have the same effect. The message would not be delivered properly. Alternately 4.17 may be in mind where fools ‘drink the wine of violence’, which parallels ‘eating the bread of wickedness’. The idea could then be that all that such an envoy will produce is war, not peace. Thus by sending him you are inadvertently starting a war.
Note the connecting link between this proverb and the next. Here there is a cutting off of the feet, in the next there is the lameness and uselessness of the legs.
26.7
Legs that hang loose because they are useless mean that the lame man has no use of them. What should accomplish something, accomplish nothing. They are useless for the purpose. So is a parable or proverb communicated by fools. The fool is unable (or unwilling) to communicate its message properly. It is left hanging in the air. He twists it and interprets it to suit himself. So the parable is useless, and achieves nothing of its intended purpose. Jesus Himself warned that whilst His parables had a clear message for those whose eyes were opened by God, to those whose eyes were closed (because they interpreted them as fools) the parables cause spiritual deafness and blindness (Mark 4.11-13). This and the following proverb (verse 8) are linked by the idea of failing to accomplish one’s purpose.
26.8
The purpose of putting a stone in a sling is in order to sling it. If you bind the stone in the sling so that it is firmly attached, you will not achieve your purpose. Whilst it will prevent the stone from falling out prematurely (which would be the purpose of doing it), you may whirl the sling as much as you like but the stone will stay in the sling. It would be ludicrous. It is equally ludicrous to give a dishonest and unreliable person status or an honoured position of authority. You will accomplish nothing of your purpose. Instead of whizzing on his way fulfilling his purpose, he will be tied down by self-interest, doing his own dishonest or selfish thing.
There was a similar warning against giving honour to a fool in verse 1, where it was seen as unseemly. Here it is seen as ridiculous.
A sling was a long thin piece of leather or other material which was widened in the middle. The slinger held both ends so that the wide part hung loose. The stone was put in the wide part and the slinger then held both ends and whirled the sling around his head, before finally letting go of one end. The stone then whizzed away to its target. Expert slingers could achieve remarkable accuracy. David could aim for, and hit, the forehead of Goliath (1 Samuel 17.49). Compare the seven hundred left-handed chosen men who could sling a stone at a hairsbreadth and not miss (Judges 20.16).
In the church if we give status to the wrong people, at the best we will accomplish nothing, at the worst we can cause real harm. Had the church heeded this proverb much of its tragic history might not have happened. Instead it found itself mesmerised by personalities.
26.9
This verse parallels verse 7 in that both refer to parables in the mouths of fool. It interlinks with verse 9 in that both refer to being wounded. But whereas in verse 7 the parable in the mouth of a fool (a self-interested, unreliable man) lost its real meaning, here it is so badly misinterpreted by spiritual drunkards that it causes deep pain, both to themselves and to others. No parables have been more distorted in their meaning than the parables of Jesus by unscrupulous or unwise interpreters.
26.10
One essential for an archer was that his arrows did not hit and wound or kill the men on his own side by ‘friendly fire’. Here the thought is of an archer who lets loose his arrows indiscriminately regardless of whether it is at friend or foe. By his carelessness he is a menace to those whom he should be protecting.
In the same way a man who employs a self-interested, unreliable man, or someone off the street whom he knows nothing about, who is just passing by, will cause hurt to those who rely on them because he hired them. Because these people represent him, others will trust them and rely on them to their hurt. If he uses them as envoys they will just harm relations between him and those to whom he sends them, something which could cause real damage. An envoy needs to be reliable and to know his master’s mind.
Sadly church history is full of situations where unreliable and self-interested men were given positions of authority, bringing harm both on the reputation of the church, and on those to whom they were sent.
26.11
Whilst in ancient days dogs were trained for hunting, to act as watchdogs (Isaiah 56.10) and to assist in herding sheep (Job 30.1), when spoken of in Scripture it is mainly as the wild dogs which roamed the streets acting as scavengers (1 Kings 14.11; 21.23-24), or gathered in packs outside towns for the same purpose. They would often need to be driven off with staves (1 Samuel 17.43). One of the disgusting habits of such dogs was to vomit up unpalatable things that they had eaten, and then go back to their vomit and lick and even eat it.
In the same way a fool often returns to his own folly (his acts of dishonesty, selfish greed, and harm) and repeats it, thereby revealing himself as disgusting. That is what he is, and that is what he reveals himself to be. One New Testament example of a fool returning to his folly (citing this verse) is that of those who have professed to become Christians, becoming free from the entanglements of the world, only to return to unbelief and become caught up in them again (2 Peter 2.20-22).
26.12
This subsection on folly ends with the example of someone who is even more foolish than a fool. And that is the man who is wise in his own conceit. He is so sure that he is always right, and he acts accordingly. He never listens to advice or to reproof (1.22-23, 25). He goes on his way regardless. For such a man there is little hope. Even a beating will not help such a man (verse 3). He will simply claim that he is being made a scapegoat.
The indication that there is hope for a fool looks back to verses 3 and 5. The purpose of beating him with a rod was precisely in order to turn him from being a fool (22.15), and to stop him from becoming wise in his own conceit, at which point he would almost lose hope. According to 27.23-24, however, the hope is not very large.
The Sluggard (26.13-17).
One of those who is wise in his own conceit (verse 12) is the sluggard (verse 16). He is confident that his antisocial attitude is the correct one, and uses specious arguments in order to bolster his case. But the real truth is that he is too lazy to exert himself. We were introduced to him in the Prologue where his love of sleep would lead him into poverty (6.6-11; compare 13.4; 20.4), and like the fool (verse 6) he is dangerous to use as an envoy (10.26). Here the emphasis is on his folly and his lethargy. Yet Solomon had hope for him for he called on him to look to the ant and be wise (6.6).
The subsection can be presented chiastically as follows:
Note that in A the sluggard gives his specious arguments, and in the parallel he is wise in his own conceit. In B he is weary in his bed, and in the parallel he is weary even when he is eating, almost too exhausted to bring the food to his mouth.
26.13
A feature of the sluggard is that he tries to find weak excuses for his behaviour. Here he claims that he cannot go out and work because there is a ferocious lion roaming the streets. How foolish he would be to risk his life just in order to work. Far better to remain safely in bed. He finds any excuse to avoid work. When asked, as he lies there dozing, why he does not go out and do something, he shudders and says, ‘there is a lion outside, the streets are dangerous, I could be killed’. We at least have to laugh at his inventiveness. However, his laziness was not funny. It meant that he sponged on others, and failed to fulfil his part in the community, and it probably led on to his finding other more dishonest ways of obtaining wealth.
Lions abounded in the forests of Israel, and whilst they would not enter large fortified cities, hungry lions may well sometimes have entered unwalled towns and villages, keeping the residents safely in their houses. It is quite possible that learning of such an incident prompted the idea of the proverb. But such invasions of towns were not a common feature of life. They did, however, provide the lazy man with what he saw as a good excuse.
There is, however, also an important spiritual lesson here for the spiritually lazy. Whilst we cannot blame lions, it is amazing what inexcusable excuses people come up with for not attending church, or bible study, or the prayer meeting, or for not doing some other service for God. They are often just as absurd when examined carefully as the ones provided by the sluggard here. And they come under the same condemnation.
This verse is in contrast with verse 15. Here the sluggard’s thinking is revealed as irrational and ridiculous. In verse 15 he is proud of his rationality. But it is not really a contrast for in verse 15 it is made clear that he is not rational at all.
26.14
An ancient door would have two or more projections on one side shaped so that they would fit into a pivot fastened to the door post. This enabled the door to turn when it was opened or shut. This movement of the door is here likened to the sluggard turning in his bed continually through the day. He is to weary to rise and do anything.
26.15
And even when he is eating the sluggard reveals his laziness. He buries his hand in the dish in order to pick up the food but cannot find the strength to life it to his mouth. It is too wearisome, and not worth the effort. He would rather starve (and starve he eventually will). The picture is, of course, exaggerated, but it underlines its point. He is too lazy to make any effort to produce food. Paul may have had this proverb in mind when he said, ‘we commanded you that ‘if a man will not work, he shall not eat’ (2 Thessalonians 3.10).
26.16
This vivid portrait concerning the sluggard ends with a powerful indictment of him. Whilst everyone else can see what a fool he is, he is more confident in his own wisdom, and his own reasoning, than ‘seven truly rational men’. That is why he is so difficult to help. Seven indicates a divinely complete number, thus indicating the totality of reason. It was recognised as doing so throughout the Ancient Near East from the earliest days of writing. Sumerian myths used only the numbers three and seven.
The Busybody, The Deceiver, The Whisperer, And The Schemer (26.17-27).
This subsection deals with four kinds of fool, the busybody who can’t keep his nose out of other people’s quarrels (26.17); the deceiver who thinks that it is a joke to deceive people, and is hate-filled (26.18-19, 23-26); the whisperer who spreads contention and trouble (26.20-22); and the schemer who schemes to ensnare others (26.27). Apart from the last all are involved with the use of the mouth, and there are various connecting links: ‘strife (verses 17, 21; deceit (verses 19, 24); whispering (verse 20, 22); fire and burning (verses 18, 20, 21, 23); contention (verses 20, 21); lips (verses 23; 24); hatred (verses 24, 26).
It can be presented chiastically as follows:
Note that in A the one who interferes with other people’s strifes will find that he gets bitten, and in the parallel the one who seeks to trap others will find that he is trapped himself. In B is the man who deceives his neighbour, and in the parallel there is similar deceit which clearly reveals itself. Centrally in C where there is no whisperer there is no contention, and in the parallel there is both contention and whispering.
26.17
The first unacceptable person is a busybody and nosey-parker. He loves interfering in other people’s business, but it will get him into trouble. To take a scavenging dog by the ears was a sure way of getting bitten, and in the same way the one who interferes in other people’s quarrels is seen as equally likely to get ‘bitten’. To interfere between two quarrelling people is always foolish, because they are at the time in no mood to put up with interference. Indeed, they are likely to gang up together against the one who interferes, before getting on with their quarrel. They will ask what business it is of his, and they are perfectly right. It is a warning against nosiness. Peter warned against ‘being busybodies in other men’s matters’ (1 Peter 4.15), indicating that it could result in suffering.
26.18-19
The second unacceptable person is a nasty-minded deceiver. He tricks his neighbour in a way that harms his neighbour, and thinks that it is funny. And having tricked and deceived his neighbour he then asks his question because he wants others to admire him and appreciate how clever he is. He is surprised when they turn away in disgust. They recognise that he is just nasty.
This is not speaking of a good-hearted practical joke, but of someone who behaves nastily and then laughs at his own bad behaviour, of whom 10.23 says, ‘it is as fun to a fool to behave unrighteously.’ He causes hurt and pain and thinks that it is clever. His activities are so harmful and hurtful that he is likened to someone totally out of control who flings around firebrands, fires off arrows, and destroys other people’s lives. He is totally thoughtless and without morals. Such a man is to be avoided. He is the worst kind of humanity.
Note how the firebrands connect up with the next two proverbs, both of which refer to fire. But the sad thing is that those who are then spoken off do not cast their firebrands around madly. They do it carefully and with intent.
26.20
The third unacceptable person is one who passes on rumour and innuendo in secret, in order to make a bad situation worse. He wants to cause trouble. By his activity he causes friends to fall out, and people to quarrel. He provides opportunity for the busybody. Fire has already been lit by events, but he feeds the flames to make them grow. He enjoys it when people quarrel. If he had left things alone his targets would soon have patched up their differences, but he does not want that. And so he feeds the flames. He is a troublemaker.
26.21-22
The words of the whisperer who causes contention are likened to two things. The contentious aspect is likened to putting coal on hot embers, or wood on a fire. It adds to the flames, as already made clear in verse 20. He is a man who spreads discord among brothers, and is thus an abomination to God (6.19). But his words are also insidious. They are like delicious titbits, although they can only be so because they are spoken to sinful people. There is nothing some people like to hear more than gossip, innuendo and rumour. And so the whisperer’s words are to them like a dainty morsel to be swallowed and thoroughly enjoyed. Such avid listeners are sadly unaware of what trouble their foul habit is causing. But they ought to be aware of it. In Paul’s words, ‘they speak of things that they ought not’ (1 Timothy 5.13). They are as guilty as the rumourmonger himself, and therefore also an abomination to God..
26.23-24
The thought of the kindled fire continues in the use of the word ‘burning’. His lips are on fire spreading contention and strife, and it is not surprising because his words come from an unrighteous heart. In wealthier households earthenware jars would be coated with silver, so as not to appear ‘common’. So he is an inferior man, but all dressed up. However, as with all to do with this man, the silver here is not pure silver, it is inferior silver. He is a fake within and without.
Both parts of the description are probably derogatory. His lips are ‘common’ like earthenware, and they are soiled further by their covering. The burning lips are bad enough, but even worse when the words on them come from an unrighteous heart. Such lips are destructive for the community.
For this man is a hater. He thus in speaking his words fervently, tries to give the impression that he is rightminded and righthearted, whilst all the time seeking to cause damage. He switches from one thing to another, hoping to avoid looking as bad as he is. He is difficult to pin down. But it all springs from deceit within him. Like the man in verses 18-19 he deceives his neighbour, he deceives those who listen to him.
26.25
Thus even when he speaks with fair (charming, flattering) words we are not to believe him, because in fact his heart is filled with seven abominations, as listed in 6.16-19. A proud look, a lying tongue, murderous hands, a heart that schemes unrighteousness, mischievous feet, false witness, and the sowing of discord. All these possess him and characterise him. He is totally untrustworthy. If those who eagerly listened to his whispers and rumours really knew what he was like they would close their ears and run away screaming. But they have itching ears that long for gossip, and so they become partakers with him in his sins.
Alternately ‘seven abominations’ may signify ‘manyfold abominations’. He is full of what is abominable (compare 24.16; 26.16).
26.26
Once again we learn that he is a man full of hate. But he covers the fact up by guile (he dissembles (verse 24)). However, with all his subtlety and guile, his unrighteousness will eventually be openly showed among the assembly of God’s people, when he is brought before them to be examined. Eventually he will be exposed for what he is (compare 5.14). He will be brought to his just end.
26.27
The final man in mind is the schemer. He is like a hunter. He digs pits for people to fall into, (he causes the righteous to go astray in an evil way - 28.10), but he will fall into them himself (compare 28.10). Compare Psalm 7.16, ‘his mischief will return on his own head’. This subsection has been full of such scheming. But all will fall into their own pits.
In ancient days in order to move large stones they would have to be rolled, often on rollers. The idea here may be of a man who starts to roll a stone into position on a height so that, because of his hatred, he can send it crashing down on people below. But as he rolls it up the ascent, imagining gleefully his revenge on his enemies, it becomes too much for him and to his horror it begins to roll back on him, and finally crushes him badly. What he seeks to do to others will be recompensed on him, either before the assembly (verse 26) or by God. It is a fitting end to the subsection.
Love And Hate (26.28-27.6).
This subsection is connected to the previous one by the lying tongue used in hatred (26.28; compare 26.18-26). Here the lying tongue and the flattering mouth (verse 28) are contrasted with the trustworthy words of a true friend (27.6), and likened to the kisses of an enemy (27.6). But within those inclusios we have examples of a good use of the mouth and lips as men give praise where it is due (27.2), and faithful rebukes (27.5, 6). Central to the whole is the fool’s vexation and jealousy.
Note that in A the lying tongue has wounded men, and the mouth injuriously flatters, and in the parallel the friend wounds his friend with a good purpose whilst the enemy kisses hypocritically. In B you should let another man praise you, and in the parallel you should welcome open rebuke. Centrally in C a fool’s vexation is exceedingly heavy, and in the parallel jealousy is exceedingly cruel and overwhelming.
26.28
The opening verse of the subsection continues the theme of the previous subsection. It makes clear that a lying tongue arises out of hatred. Men lie and whisper and spread innuendoes because they hate the one whom they wound and afflict. Their purpose is to hurt. They are vindictive.
But even worse are those who use flattering lips (compare 26.25). They flatter to deceive. By their words they win you over, but they will only continue to flatter you while they think that they can benefit from you, and in the end their flattery spells ruin. When the going gets tough they will desert you. They are totally untrustworthy. Their kisses may be profuse but they are false (verse 6). The liar tries to destroy you from the outside, but the flatterer is destroying you from within. However, the sword may be two edged, for flattery can equally work ruin for the flatterer. Once he is found out he can lose everything that he has tried to build up.
27.1-2
In contrast to the flattery of the previous verse are lips which offer genuine praise. But it is a praise which has to be earned. We may try to build up our own reputations by boasting of what we are and what we will do ‘tomorrow’, but that is foolish (compare James 4.13-14 where this proverb is in mind). For we do not know even what today will produce, never mind ‘tomorrow’. Rather then we should walk rightly with God (Who does know what tomorrow will bring forth), and wait for others to praise us, rather than praising ourselves. Genuine praise from a stranger is praise indeed. It will have been earned.
Of course, tomorrow can be assured. For there is One Who controls tomorrow. So rather than boasting of what we will accomplish tomorrow, our eyes should be on Him (James 4.15). We can leave tomorrow safely in His hands. What is being argued against is not planning for tomorrow with the help of others (11.14; 15.22; 20.18), which we should do, but boasting of it on the grounds of self-sufficiency.
27.3
A heavy stone was spoken of in 26.27. But here the stone is still waiting to fall on its victim. Sand may appear to be light when we take it in our hands, but it is much heavier when we fill up a bag with it. Try lifting up a sandbag (compare Job 6.3). But neither of these is as heavy as a godless, unrighteous man’s anger. He knows no restraint and can crush people in his irritation. When Nebuchadnezzar was angry he threw three men into a burning, fiery furnace. Unfortunately for him he had chosen the wrong three for God was with them and they came out alive (Daniel 3). But that was an unusual case. Many who suffered under his anger never came out alive.
There is in this a warning to beware of arousing people’s anger unnecessarily. We never know when it will rebound on us. We have to remember that people do not always behave rationally. Once they have lost control of their tempers they can do anything, however violent. Most men are ‘fools’ when in a bad temper. It is wise not to arouse them more. Remember the gentle answer which turns away wrath (15.1).
27.4
On the other hand there is one thing that is more cruel and overwhelming than wrath and anger, and that is jealousy. In Scripture jealousy is often paralleled with anger, but it a peculiarly intense anger. It is a fury roused by personal interest and concern. The jealous man is not only angry, he feels personally involved. He feels thwarted because someone has what he wants, or has achieved what he has not. And so he plans if at all possible to destroy him. Saul was jealous of David because the women praised David more than they did Saul (1 Samuel 18.7-9). And it led him to exert all his efforts to destroy David. It is ‘rottenness of the bones’ (14.30), something stirring deep within. It is ‘cruel as the grave’ (Song of Solomon 6.6). And it can rebound on the one who is jealous. ‘Jealousy (envy) slays the silly man’ (Job 5.2).
27.5
It is good to be loved. But someone may love you, yet never show it in any way. However, it is the one who truly loves you who will be concerned about you and will if necessary rebuke you (see verse 26a). If someone reproves you lovingly, and with a concern only for you, you can know that you have found a true friend. Many will praise you (verse 2), or even flatter you (26.28). It takes a true friend to show you the truth about yourself in a concerned way.
27.6
The thoughts of the last verse are now put in another way. ‘Faithful are the wounds of a friend.’ When a lying tongue wounds you (26.28) it is in order to hurt you, but when a true friend wounds you it is in order to heal you. He is not trying to hurt you, but to help you. It is a proof of his faithful friendship. And you would do well to pay heed to him.
In contrast are the kisses of an enemy. They are not a real sign of friendship. They are designed to deceive. However profuse they are they flatter to deceive. They reveal false love. The word translated ‘profuse’ strictly means ‘to be pleaded with, to be moved by pleas’. The idea is possibly, therefore, that whilst you can quietly accept the wounds of a friend, and go on doing so, because they are a consequence of love and show his true affection for you, you have to plead with the kisses of an enemy, because you know that they are given with the wrong motive. They are not trustworthy. You plead with the kisser not to be hypocritical, or not to do it any more. You do not want his kisses (any more than you want the flattery of the flatterer (26.28)).
True Wisdom And True Friends (27.7-10).
The men of Hezekiah end this section by pointing to the value of true and wise friends. It commenced with reference to God and the King, but ends by pointing out that it is in true friends, wise in the wisdom of God, that a man finds comfort and solace. It is they who will help him in time of need. It is they who will help him to keep close to God, and will aid him in time of trouble. In days when there was no welfare state it was to friends that a man had to look when problems arose. And there is nothing like good fellowship with godly people for ensuring that we are able to endure in our spiritual lives.
In verse 8 the man who has to flee from his home and friends is like a bird who has deserted its nest, he is lost and alone. In verse 9 a friend who offers true counsel is sweet. And in verse 10 a close friend is better than a far off brother.
The subsection is presented chiastically:
Note that in A the hungry person partakes of something that he would not normally partake of (any port in a storm), and in the parallel a man in need goes to a near neighbour rather than to a (far off) kinsman (any port in a storm). In B a man wanders from his place, like a bird forsaking its nest, and in the parallel a man facing distress is called on not to flee from his place, by going to his kinsman’s house, and not to forsake the help of an old family friend. Centrally in C oil and perfume rejoice the heart, and in the parallel the sweetness of a man’s friend in his counsel does the same.
27.7
To some extent this compares with our proverb, ‘beggars can’t be choosers’. It points out that a person who is fully satisfied food-wise will trample down a honeycomb. He despises its sweetness as he comes across it where it lies on the ground, and tramples on it because he has no use for it. He is not hungry. On the other hand, to a hungry person who comes across a honeycomb lying on the ground it is a delight, for he knows that it will help to sate his hunger. Indeed, he will eat anything that is edible, even if it is bitter. To him even what is bitter, tastes sweet, as long as it is edible.
But verse 9 may suggest that we should take the question of interpretation further. There the sweetness of a friend who gives him counsel is likened to the sweet fragrance of olive oil and perfume. Through his true friend the wisdom of God comes over to him in all its sweetness. So there may also be the thought here that when all goes well and man’s needs are satisfied, God’s wisdom is dismissed. It is not needed. But when a man becomes hungry of soul what had seemed bitter becomes sweet. He rejoices in God’s wisdom. Compare with regard to this 24.13-14, ‘my son, eat honey for it is good, and the drippings of the honeycomb are sweet to your taste, know that wisdom is such to your inner man, if you find it there will be a future, and your hope will not be cut off.’ So there is clear precedent for such a thought.
27.8
A bird deserts its nest when something has happened to deeply disturb it and its connection with the nest. It is then homeless, and has to start all over again. In the same way a man who flees from his home and neighbourhood, possibly because of invasion, or natural catastrophe, is left with nothing and has to start all over again. He is homeless and friendless. It is the ultimate tragedy. It is a reminder to men of the value of their home and their known surroundings. We must remember that in those days men would have lived in one place all their lives. Moving home was not an option that most men considered. To have to flee from it was therefore a disaster.
27.9
When a man is in need of help a friend who brings him heartfelt counsel is as a sweet fragrance to him. It is like olive oil and perfume which rejoice the heart. He breathes in his words and rejoices in them. Such is the value of a true and wise friend who can speak to his inner heart. In Proverbs the friend’s counsel comes, of course, from the wisdom of God (see 1.25, 30; 8.14; 12.15; 19.20, 21; 21.30).
27.10a
The idea here is probably that when trouble comes a man should not (like the bird did - verse 8) desert his home. He should not go and live with his kinsman, depending on him. At such times it is easy to give in. But he must not do so. He should instead look to a close, longstanding family friend of both his and his father who lives nearby, to see him through. (Having lived there all his life it is assumed that he will have one). Rather than deserting his land he should re-establish his home in that neighbourhood. Good friends are there and are willing to help. They should not be forsaken. (He is not being asked to refuse his kinsman’s help, just not to become a burden on him, losing his own home. And the added thought may be that he needs older and wiser, and probably nearer, help).
27.10b
In this parallel proverb it is being pointed out that a true neighbour close at hand is of more value than a kinsman far off. He would not be able to contact his kinsman for some time, and it would take months for his kinsman to come to his aid. A true neighbour who lives nearby is therefore of greater value at the time.
SECTION 2 (27.11-29.27).
That a new section commences here is suggested, firstly by the opening words which are not in the form of a proverb, but of a plea (unique in 25.1-29.27), and secondly because there appears to be a change of emphasis as indicated below. It commences with an injunction to ‘my son’, followed by a call to make his heart glad. This is then followed by a contrast between the shrewd and the naive.
As in the previous section this section commences after the plea with an antithetical proverb. Antithetical proverbs were rare in the first section but are more common in this section. The first two proverbs are in fact almost repeats of 20.16; 22.3. It asserts that the crown will endure for all generations (27.24), whilst the king is mentioned towards the end in 29.4 as establishing justice, and in 29.14 where his throne will be established for ever. Other under-rulers are generally looked at more negatively (28.2, 15, 16; 29.2, 12, 16). 29.26 is neutral. Thus the assumption is that the king will be righteous, but will have to contend with the strong possibility of failing subordinates. This idealistic picture of the monarchy fits in with Solomonic authorship before his reign began to depreciate. It was not true of later kings.
The Name of YHWH is used five times in the section, in 28.5, 25 and again in 29.13, 25, 26 (only once in the previous section). The first two references relate to His judgment and to putting trust in Him, the last two to putting trust in Him and to His judgment. They may be seen as a kind of envelope, but not strictly as an inclusio. 28.5, 25 are not close enough together.
The righteous and the wicked are contrasted in 28.1, 12, 28, and in 29.2, 7, 16, 27, (and not at all in the previous section) but there are variations in that the righteous are singular only in 29.7, whereas the wicked are singular in 28.1; 29.2, 7, 27 and plural in 28.12, 28; 29.16. It is doubtful how far we can see 28.1 and 29.27 as an inclusio of the whole section as suggested by some, for the only other reason for seeing the section as commencing at 28.1 is the poem in 27.23-27, but such poems are found in, for example, 23.29-35; 24.11-12, without them ending a section. And 28.1 is not really a suitable beginning for a section. 27.11, with its unique appeal to ‘my son’ in this section, in what is a plea rather than a proverb, seems a far better candidate as the opening of the section.
Introduction (27.11).
27.11
Significantly ‘I’ and ‘me’ do not occur anywhere in 25.1-29.27 as referring to the author, except in this verse. It is therefore unique in these sections, and consequently distinctive. (‘I’ and ‘me’ appear in the Prologue regularly, and in the words of the wise). It is difficult to see why this unique verse is introduced here except as commencing a new section. It has no other obvious function.
So Solomon calls on ‘my son’ (each of his responsive listeners and readers) to be wise and thereby make his heart glad. It reminds us of the Prologue, and we can compare it with 10.1, which also began a new section, in which he pointed out that ‘a wise son makes a glad father’. And he desires this here in order to answer any who reproach him, denying the truth of his wisdom. He will then be able to point to those who have become wise, and whose lives substantiate his words.
The Shrewd Man Does Not Get Involved With Evil, Watches Whom He Associates With, And Seeks To Be Approved By Man And God (27.12-27).
This subsection prepares for what is to come as coming proverbs will deal with kingship, rulership (both just and unjust), wealth, the contrast between the righteous and the unrighteous, and the importance of the Torah. It lays the foundation of the truly shrewd man in the light of the temporary nature of riches and kingship. It reveals that in the end a man must rest on what God has given him.
The subsection opens and closes with a description of the shrewd man. He avoids becoming involved with evil (verse 12), and, avoiding the desire for riches and power, works hard and ensures for his household the basic things of life based on what God has provided for man (verses 23-27). In between he deals with the question of relationships.
Thus it goes on to deal with the need to avoid unwise friendships (the surety for foreigners (verse 13), the flattering so-called friend (verse 14), and the contentious woman (verse 15)), and points out that rather than these he is to cultivate wise friendships (verse 17), be loyal to those in authority (verse 18), and watch his own heart (verse 19). For a man is judged on the basis of who praises him, that is, on an objective assessment (verse 21).
On the other hand for the unwise only suffering (verse 12) and poverty (verse 13) awaits together with flattering, thoughtless friends (verse 14) and a contentious woman (verse 15), with Sheol and Abaddon waiting to swallow him in the end (verse 20).
It is presented chiastically as follows:
Note that in A the prudent see the evil that is coming and takes precautions, and in the poem which is in the parallel he is called on to look well to his herd as at some stage troubles will come (riches are not for ever, and the crown will not endure for ever), and to rely on maintaining what God has given him. In B the surety for a stranger and for a strange woman is such a fool that he is to be called on to relinquish his security (his garment) and to be held under a pledge, whilst in the parallel the fool never loses his foolishness. In C a man blesses his friend in an unseemly fashion and in the parallel a man is tested by who praises him. In D the contentious woman is never satisfied, and her man finds her too elusive and slippery, thus being unsatisfied, and in the parallel Sheol and Abaddon are never satisfied, nor are the eyes of a man. In E iron sharpens iron, and a man similarly sharpens his friend, and in the parallel face answers to face, and so does the heart of man to man. Centrally in F the one who takes regard to the fig tree will partake of its fruit, and in the parallel the one who takes regard of his master will partake of honour.
27.12
The section proper, and this subsection, now commence with a comparison between the shrewd and the naive. Reference to the stronger comparison of righteous and wicked commences at 28.1. But here he is talking to ‘my son’ and warning him not to be naive. He is to be shrewd in assessing life and watching for coming problems. (The same proverb occurs in 22.3). For the shrewd man sees evil before it comes, and is thus able to hide himself. The evil could be an invading enemy or an approaching storm, or even the evil intentions of the unrighteous, or it may includes such things as acting as a surety (verse 13), or marrying a contentious wife (verse 14), or even avoiding Sheol and Abaddon (verse 20). But because he is shrewd he is able to absent or hide himself from their consequences when such problems come. On the other hand the naive go heedlessly on and suffer as a consequence.
According to the parallel in the chiasmus some of the coming evil has reference to his herds and flocks. Unless cared for they would always be in danger of being stolen or seized by an enemy, or even of going hungry. He is thus advised to see to them (verse 23), and work hard to feed them (verse 25), as what makes men wealthy is not permanent (verse 24), in contrast to mans flocks and herds. But if he is to keep them he must work at it.
27.13
One evil he has to avoid, an evil that the naive may go head on into, is acting as a surety for a stranger or a foreign woman. And he is advised that if he has had dealings with someone so foolish that they would do that, he should immediately take the security of his garment, and obtain a pledge from him about repayment of any loan. He should cease dealing with such a person as soon as he can, and meanwhile do all he can to secure his debt. Note the emphasis on ‘strangers’ (foreigners). He is operating in order to obtain wealth outside the covenant community.
The proverb is virtually the same as 20.16 but with ‘strangers’ being altered to ‘strange woman’. The point is that this naive young man has got himself into the toils of a prostitute who has persuaded him to act as a surety, and will squeeze him dry. He is therefore not good security. This, and the foreign connection, is one of the evils that the wise can hide from.
27.14
Another evil to be avoided is the so-called friend who rises early in the morning to hail him loudly with a blessing. Such an untimely greeting hints at insincerity and flattery. The ‘friend’ is clearly out to obtain some benefit. But because of its insincerity the friend’s ‘blessing’ will rebound on him as a curse. He is using God’s Name lightly. The wise will not be taken in by it. In the chiastic parallel ‘a man is tested by his praise’. This man has failed the test.
27.15-16
A further evil to be avoided is living with a contentious woman. Her continual grumblings and arguments will be as bad as water continually dripping from a leaky roof on a rainy day (compare 19.13). And once married to her there will be no way of restraining her. He will find that when he attempts to do so a storm will arise, for by introducing her into his house he has introduced the wind in the person of the woman, with the resulting chaos that will result. And he will also find her very slippery customer. When he tries to restrain her his hand will encounter oil. So the woman who should have been such a comfort to him will turn out to be his greatest discomfort. For such a woman is like Sheol and Abaddon. She is never satisfied. She always wants more. And she will prevent from him being satisfied as well (compare verse 20).
27.17
We now turn from the false friend of verse 14, and the contentious wife of verse 15, to the true friend. Just as the face of a tool or sword was sharpened (‘if the iron be blunt and he do not whet the face, then he must put forth more strength’ - Ecclesiastes 10.10), so a man sharpens another man’s ‘edge’. The wise man learns from the reproof of his friend (‘faithful are the wounds of a friend’ - verse 6). One intellect sharpens another. Each learns from the other and is intellectually challenged. One life sharpens another. What a person is rubs off on another. Men become like their friends. The wise learn more wisdom by mingling with the wise (13.20). It is thus important that we mix with the right people. It is because iron sharpens iron that Christians meet together. And what a man is shines out from his face.
The smelting and working of iron had been known in that part of the world from about 1400 BC. The Philistines had obtained the secret from the Hittites, and had held a monopoly on iron in the early days after the conquest (see 1 Samuel 13.19-22). Iron was then the hardest material known to man. Only iron could sharpen iron. The ‘face’ of the iron sword or tool would be sharpened on a sharpening iron.
27.18
The man who persistently attends to and watches over a fig tree will eat its fruit. This fits in with the agricultural emphasis of the subsection (27.23-27). In the same way it is the man who attends to and is faithful to his lord who will be honoured. Promotion is obtained through faithful service (compare 14.35). And the ‘son’ who faithfully responds to the wisdom of his mentor will himself come to be seen as among the wise (verse 11). he will partake of his fruit.
Attending to a fig tree was a long process, and its fruit the consequence of many years hard work (see James 5.7). It was not ‘instant fruit’. But the sweetness of its eventual fruit made all the effort worthwhile. In the same way men must demonstrate their loyal service over a long period if they would be honoured (compare 17.2), and wisdom is not learned in a day. But in the end they will receive the rewards of faithful service, and they will be very sweet.
It is, of course, even more true in the spiritual life. Those who would be honoured by the Lord, must constantly attend to Him and to His interests. Spirituality and growth does not come through occasional attendance on Him. ‘It is the husbandman who labours who must be the first partaker of the fruits’ (2 Timothy 2.6). ‘Do not labour for the food which perishes, but for the food that endures to everlasting life, which the Son of Man will give you’ (John 6.27). As the wisdom of God said, ‘Those who love me, I will love, and those who seek me early will find me. Riches and honour are with me, durable riches and righteousness. My fruit is better than gold --’ (8.17-19).
27.19
When a man looks in water he sees his own reflection. ‘Face answers to face’. It is only then that he sees himself as he really is (they had no efficient mirrors). In the same way when a man truly looks into his inner heart he sees himself as he really is. Taking time to consider what is really important to us is when we learn our own measure. Do we look at the things which are seen, or the things which are unseen? (2 Corinthians 4.18). Taking time to consider our words and actions may well alter those words and actions in the future. Every man needs now and again to weigh up his life.
However, the context has been dealing with good and bad friendships, and the thought may therefore be that men respond to what their friends are. Our faces and hearts respond to the faces and hearts and lives of our friends. Those whose friends are wise, become wise. Those whose friends are righteous, become righteous. Those whose friends take the trouble to reprove and guide them, will grow in wisdom and understanding. ‘Iron sharpens iron’ (verse 17). And the same is true in reverse order. There is nothing like the example and companionship of a caring spiritual friend to enable growth.
27.20
In verses 15-16 the contentious woman is never satisfied, which is why she is contentious, and her husband is never satisfied because he cannot control her. But here we learn of something far worse than a contentious woman which is never satisfied, and that is the grave world (Sheol) and destruction (Abaddon). The grave ever wants more. It waits with its mouth open for the whole of humanity (see Isaiah 5.14). And one by one it is satisfied. But it always craves more. This awful picture contrasts with the pleasant picture drawn in 27.23-27 which basically pictures the ideal life which wisdom has promised to those who follow God’s wisdom.
And what is true of Sheol and Abaddon is also true of the eyes of a man. He eyes the world, and the things that are in the world, and he craves them and wants more and more. And he is never satisfied. (Not for him the pastoral life of sheep and goats). Greed and lust underline much of the world’s thinking, the desires of the flesh, the desires of the eyes, the desires of the mind, the desire for wealth and social position, the desire for the acknowledgement of their abilities and status, all drive men on (compare 1 John 2.15-17; Ephesians 2.3). They are clearly depicted in 1.10-19; 2.12-22; 4.14-17; 5.3-21; 6.12-19, 24-35; 7.5-27; 9.13-18.
Man wants and he goes to war, in his greed he ruthlessly treads on others, he covets what his neighbour has, he fights, he gambles, he lies, he steals. It all began when Eve eyed the tree in the Garden of Eden. She wanted and she took, even though it was in the face of God’s direct commandment. And it has continued on to this day. But as John reminds us, this attitude is not of the Father but of the world. And the world and its desires pass away. It is they who do the will of God, and follow the wisdom of God, who will abide for ever. If we would truly live ‘I want’ must become ‘He wants’. Sheol and Abaddon cannot devour those who walk with God.
27.21
Men have refining pots in order to test out the purity of silver, and furnaces with which to test out the purity of gold, but the true test of a man is whether he receives, not the flattering praise of verse 14, but genuine praise from both God and man. He is tested by his praise.
Or it may mean that he is known by what he praises. What he truly praises demonstrates what is in his heart. He who praises man will become like man. He who truly praises God will become like God.
It could also be seen as meaning that a man is tested by looking at who praises him (compare 27.2). If the world praises him he may well need to examine himself. But if God praises him, and godly men praise him, he may well feel satisfied. All these aspects may in fact be intended to be included in the rather vague phrase. We are tested by who praises us, and whom we praise.
27.22
A man is tested like silver and gold, to discover his worth, but a fool (an unrighteous, ungodly man) is rather tested in a mortar and pestle that grinds the grain. He has no worth. He is not being examined for his worth, but chastened by his trials. The hope is that his foolishness will be crushed out of him. But it will not work, for his foolishness will not depart from him. Only God can take the folly out of the heart of a fool.
The fool has been clearly depicted in the preceding verses. He/she does not see evil when it is coming (verse 12); he pledges himself to foreigners when he cannot afford it (verse 13); he blesses men hypocritically bringing a curse on himself (verse 14); she is continually contentious (verse 15). They do not look to God or trust and fear Him, thus they continue on in their ways, having to endure life’s grinding. For the wise it is so different, they are not ground in a mortar, but chastened by a loving Father (3.11-12), and will come forth with His wisdom which is more precious than gold and silver (3.13-14).
27.23-27
The subsection comes to an end with a longer saying. Compare the similar sayings in 23.29-35; 24.10-12, 30-34; and, of course, the Prologue. This one describes the simplicity of life for the one who looks to the wisdom of God. It exalts God’s wisdom in terms of an agricultural society.
Riches are not for ever, even kingship does not endure (verse 24). Men should not therefore strive for riches and power. What a man must do is work hard (carry the hay, gather in the herbs of the mountains) and look well to the basics of life. He must watch diligently over his flocks and herds (verse 23) and feed them well from nature’s provision (verse 25). For they will clothe him, enable him to buy another field (verse 26), provide him with food, and sustain his household (verse 27). They will make his household self-sustaining.
In other terms it is like every man living under his own vine and his own fig tree, that is, living under the provision of God, the agriculturalist’s view of the new earth (Micah 4.4). Such a son will make his father glad (verse 11). This is very much reminiscent of Ecclesiastes. Do not strive for what is beyond you, but enjoy what God provides. For everything else is vanity. As verse 12 stressed, the shrewd man will see evil and hide himself. He will watch over what he has, safeguard it, and not get involved in the evils of the world. The naive will go on their way regardless and suffer the consequences.
‘Be diligent to know the state of your flocks, and look well to your herds, for riches are not for ever, and does the crown endure to all generations?’ Flocks and herds were the sure and certain way of subsistence in an agricultural society They represent here God’s provision for mankind. They also represent normality. It is these to which men should give their attention, the basic blocks for living, rather than to wealth and kingship, both of which are temporary, an added extra. It is these things which represent permanency. From the beginning man was a keeper of flocks (Genesis 4) and worshipped YHWH (Genesis 4.25). And this is how life should be.
It was what YHWH originally intended for His people, living in their own land, looking after their herds and flocks, each owning land which would remain in his family for ever, the wealthy caring for their poorer neighbours, and with God Himself as their King. It was the hope for the future (Micah 4.4).
It may well be that this was looking back to Abraham, who was also a keeper of herds and flocks, and moved around outside ‘civilised’ society (although he was, of course, wealthy). As father of his family tribe he fed his people and his maidservants (verse 27). Israel also subsisted on herds and flocks in the wilderness, and looking back, this was seen as Israel’s most spiritual time (Deuteronomy 1.31; 29.5-6; Hosea 11.1, 3-4). It was the way of God’s wisdom. It provided all that was needed. From the beginning ‘cities’ were seen as a retrograde step (Genesis 4.17; 11.4).
It is a description of the Christian’s life, ‘in the world but not of the world’, the picture that Jesus clarified in John 17. In the midst of a world in turmoil the wise live their lives contentedly under the hand of God, ensuring food and clothing for their families and dependants, and waiting for the time when earthly riches cease, and earthly crowns are no more and they live in dependence only on God (Micah 4.4).
‘The hay is carried, and the tender grass shows itself, and the herbs of the mountains are gathered in.’ Riches may cease and kings may vanish, but what is permanent will go on. There is nothing more permanent than the grass, and vegetation on the ‘everlasting’ mountains. Whatever happens to men’s plans, God will continue to make his provision for man. The cycle of nature continues. The hay is gathered in, new grass springs up, vegetation grows on the mountains All are still available to the hard workers among men. Riches and kings are unnecessary.
‘The lambs are for your clothing, and the goats are the price of the field, and there will be goats’ milk enough for your food, for the food of your household, and maintenance for your maidens.’ The picture is of a large family group together with pastoral helpers, maintaining itself from its flocks and herds, reminiscent of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Goat’s milk was the staple diet of the semi-nomad. It is a reminder that having food and clothing we have all that we need and are with them to be content (1 Timothy 6.8). These are what God has promised to provide for us (Matthew 6.25-33). Our part is to seek God and His righteousness (Matthew 6.33), as Abraham did.
So this subsection, with its emphasis on the fact that riches and kingship are temporary, is preparing the wise for what is to follow, with the world having become more complicated with the introduction of kings and rulers (28.2, 15, 16; 29.2, 4, 12, 14, 26), and the idea of the accumulation of ill-gotten riches (28.6, 8, 11, 20, 22, 24, 27; 29.7), a world where men tread down others. The contrast will now, not be between the shrewd and the naive, but between the righteous and the wicked (28.1, 12, 28; 29.2, 7, 16, 27). But it will immediately be made clear that man’s prime responsibility is still to live in accordance with God’s requirements in terms of the Torah (28.4, 7, 9; 29.18).
Thus having provided the ideal picture of the shrewd man as contrasted with the naive man, the narrative now looks at the world as it is as containing the righteous and the unrighteous. It is a world of fear, unfairness, and frailty. Whilst the king himself is just (29.4, 14), his under-rulers are liable to go astray (28.2,15, 16; 29.2, 12, 26), and the rich on the whole ill-treat the poor (28.6, 8, 11, 20, 22, 24, 27; 29.7). The idea in the Prologue that the rich and the wise are synonymous no longer applies, for these are rich by unworthy means. So the wise will live their lives independently under God, whilst at the same time being subjected to the world and its ways. But in the ideal world both crown and ill-gotten riches will have gone (27.24).
The World Under The Righteous And Under God’s Torah Contrasted With The World Of The Lawless (28.1-10).
This subsection commences with the righteous as bold as lions (verse 1), and ends with the persevering upright inheriting good (verse 10). This is because they look to God and His Torah (verse 4, 7, 9), and by implication know that God hears their prayers (verse 9). For the righteous have understanding of what is right (verses 2, 5, 7), respond to God’s Torah (verses 4, 7, 9), and rule well (verse 2). In contrast the unrighteous are uncertain (verse 1), experience instability of rule (verse 2), do not understand justice (verse 5), will lose their ill-gotten wealth (verse 8), find that God is deaf to their cries (verse 9), and will fall into the pit that they have dug (verse 10).
This is a world torn apart, totally unlike the ‘world’ described in 27.11-27, which was the ‘world’ of the righteous, who were ‘in the world but not of the world’ . It is the world of politics and wealth, full of strife, because it is not under YHWH. The contrast is deliberate. The men of Hezekiah were embroiled in the world of their day. But how they must have longed for the peaceful life earlier described, the life of the people of God as they live separated off from the world, walking with God. It represented the future hope for the wise (Micah 4.4).
The subsection is presented chiastically:
Note that in A the wicked flees when no man pursues, and the righteous are bold as a lion (because they know that God is with them), while in the parallel those who cause the upright to go astray (the wicked) fall into their own pit, and the perfect (those who persevere in uprightness) inherit good (because God is with them). In B the transgression (of the law) of the people of a land causes continual political disruption, and in the parallel those who turn away from the hearing of the law are never heard when they call on God (in the face of political disruption). In C we have the needy who oppress the poor, and in the parallel they are in contrast with the one who has pity on the poor. In D those who forsake the law praise the wicked, but those who KEEP THE LAW contend with the wicked, and in the parallel he who KEEPS THE LAW is a wise son, whilst the one who keeps company with gluttons (and thus forsakes the law) shames his father. Centrally in E evil men do not understand justice, while those who seek YHWH understand it thoroughly, and in the parallel we have rich men who are perverse in their ways (because they do not understand justice), and poor men who walk in their integrity (and therefore do understand justice).
28.1
Having presented the picture of the ideal shrewd man in 27.12-27, the writer now contrasts between the righteous (the shrewd man) and the unrighteous. The unrighteous are terrified of their own shadows. They have no confidence about life. They are always on the run from their destiny. And they are right to be afraid, for because they seek to lead the upright astray they will end up in the Pit (verse 10).
In contrast the righteous are without fear, and face whatever is ahead with confidence, having the boldness of a predatory lion. They can be so because they know that God is on their side. They know that their prayers will be heard (verse 9). They know that rather than facing Sheol and Abaddon (27.20) they will inherit good (verse 10), and that as long as they work hard, God will supply all their needs (27.23-27). In a sense, while living in the world as it is, they also live in their own world, a God-filled world, just as Abraham had done.
Thus those who do not fear YHWH are themselves afraid of life, whilst those who do fear YHWH face life unafraid. Paradoxically it is YHWH’s very awesomeness that makes them unafraid.
28.2
A land full of transgression, that is, of lawless people, will have many princes. This probably means, in the light of the parallel clause, that they will not survive for long. They will quickly be replaced, probably by assassination, as would happen later with the kings of Israel in contrast with the kings of Judah, or by being replaced because they become too corrupt. Alternately it could mean that many princes are needed in order to maintain control of a lawless people. (The more lawless they become, the more they have to be overseen). These lawless people turn away from hearing the Torah (the law of Moses, or in other nations its equivalent). They do not want to hear it or submit to it. And this attitude has permeated most of the land (‘the transgression of the land’), the consequence is that when they pray their prayers are an abomination to God. Thus their only hope of stability is gone.
But where the people are righteous and have true knowledge, what is right will be prolonged. They will recognise the quality of their princes and will give them long tenure. This would go well with the first of the interpretations above. In other words a country’s political stability depends on the lawfulness of its people. This also fits in with the theme of the subsection. An alternative is to see the men of understanding and knowledge as the princes. Then it would be saying that whilst unlawfulness results in having many princes, having good princes results in what is right, that is, in lawfulness. All the alternatives would be true.
Whichever alternatives are seen as true the proverb is certainly indicating that transgression and lawlessness are bad for a country, whilst understanding and knowledge, resulting in lawfulness, are good and beneficial for all.
28.3
Sweeping rain, coming at the wrong season, comes down on the crops and rots them, or sweeps way the soil, and the consequence is a food shortage. What would in normal circumstances have been welcome (rain) has turned out to be devastating. In the same way if the man whom we would expect to favour the poor, that is the destitute man, whom the poor would normally welcome, instead oppresses the poor, then that too is devastating.
The land full of transgression (verse 2) would be expected to contain people like this. It is a lawless land and the destitute man presumably leads a band of his own kind. For a destitute man who became leader of a band of brigands compare Jephthah in Judges 11.2-3. But this destitute man, rather than attacking the rich, which might have been partly excusable, instead oppresses the poor because they are easy pickings. He charges them for ‘protection’. He takes their food. He forces them to cooperate with him and his men. This is lawlessness indeed and totally inexcusable. It is contrary to all expectation (the poor should look out for each other). And it demonstrates extreme wickedness.
But the destitute man should beware. If the one who charges the poor interest, and takes away much of their increase (what they manage to produce) will lose everything (verse 8), how much more will a destitute man who is cruel to the poor, with whom he should have had sympathy, and charges them for ‘protection’, and takes part of their production.
28.4
The lawless, those who forsake the Torah (or its equivalent, but verses 5 and 8-9 assume the Torah), praise the unrighteous, for they are unrighteous themselves. They favour an unlawful prince as against other princes (verse 2). They take sides with the evil destitute man (verse 3), because they themselves are evil. They are perverse in their ways (verse 6). They are companions with gluttons (verse 7). They charge interest to the poor on his loans, and take a good proportion of his production (increase) in order to obtain repayment of the loan (verse 8). They favour the bad rather than the good. They fill the land with transgression (verse 2). Their prayers are unheard (verse 9).
In contrast are those who keep (observe and watch over) the Torah. They are men of understanding and knowledge (verse 2). They are wise (verse 7). They contend with the unrighteous (verse 4). They try to remove evil princes (verse 2). They wish that they could capture and punish the destitute bandit leader (verse 3). They fight for men to obey the Torah (verse 4). They walk in integrity (verse 6). They have pity on the poor (verse 8). They lend to them without interest. God hears their prayers (verse 9). They are seeking a law abiding state in which the Torah is honoured and obeyed.
28.5
And the reason why a land of transgression has many princes, why a destitute bandit leader oppresses the poor, why men who forsake the law praise the unrighteous, is because evil men do not understand what is right and true. They are lacking in understanding. They do not understand justice. It is far from their thinking. Note that ‘evil men’ are basically defined as those who do not seek YHWH.
In contrast those who seek YHWH understand all things. Nothing about the situations described puzzles them. They know the sinfulness of men’s hearts. They fight for justice. They see things in God’s light. It is a joy for them to do justice (21.15). The importance of this verse cannot be overestimated. It brings out who the righteous and the wise are. They are those who seek YHWH. Their desire is to know Him more and more, and to walk in His wisdom. And this brings out that ‘the Law’ in mind is His Torah.
28.6
The contrast between the righteous and the unrighteous continues. Even the righteous poor walk in integrity (compare 19.1). They are trustworthy and reliable. They are true and honest in their words (19.1). They obey the Torah. They seek to do what is right. But in contrast are the unrighteous rich. They are not those who have become rich by hard work and honesty. They have squeezed the poor (verse 8). Their riches are ill-gotten (verse 20). They are perverse (crooked) in their ways (2.12-15). ‘His ways’ is dual indicating that they always have two ways. They cheat but try to give the impression that they are good citizens. They are double-dealing. And they disobey the Torah (verse 4).
28.7
Unrighteousness has even permeated the family. Wise sons observe the Torah, they work hard and are law-abiding. They are concerned for the poor. But unwise sons are keeping company with gluttons (compare 23.20-21). They are sluggards. Work is being neglected. All they think about is a good time. They spend their time in riotous living. They ignore the Torah. They bring shame on their fathers and their families. They are foolish sons.
An interesting example of how such a son brings shame on his father is found in 1 Timothy 3.4-5; Titus 1.6. He lowers the status of his father in the eyes of his community.
28.8
But what is happening is not overlooked by God. He knows those who seek Him and walk in integrity. And though men may grow rich and prosper through dishonest practises He will call them to account. Those who augment their wealth by charging interest on loans to the poor, and take a further portion of their production in order to obtain repayment of the loan, contrary to Deuteronomy 15.1-11, thus demonstrating that they are lawbreakers, will eventually lose their riches, which will pass over into the hands of those who have pity on the poor (who will, of course, in one way or another return it to the poor). What men sow they will eventually reap. God will do to them what they have done to others. Note the parallel with verse 3. In both proverbs the poor are being made destitute.
In the Torah the charging of interest on loans to the poor was forbidden (Exodus 22.25; Leviticus 25.35-37; Deuteronomy 23.19). Those who lent the money had to remember how YHWH had redeemed them from Egypt and were to lend in covenant love, even though they could not be sure that they would get back what they had loaned (Deuteronomy 15.7-11, 15). In other nations interest rates were exceedingly high, often amounting to around 30% of the amount borrowed. It was no wonder that the poor soon found themselves having to sell themselves into bondage. But this was a contradiction in regard to one whom YHWH had redeemed. It was not deemed right that they once again became bondsmen.
28.9
Here we learn that prayer offered by someone who turns his ear away from hearing the Torah ‘is an abomination’. We can compare with this proverbs 15.8; 21.27 where we read, ‘the sacrifice of the unrighteous is an abomination’, and 15.8 adds ‘to YHWH’. The same principle is clearly in mind, and brings out that in the main it is in the eyes of God that the sacrifice and prayer are an abomination. However, the implication of the more general statements is that it is also an abomination to good men (unless it is in true repentance). It is an abomination to God and all good men.
It is a reminder to us that God requires prayer to be from an upright heart. ‘If I regard iniquity in my heart YHWH will not hear me’ (Psalm 66.18). Compare also 1.28-29. God is not a dispensing machine, responding to any request, but a righteous God who abominates prayer from those who do not ‘hear His Torah’. In days when most men were religious, and polytheism had little regard for morals, this teaching would have come as something of a shock. Most men’s view was that if you used the right methods you could persuade the gods to do what you wanted, and that the gods were too busy disagreeing among themselves to take much notice of human behaviour as long as religious requirements were fulfilled. That was a major way in which the God of Israel was different. He insisted that unless men observed his moral requirements their prayers and sacrifices were an abomination to Him. Thus ‘the transgression of the land’ (verse 2) meant that God would not hear the cry of the people, which was why things were as bad as they were.
28.10
The subsection ends by seeing those who are in rebellion against God as trying also to lure the upright into rebellion (something strongly attacked by Jesus, see Matthew 5.19; 18.6; 23.15). They cause the upright to go astray, and to walk in an evil way. Compare 1.10-19; 2.12-22; 4.16. We are not told how they do this. It could be by enticement or by force, or by setting traps for them (thus the pit into which they themselves can fall), but their methods are sometimes successful, and simply reveal just how evil they are. Not understanding rightness and truth themselves (verse 5) they are puzzled by it in others. And if the upright go astray it eases their own consciences. Thus they enjoy nothing better than to bring them down to their level. This is the essence of evil, not only going astray themselves, but dragging others down with them.
But they will not escape God’s judgment. They will end up by falling into the pit that they have dug for others (compare 26.27). As they flee from their imaginary terrors (verse 1), they become the victims of their own scheming. Indeed, in 28.17 the two ideas are combined. They ‘flee to the pit’. Only destruction awaits them.
In contrast the righteous can be as bold as a lion (verse 1). For they know that if they resist the machinations of the unrighteous, and remain ‘perfect’ (true to YHWH, complete, undefiled), they will inherit only good. If they are enticed they stand firm, if they have force used against them they endure it, if traps are set for them they avoid them, for they are immersed in the wisdom of God. They will therefore experience the blessings that come from God’s wisdom (3.16-18). They will enjoy everything that is desirable. When riches and kingship cease they will enjoy the idealistic world of the semi-nomad (27.23-27). Thus the righteous know that they will triumph. No wonder that they are as bold as a lion (verse 1).
Note how this verse so perfectly ends the subsection. With all the conflict between righteousness and unrighteousness, good and evil, being lawless or law-abiding, the unrighteous end up in their pit, and the righteous inherit good.
The Unrighteous Wealthy And Unrighteous Rulers Will Oppress Their People But The Righteous Poor Will Survive Through Understanding (28.11-16).
This subsection considers the wealthy and the rulers who will not be ‘for ever’ (27.24). Their tenure is limited. But meanwhile they give the people, and especially the poor, a hard time. But the righteous poor are able to cope with it because they understand how men think (verse 11b). They avoid the pitfalls set by the rich (verse 11), and keep their heads low when unrighteous rulers rule (verses 12b, 15, 16a). Meanwhile they make the most of the good times (12a, 16). For what matters in the end is not that life be easy, but that men obtain God’s mercy and find true joy (verse 13-14). This subject of unrighteous rulers will not arise again until 28.28; 29.2.
The subsection is presented chiastically:
Note that in A the poor man has understanding, and in the parallel the prince lacks understanding. In B when the wicked rise (to power) men need to be searched out (they discreetly hide themselves and keep out of sight), and in the parallel a wicked ruler is like a roaring lion and a ranging bear (from which men will hide themselves). Centrally in C he who covers his transgressions will not prosper and in the parallel he who hardens his heart will fall into distress.
28.11
In this section the rich man is not one who is rich through having responded to wisdom (as in the Prologue) but one who has become rich by devious methods. He is ‘perverse in his ways’ (28.6); he ‘augments his substance by interest and increase’ (28.8); he ‘became rich in a hurry’, not through hard work (28.20, 22). Here he is ‘wise in his own conceit’. He thinks a lot of himself and thinks himself clever, and even his peers do not see through him. They do not ‘search him out’. But he does not have real wisdom. He does not have understanding. He is not wise in God’s eyes. And in consequence of his view of himself he thinks that the poor are gullible and that he will be able continue to use the methods which have enabled him to get rich quickly on them. Thus he tries to deceive and inveigle the poor man, and get one over on him.
But the poor man described here is not deceived. He has understanding, the wisdom which comes from YHWH (verse 5). He is able to suss the rich man out. He has come to an understanding of human nature, and can see through his falsehood. He recognises his duplicitous nature. He thus avoids his schemes. (How important it is to have God’s wisdom). So he ‘hides’ from the rich man, as he does also from the unrighteous ruler in verse 11, and no doubt from the ruler who does not have understanding in verse 16. He maintains his means of livelihood looking only to YHWH (27.23-27).
28.12
This proverb pithily presents a vivid contrast. When the righteous are on top, and the leadership who come to power are righteous, there is great ‘glory, splendour, shouting for joy’. The whole city buzzes with life. Festivities take place. People are not afraid to walk the streets. Life is good.
But when the unrighteous rise to power, and the rich are those who have become rich through devious means (verse 11), everything changes. People do not want to draw attention to themselves. Voices are hushed. The streets are empty. People remain out of sight. Life has ceased to be good. They get by as best they can.
But even in this situation those who have understanding and are wise are not taken in (verse 11). They understand the hearts of men and respond accordingly. They know that God is with them, so they are discreet but not afraid (verse 11). They continue to maintain their livelihoods knowing that ‘the crown does not endure to all generations’ (27.24), whilst their lives before God do (27.23-27). If they wait long enough all will be put right.
28.13
Whatever happens, the central truths about life never change. Men may have to hide from men (verses 11, 12), but they must not hide from God. They must come out fully into the open with God. The one who covers his ‘transgressions’ (‘rebellions’), his acts in rebellion against God and His Torah, ignoring his transgressions and not being willing to admit them, will not finally prosper. He will not enjoy the life describe in 27.23-27. He will not ‘obtain mercy’. This is true for all. It is true for both rich and poor, for the powerful and for the helpless. The devious rich may seem to get richer (verse 11), evil men might rise to power (verse 12), but in the end both will lose out. The devious rich will lose their riches (22.16; 23.5), ‘riches are not for ever’ (27.24). Evil rulers will be replaced, ‘does the crown endure to all generations?’ (72.24). Neither will come off well in the end. The only ones who will finally prosper are the wise, the truly righteous.
Thus in contrast to those who hide their transgressions, those who confess and forsake their transgressions will obtain mercy. As they come to God with repentant hearts God will forgive them and be their God. And as a consequence they can be sure that in the end they will prosper, whether here or in the life to come. They have understanding (verse 11). They know that riches and power are temporary (7.24), and that true life (‘eternal life’) is permanent.
The word ‘confess’ in the Hebrew indicates something which brings public praise to God (its main significance). So whilst we may admit our sins to God in private, we are expected to make public what we have done for the glory of God. In other words we are to make clear to men that we rejoice as forgiven sinners. Our change of heart and life is to be known to all men to the glory of God.
28.14
Verse 13 is now repeated in another way. The man who continually walks in the fear of YHWH is ‘happy’. He is happy because he ‘makes YHWH his trust’ (16.20; Psalm 40.4; compare 84.12). He is happy because his sin is no longer imputed to him (Psalm 32.2). He is happy because his strength is in God (Psalm 84.5). He is happy because YHWH chastens him and teaches him from the Torah (Psalm 94.12). He is happy because he has found wisdom and obtained understanding (3.13). He is happy because he keeps God’s ways (8.32) and obeys the Torah (29.18). He has much to be happy about. Note the ‘always’. He fears YHWH whether the ruler be good or bad. For in that is the secret of life.
This man is happy because he ‘fears always’. He trembles before YHWH because he recognises His awesomeness. In context the ‘trembling’ here can only be ‘the fear of YHWH’ which is a theme of the whole book (1.7, 29; 2.5; 8.13; 9.10; 10.27; 14.26, 27; 15.16, 33; 16.6; 19.23; 22.4; 23.17). It is because he fears YHWH that he does not harden his heart (verse 14b). It is because he fears YHWH that a man confesses and forsakes his transgressions (verse 13) and is happy (Psalm 32.1). It is because he fears YHWH that he is unafraid (verse 1), whatever problems arise. It is because he fears YHWH that a man observes the Torah (verse 4; 29.18). It is because he fears YHWH that a man seeks Him (verse 5).
But in contrast is the one who ‘hardens his heart’. He does not confess and forsake his transgressions (verse 13). He does not obtain mercy (verse 13). He does not have understanding (verse 11). All that awaits him are troubles and distress.
The hardened heart is not just a theological expression. It is a practical experience. When a man has covered up his transgressions, although in his conscience aware of them, they are still there underneath. They prevent his true happiness. And gradually he becomes more and more hardened. He loses his joy. He builds up barriers between him and God. God speaks to him by His Spirit, calling him to repent and forsake his sins. But he continually rejects, until in the end the danger can be that he becomes so hardened that he is no longer accessible to God. It was because He saw that the Pharisees were doing this that Jesus warned them of the danger of their ‘blaspheming against the Holy Spirit’, in other words giving the lie to the Holy Spirit’s testimony in their hearts which arose through what they had seen of His activity (Mark 3.22-29).
28.15
Having described the security and happiness of God’s true people, the writers now turn back to the thought of the unrighteous ruler (verse 12b). Through his activities and demands he brings his people into poverty, acting like a roaring lion after what prey it can find, and a ravenous, charging bear who is out to seize its prey. He taxes them to the hilt, he uses the courts in order to fill his treasury, he seizes their goods under any pretext.
The lion and the bear were a favourite idea of David, Solomon’s father. When he kept his father’s flocks the hungry lion and the ravenous bear would try to seize one of the flock, but then David, with the strength given to him by YHWH, would overcome the lion and the bear and deliver his sheep (1 Samuel 17.34-36). In view of the depiction of the people of God as shepherds in 27.23-27, we may well see a parallel. His people can be sure that YHWH will deliver them from the lion and the bear. Meanwhile they will do well to live quietly and not draw his attention to them (verse 12).
28.16
The subsection ends with a further contrast between the prince (nagid) who is ‘lacking in understanding’ (does not follow the wisdom of God), and who therefore oppresses his people, and the wise prince who hates covetousness, and is not greedy and grasping. The wise prince will have a long and wise rule. In the light of the parallel the oppression of the unwise prince was clearly seen as related to coveting wealth. He was one of the rich who were wise in their own conceit (verse 11).
The oppressing ruler also occurs in verses 12 and 15. It is a theme of the subsection. Note the contrast also between the righteous poor man who has understanding in verse 11, and the oppressing, greedy prince who lacks understanding here. ‘There is who makes himself rich and has nothing, there is who makes himself poor and has great riches’ (13.7). ‘Better is the poor who walks in his integrity, than he who is crooked in his lips, and is a fool’ (19.1).
The use here of the word ‘nagid’ (prince) here is interesting. As a title in the singular it was only ever used of ‘princes’ of Israel, (whether secular or religious), mainly in the case of the secular at the time of their anointing as kings (1 Samuel 9.16; 10.1; 13.14; 25.30; 2 Samuel 5.2; 6.21; 7.8; 1 Kings 1.35; 14.7; 16.2; 2 Kings 20.5). Prior to Chronicles its emphasis was on secular kings of Israel and Judah and on there being made ‘prince’ by YHWH. The only exception is Ezekiel 28.2 where used of a pseudo ‘anointed one’ in sarcasm. On the lips of Solomon and the men of Hezekiah, therefore, it probably indicates ‘an anointed prince’ giving a more powerful edge to the proverb. Saul and Jeroboam (and indeed Solomon in his later days) were examples of anointed princes of Israel who went wrong.
Having concentrated attention on the devious rich and the unrighteous ruler (neither of whom will last for ever - 27.24) the subsection thus ends on a happy note with the thought of the wise ruler who is not out to get what he can for himself, and will thus live long (3.2, 16; 4.10; 9.11; 10.27) and enjoy popular support (his days will be prolonged).
The Wise And The Foolish (28.17-27).
The purpose of this next subsection is in order to explain who ‘the righteous’ and ‘the wicked’ are (28.1, 12, 28). It deals with different types of wise/righteous and foolish/unrighteous people, each proverb dealing with a different one. It is connected with the previous subsection by reference to the man of blood (verse 17). Unrighteous rulers were typically men of blood.
The wise man walks uprightly (verse 18), tills his land (verse 19), is trustworthy (verse 20), reproves those who need it (verse 23), puts his trust in YHWH (verse 25), walks wisely (verse 26) and gives to the poor (verse 27). The foolish man is crooked in his ways (verse 18), does not work hard but follows after empty headed persons (verse 19), uses devious methods to become rich (verse 20), is partial (verse 21), transgresses for a piece of bread (verse 21), looks at things from a wrong perspective (has an evil eye) (verse 22), flatters people (verse 23), robs his father and mother (verse 24), is greedy of spirit (verse 25), trusts in himself (verse 26), and hides himself from the poor, leaving them to struggle (verse 27).
There is continual emphasis on devious riches. Note how many of the examples involve wealth, either righteously or deviously obtained. Thus the hard worker will have plenty of food (verse 19), empty people will experience poverty (verse 19), the one who is in a hurry to be rich will be punished (verse 20), the one who has an evil eye bustles after riches (verse 22), a man robs his father and mother (verse 24), the man who has a greedy spirit causes strife (verse 25), those who have should give to the poor (verse 27). The references are sprinkled throughout the list. They are mainly a reminder that riches will not last for ever (27.24).
The subsection is presented chiastically as follows:
Note that in A we have the man laden with blood, and in the parallel we have the man who hides his eyes from the poor leaving them to die of hunger. In B we have the man who walks uprightly, and in the parallel the one who walks wisely. In C we have the man who works hard and tills his land (and trusts in YHWH to give him increase), and in the parallel the man who trusts in YHWH contrasted with the greedy man who want money without effort. In D we have the trustworthy person, and in contrast in the parallel the man who robs even his father and mother. In E we have the respecter of persons who is partial, and obtains favour in the wrong way, and in contrast in the parallel we have the one who rebukes all regardless of who they are and thereby finds favour the right way. Centrally in F we have the man who sees everything from an evil viewpoint and is in a hurry to get rich.
The Murderer (28.17).
28.17
Here we have the first example of the foolish man. This proverb connects with the previous subsection in that the oppressing prince is regularly a man who sheds innocent blood. But here the idea is more general and has in mind any man who murders another (compare 1.11). Carrying it on his conscience he seeks relief in death. Here the Pit is the entry into the world of the dead (see 1.12). He is under the sentence of God for murder (see 6.17), so no one is to seek to prevent him. 24.11 (‘deliver those who are carried away to death’) does not apply in such a case. It is no light thing deliberately to take another man’s life. For the use of ‘oppressed’ as meaning inwardly burdened see Isaiah 38.14b.
Alternately we may see the idea of ‘will flee to the pit’ as more figurative, signifying that his punishment will quickly follow his crime. He flees from the scene of the crime not realising that because of what he has done he is ‘fleeing to the Pit’ which will soon be the inevitable consequence of his crime. There may be delay, but it will come.
Three Wise Men (28.19-21).
We now have examples of three wise men who are contrasted with ‘the foolish’. The first ‘walks uprightly’, the second works hard, and the third is trustworthy and faithful.
28.18
In this proverb we have the familiar contrast between the upright (straight) and the perverse (crooked). See 10.9; 2.7, 15. This is the first example of the truly righteous man, he is the one who walks uprightly or straight. He walks wisely (verse 26). He is not crooked in any way. He is not furtive. He walks firmly in the paths of righteousness, the path of life, not turning aside into crooked by-paths. And as a consequence he will be ‘delivered’. The word includes the idea of being ‘helped’. He will be helped in his ways and will be delivered from the ways of evildoers (2.12, 16), from trouble (11.8) and above all from death (10.2; 11.4; 23.14). He will have and enjoy life (3.16-18). 20.22 makes clear that it is YHWH Who will deliver him.
In contrast is the perverse man (the second example of the unrighteous man). He is the one who is crooked in his ways. And he will ‘fall in one’. ‘In one’ probably refers to the Pit of verse 17a, seeing the two proverbs as taken together. But it may mean ‘in one of his ways’. Either way his fall is final.
28.19
The second example of the righteous man is the one who tills his land, in other words works hard. The idea of the righteous man as hard working is a feature of Proverbs (e.g. 10.4b, 5a; 13.4; 21.5), often conveyed by the contrast of the sluggard (6.6-11; 13.4; 20.4). He lives the ideal life of 27.23-27. And in consequence he will have plenty of food. He is an exemplar of Paul’s words, ‘if a man will not work, let him not eat’ (2 Thessalonians 3.10, 12). He is the exact opposite of the one with a greedy spirit (verse 25).
In contrast is the one who ‘follows after vain (empty) persons’ (or ‘after what is vain, empty’). Instead of working hard and honestly, he engages in devious enterprises with equally devious people, people who are empty of worth and empty of righteousness and who follow after things which are empty. He is seeking to get rich quickly (verses 20, 22), and listens to those who would lead him astray (1.11-19; 2.12-15). He does not let conscience get in the way of his business activities. He is crooked (verse 18); flatters the right people (verse 23); and is greedy (verse 25). He practises deception. But he will be ‘filled with poverty’, either literally, or in his soul and in his destiny.
28.20
The third example of the righteous man is the trustworthy and faithful man. He does not let people down and is honest in all his ways. He is reliable and dependable. As a consequence he will abound with blessings, both from God and from men.
In contrast is the man who is in a hurry to get rich. He does not mind what devious or dishonest methods he uses. He does not mind who he hurts (he probably does not even think about it). He is greedy in spirit (verse 25) and has an eye set on evil (verse 24). But he will receive his deserts in the end. He ‘will not go unpunished’. One day either God, or life, or both, will get hold of him. The combination of ‘blessings’ and ‘punishment’ point to God as the main source of blessing and punishment.
Three Foolish Men (28.21-22).
Three more foolish men are now described. The one who has respect of persons (verse 21a), the one who transgresses for merely a piece of bread (verse 21b), and the one who sees things from an evil point of view and ‘bustles after riches’, not caring how he gets them (verse 22).
Note how they all have their eye on something. The first has his eye on who can be beneficial to him. The second has his eye on a good dinner. The third has his eye on riches.
28.21
The one who has respect of persons fawns on the rich and despises the poor. He ingratiates himself with the great, and looks down on ‘common people’. He is a confirmed flatterer (verse 23). He distinguishes people on the ground of race and colour (unless they are rich, of course). He is out for what he can get. This is summed up as ‘not good, not wholesome’. It is to be avoided by the righteous man.
It is especially important, of course, in court. Favouritism should be shown to neither rich nor poor. What is important is true justice (23.3, 6; Leviticus 19.15).
Parallel with him is the man who can be bought cheaply ‘for a portion of food’. Just as the man who has respect of persons is ‘bought’ by the hope of favours from the rich man, or favours from the great, this man can be bought cheaply, even for a portion of food (a good dinner - Genesis 18.5; Judges 19.5). This is not speaking of a starving man who will do anything for food, but of a man who is not fussy what he does, and will do it for little reward. As long as he can feast well he is satisfied.
28.22
The man with ‘an evil eye’ is the man who looks at things from an evil point of view. In 23.6 the man with an evil eye was a man who, while being forced into giving hospitality out of politeness, looked on the one who received it with distaste, and even anger. Here the ‘evil eye’ turns its attention to riches. This man is in a hurry to get rich (compare verse 20), and his attention turns towards ill-gotten gains. But what he does not realise is that those ill-gotten gains will prove elusive. One day, in this world or the next, he will find himself in want (Luke 16.23-24). For ‘riches are not for ever’ (27.24).
Those Who Repair Or Destroy Relationships (28.23-25).
These next examples encourage or destroy relationships. The reprover sets a man on the right road and as a consequence is favoured (verse 23); the one who robs his father and mother destroys their relationship with him, and goes against all that they have taught him (verse 24); the greedy man causes strife (verse 25).
28.23
The next righteous man is the righteous ‘reprover’. Because of his concern for his friend he reproves him. It is not an easy thing to do for it is much easier to say flattering (smooth) things to someone than it is to have to reprove them and correct them. (The word mans ‘rebuke, reprove, correct, chasten’). But in the end he is appreciated, for it is the wise reprover who will finally receive more favour than the flatterer. For whilst the person who is reproved may initially take offence, afterwards, if he is wise, he will be grateful. If he is a man of understanding he will learn from it (19.5). So to the wise man who is reproved his reprover will finally appear as a rich ornament (25.12)
On the other hand if the person reproved is recognised as an unrighteous person, it is the contemporaries of the reprover who will express their appreciation of his reproof, for it will help towards maintaining a wholesome society (24.24-25). So he gains either way.
In contrast the flatterer often has an ulterior motive (29.5; 2.16; 7.5). He especially flatters the rich and the great (compare on verse 21). He/she speaks with a smooth tongue (29.5; 2.16; 7.5), and leads people astray or gives away secrets (20.19). In the end flatterers can ruin a man (26.28). And even a friend becomes an enemy when by his smooth words he persuades his friend that everything is all right with his behaviour when it is not.
The word translated ‘afterwards’ literally on the face of it means ‘after me’ (in accordance with what I say), but it is translated as being a rare adverbial form.
28.24
We now come to a description of the lowest of the low, a man who without conscience can rob his own father or his own mother. The thought may be of not providing for them in their old age, or of causing them serious loss while offering some specious excuse. In the latter case he possibly claims that he ‘has a right to it’, or that ‘they are not looking after it properly’, or that ‘it will be better if I take over the inheritance’ (compare 20.21). But his real motive is greed (verse 25). He is in a hurry to be rich (verses 20, 22). 19.25 speaks of a man who impoverishes his father and refuses to fulfil his covenant responsibility to care for his mother. Jesus Himself condemned those who ‘devoted things to God’ so as not to have to look after their parents (Matthew 15.5-6).
Such a man as this is the equivalent of a destroyer (the most feared of people). He goes against all that his parents have taught him, and all their loving reproof (verse 23). He destroys his relationship with his parents, he destroys their hearts, and he may even destroy their home. He has no compunction. He has united himself with that most evil of people ‘the destroyer’. But he need be in no doubt that one day he too will be destroyed (compare 22.23).
28.25
The next foolish man is the one who is ‘of a greedy spirit’ (literally ‘one who is wide of appetite’ who has his mouth wide open for what he can get). He wants to possess things, to become rich, This necessarily puts him at odds with those from whom he is obtaining what will satisfy his greed, and in many cases causes him to join with those who cause trouble. Thus he tears society apart and destroys relationships. But he will not necessarily get what he wants, and even if he does it will only be in order to lose it in the end (27.24). The parallel brings out that he puts his trust in possessions rather than in YHWH. But he is a fool, for ‘a man’s life does not consist in the abundance of the things which he possesses’ (Luke 12.15-21).
In contrast is the one who trusts in YHWH (3.5; 16.20; 18.10; etc.). He will receive abundance. He will be ‘made fat’ (will prosper and do well). Compare 27.23-27; 3.9-10; 11.25; 13.4.
Four Final Examples (28.26-27).
These four examples in verse 26-27 are in chiastic form. On the one hand is the one who trusts in his own heart, and the one who hides his eyes from the poor. And these sandwich the one who walks wisely (trusting in YHWH - verse 25) and the one who gives to the poor.
28.26
Whereas the wise man trusts in YHWH (verse 25), the fool trusts in his own heart, which is deceitful above all things and desperately wicked (Jeremiah 17.9). No wonder he goes astray and is crooked in his ways (verse 18). By it he proves that he is a fool.
On the other hand the wise man walks wisely. He walks uprightly (verse 18). Such a man will be delivered from trouble and from death. Compare verse 18; 11.21.
28.27
The list of righteous and unrighteous men ends by considering men’s behaviour towards the poor. This brings out how important a generous spirit and the meeting of the needs of the poor was to YHWH. Indeed, it is paralleled in the subsection chiasmus with the man who sheds blood (verse 17), and rightly so, for many of the poor died prematurely because of their poverty and because those charged with their welfare neglected their responsibility.
And the promise is that the one who gives to the poor will not have to go without themselves. YHWH will prosper them (Deuteronomy 15.10). He will give them back more than they give (Ecclesiastes 11.1). They will be blessed.
On the other hand the one who hides his eyes from the poor, and says ‘I did not realise’ (compare 29.7a), will have many a curse. He will be cursed by the poor, and he will be cursed by God. For what curses bring consider Deuteronomy 28.15-45, and compare 21.13. Note the irony. The generous man will not lack, he will have abundance. The hardhearted also will not lack, he will have curses in abundance. And to be justly cursed was a serious matter (contrast 26.2).
Those Who Are Masters Of Others, And Those Who Are Masters Of Themselves (28.28-29.16).
In this subsection the contrast between the righteous and the unrighteous forms an inclusio. Within that inclusio the questions of the authority of the father and mother, and the king on his righteous throne, are dealt with, both forming inner inclusios, while within those inclusios the activities of the wise and foolish are described, especially in relation to anger.
There is a strong emphasis on ‘control’. The subsection opens and closes with proverbs about those in authority, those who are in control, and deals centrally with the question of controlling men’s anger.
The subsection is present chiastically as follows:
Note that A speaks of when the righteous are increased and in contrast the parallel speak of when the wicked are increased. In B a wise son rejoices his father, and in contrast in the parallel an unchastened (and therefore unwise) child brings shame to his mother. In Proverbs it is unusual for the mother to be mentioned on her own which confirms that we are to parallel these two proverbs. In C the king establishes his land by justice, and in the parallel the king, by faithfully judging the poor, establishes his throne for ever. In D we have contrasts between the righteous, who take the cause of the poor, and the unrighteous who take no notice of them, and set snares for men, together with those who flatter to deceive, whilst in the parallel the evil oppressor, who listens to falsehood (including flattery), is nevertheless on a par with the poor. In E wise men turn away wrath, and in the parallel the wise man stills anger. Centrally in F there will be no calm for a wise man dealing with fools in a court confrontation, whilst in the parallel the bloodthirsty (and therefore fools) hate the perfect and upright (because he wins his confrontation in court) and seek his life.
The Rise Of The Unrighteous And The Rise Of The Righteous Contrasted (28.28-29.2).
These three proverbs form a unit, dealing with the contrast between what happens when the unrighteous rise, and an unrighteous man bears rule, and when the righteous flourish, while in between that contrast there is a warning to the unrighteous that if they will not respond to God’s reproof and chastening, they will suddenly be struck down and that without remedy. This last applied to both the individual and the nation. For the nation it finally occurred finally when Northern Israel was finally destroyed by the Assyrians (see 2 Kings 17.5, 14, 18, 23), and the land was possessed by others (2 Kings 17.24) and when Judah (southern Israel) was destroyed by the Babylonians (2 Kings 25.21) with those who were left fleeing to Egypt (2 Kings 25.26).
This unit is constructed as an inner chiasm:
The outer shell (AA) describes what happens when the unrighteous flourish. Men hide themselves and the people sigh. The inner shell (BB) describes what happens when unrighteous perish and the righteous flourish, the people rejoice. Central is the powerful warning to the unrighteous.
The unit forms an inclusio with 29.16 which also describes what happens when the unrighteous increase. Then transgression also increases. But it assures men that the righteous will eventually triumph.
28.28
The first proverb in the unit brings out that when the unrighteous rise (the noun is plural indicating the unrighteous as a group, although it can only occur when there is an unrighteous leadership), then men ‘hide themselves’ (compare 28.12). They watch their backs, guard their homes, and do not wander out into the streets unnecessarily. They keep a low profile. Life is unsafe.
But when the unrighteous perish, (i.e. their leadership are removed and they are the ones who go into hiding), there is great shouting in the streets (11.10), and the righteous increase. They flourish and begin to appear on the streets in large numbers, and others unite themselves with them. The whole city rejoices (11.10). This was the situation when Hezekiah became sole king and began his reforms (2 Kings 18.2-7; 2 Chronicles 30.25-26), following the death of Ahaz who had sold out to the Assyrians, something that ‘the men of Hezekiah (25.1) would well have remembered.
29.1
The reason for the perishing of the unrighteous is now given (and is inevitable - 29.16). It is because if the one who is often reproved ‘hardens his neck’ (is unyielding and unrepentant), he will suddenly be struck down and that without remedy (see 2 Kings 17.14). Such reproof, the reproof of God’s wisdom, was spoken of in 1.24-25, and the consequences of refusal outlined in 1.26-32. And in Proverbs that reproof comes primarily through the disciplinary instruction and Torah teaching of a godly father and mother (1.8-9; 6.20), and, of course, through the words of Solomon (2.1-2; 3.1-2; etc.).
There is in these words a warning to us all. God is constantly at work reproving and chastening all men, both through conscience (Romans 1.19; 2.14-15) and through His wisdom (His word), but those who harden their necks (2 Kings 17.14; Isaiah 48.4; Jeremiah 17.23) and refuse to respond can only expect finally to be ‘struck down’ (‘broken’ - 6.15). And once that has happened there will be no remedy (1.22-32; 6.15; 28.17-18; Jeremiah 19.11; Luke 17.27-29; Romans 9.28; 1 Thessalonians 5.2-3; 2 Peter 3.10-12).
29.2
In this section of Proverbs the righteous are continually thought of as a group. It is concerned with the whole of the righteous, all who respond to wisdom and God’s word. And when they ‘increase’, that is, flourish and become numerous, and rise to power, the people rejoice. It means freedom, justice, and the ability to go on the daily round without fear. But when an unrighteous man comes to power and begins to rule the people sigh. Freedom will be restricted, justice uncertain, and men will have to watch themselves as they go about the daily round.
Comparisons Between The Righteous And The Unrighteous (29.3-16).
In what follows the righteous and the unrighteous are defined. The righteous love wisdom (verse 3); rule in justice (verse 4); consider the poor (verse 7); turn away wrath from a city (verse 8); keep back and quieten anger (verse 11); judge righteously (verse 14); and obtain wisdom (verse 15).
The unrighteous squander their wealth (verse 3); demand bribes (verse 4); flatter their neighbours (verse 5); transgress and lead others astray (verse 6); ignore the poor (verse 7); bring their city into danger (verse 8); disturb the wise (verse 9); try to destroy the righteous (verse 10); do not restrain their tongues (verse 11); listen to lies (verse 12); bring shame on their mother (verse 15); and increase transgression and rebellion (verse 16).
Stability Through Righteousness Versus The Wrong Use Of Wealth (29.3-7).
The secret of stability is response to a righteous authority, the proper use of wealth, and a rejection of deceit (flattery). The one who responds to his righteous father (verse 3), those who are under a righteous government (verse 4), those who avoid the snare of flattery (verse 5), and those who ensure provision for the poor (verse 7) will have stable lives and bring joy. They will avoid wasting wealth by buying illicit sex (verse 3), paying bribes (verse 4), being caught out by flattery (verse 5), or ignoring the poor and using their wealth for other purposes (verse 7). Verse 6 is a catch all referring to ‘the evil man’ whose transgressions trap people. Both the oppressor and the righteous king are judged by their attitude towards the poor (verses 13-14).
29.3
The one who, in response to his father’s disciplinary instruction, loves wisdom, causes his father to rejoice (15.20; 23.24). He works hard to maintain the family wealth, avoids sinful pleasures, and encourages unity in the family, thus being a sound member of both the family and the community (which was dependent on stable families) and contributing to its stability. He is a cause and consequence of the increase of the righteous (verse 2) and a product of responding to authority. He has responded to discipline and reproof (verse 15).
But the one who associates with sexually promiscuous women is out for a good time and wastes his substance (like the prodigal son in the parable of Jesus - Luke 15.13). He is a grief to his father (17.21, 25), because he no longer works hard and is upright, and as a consequence he disrupts the community. He ensures that wealth gets into the wrong hands, and he is no longer a credit to the family. He also brings shame on his mother (verse 15) by giving the impression that he has not been brought up properly by being instructed in the Torah (1.8).
29.4
In Israel the father (verse 3) was the lowest in the line of authority that led upwards through fathers of a wider family, fathers of a clan, and fathers of a sub-tribe, to fathers of a tribe. But over all was the king. Just as the father established his family by his wise and firm guidance so was the king to establish the whole land through justice (righteousness and truth). It is only when he is just, and people can be sure of justice, that the land grows firm and strong, and righteousness prevails. Under such a king the country becomes stable. (The same, of course, applies to presidents, prime ministers and democratic government).
But when the ruler rules in response to bribery, and is influenced by favouritism, or others seek to subvert officials by offering bribes, then the land will be in turmoil, and righteousness will be overthrown, and with it the land, which will not survive. Its stability will have disappeared. In this case also instead of producing righteousness (as it does with the wise man) wealth produces wickedness. This second part of the proverb is well illustrated in the later history of Northern Israel where capable kings were rare, although when they did arise the land prospered (e.g. Jeroboam II - 2 Kings 14.27).
‘He who exacts or offers bribes’ is a translation of the literal ‘a man of contributions’. If it parallels the king then it suggests a ruler who is open to bribery, but it deliberately leaves open the possibility of it referring to those who offer bribes to corrupt officials. The idea is that both parties to bribery are equally culpable and destructive.
29.5
The third destroyer of stability is the man who flatters his neighbour. Whilst outwardly he appears to be on his neighbour’s side, he is really spreading a net in order to ensnare him. He wants to entangle his feet because he wants dishonestly to get something out of him. The lesson is that when someone flatters you, you need to watch your wallet. And sadly, when neighbours cannot be trusted the whole land becomes unstable. Much of modern advertising is based on flattery. It is suggesting that there is this wonderful ‘you’ whom their product can enhance (the models are always either beautiful women or rugged men). We need to beware of its claims. They can certainly affect our wealth.
The flatterer is comparable with the sexually promiscuous woman (verse 3) who also uses flattery with which to seduce her victim (2.16; 6.24), whilst the unjust ruler seeks flattery in the form of bribes. All (along with the advertisers) are out for what they can get.
29.6
Underlying ‘transgression (rebellion)’ is the thought of rebellion against society and against the covenant. The transgressor is undermining society and the Torah. He is encouraging instability. And when deliberately practised by ‘an evil man’ (i.e. one who is not seeking to be ‘good’) it is a snare both for him and for those with whom he is involved. The rumblings of disobedience to the covenant and God’s Torah (instruction) cause only distress and misery.
But the righteous are not ensnared. They close their ears to the voice of the transgressor, and they close their hearts against his sinful ways, which is why they utter shouts of joy because they are not caught in his snare (22.5). Their hearts are open to God, and they walk in His ways (3.5-6; 10.29). They walk with sure steps (3.23, 26; 4.12; 10.9; 11.3, 5). They will not therefore be brought down.
29.7
An important aspect of good rulership is concern for the poor. If the poor are not catered for in some way many will turn to violence, robbery, or even rebellion. There are always those who will take advantage of them in order to found their own kingdom within a kingdom. Compare Jephthah in Judges 11.3; David in 1 Samuel 22.1-2.
A man’s attitude towards the poor is a central theme of Proverbs (14.21, 31; 17.5; 19.17; 21.13; 22.9; 22.16, 22; 28.8, 27; 29.14; 31.20). It is a test of man’s obedience to YHWH (14.31; 17.5; 19.17; 22.2). To take knowledge of the poor (be aware of their needs and be concerned to meet them) is a fundamental of the Torah (Deuteronomy 14.28-15.18; 24.14-15; Exodus 22.25; 23.6, 11; Leviticus 19.10; 23.22; 25.35, 39). Thus those who are truly righteous will necessarily have concern for the poor. And here there is a special emphasis on ‘the cause of the poor’. The righteous man is concerned when the poor are brought before the courts, in order to ensure that they have a fair trial. Although they do not show them favouritism (Exodus 23.3, 6).
But the unrighteous, being ‘without spiritual understanding’, do not even consider the poor. They neglect them and ignore their problems. And as we see in the cases of Jephthah and David, the poor can band together and become a threat to peace and escurity.
Men’s Right And Wrong Attitudes (29.8-11).
These next four proverbs deal with men’s right and wrong attitudes, and their control or otherwise of anger: their attitude when facing circumstances that require diplomacy (verse 8), their attitude towards each other (verse 9), the attitude of men of violence towards the righteous (verse 10), and men’s attitudes when they are angry (verse 11). Note the emphasis on ‘the wise’ (verse 8, 9, 11) and their equivalents, the blameless and the upright (verse 10), and on anger controlled or uncontrolled. The first and last proverbs refer to the wise being able to quieten the anger of scorners and fools, while the central two refer to the problems that the unwise (the foolish man and the violent man) bring to the wise.
29.8
As has been indicated the next four proverbs (verses 8-11) all refer to, or otherwise indicate, anger. Here inflame could mean ‘set on fire’ or arouse the emotions of’. In the former case it could refer to unwise activity which leads to the taking of a city and its putting to the torch (such as yelling at the enemy rather than negotiating), in the latter it could refer to the idea of arousing people to anger by inciting them against the covenant and what they see as its unnecessary burdens, or against the leadership by fanning their grievances. Being scorners these ‘inflamers’ inveigh against YHWH’s covenant, and against rulers, even if they do not inveigh against YHWH.
In contrast the wise act in such a way as to turn away wrath. They reason with and negotiate with an invader, (compare how the wise woman saved her city (2 Samuel 20.15-22) and see also Ecclesiastes 9.15), or they quietly and efficiently show people why they are wrong about the covenant, or persuade them that they are making too much of their imagined grievances. Their aim is not to prevent reasonable protest, but to prevent men acting in anger. Calm minds can achieve what anger cannot. Compare how in verse 11 the wise man ‘stills’ anger in the same way as God ‘stills’ the raging waves of a stormy sea.
29.9
The wise man who confronts a foolish and unrighteous man in court has to recognise that the foolish man will use any kind of method to win his case. He may try to laugh the wise man’s case out of court, or he may inveigh angrily against the wise man and try to convey a sense of injustice. What the wise man can be sure of is that the court case will be tumultuous. There will be no calm consideration of the facts on both sides. He will have a battle on his hands. It is something that he must consider before going to court. (Barristers often try the same tactics if they have a weak case).
The laughter or anger cannot refer to the wise man. No wise man would use such tactics in court. The wise man wants to win on the basis of the facts, not by subterfuge.
29.10
Violent people, especially violent dishonest ones, hate the blameless and upright, they hate ‘each one of them’, partly because they make them feel guilty, and partly because the upright try to get in the way of their illegal activities. They especially hate them if the upright win a case against them in court (verse 9). Thus they will seek to destroy each one of them (upright is plural, his is singular, which indicates in Hebrew that it means each one). We especially see this when an upright man is actually influential in cracking down on them. The solution of the violent man is to liquidate him.
29.11
This final proverb about anger reveals more about the fool’s behaviour. He cannot control himself. When he is angry he does not stop to think what he is saying, but openly, and without restraint, blurts out everything that he thinks and feels. He says a lot that he will later regret, but he does not think about the consequences.
In contrast the wise man is calm and waits for the fool’s anger to burn itself out, responding patiently and pouring oil on troubled waters. He knows that it would be foolish to lose his own temper. And in the end he stills the fool’s anger. (The verb is elsewhere used of stilling waves caused by a storm - Psalm 89.9).
Words About Those In Authority (29.12-15).
As we have seen, these saying are in parallel with sayings about rulership, most specifically in verses 2-4. Once again they speak of those who are in authority. In those days those in authority were kings and rulers. In our own day they can be presidents, prime ministers, and national and local politicians. But the same principles apply to all. Note how underlying all is the authority of YHWH Who is Lord over all men (verse 13).
29.12
The ‘servants’ here are the king’s ‘under-rulers’ and trusted advisers. The proverb may indicate a weak ruler, who is easily persuaded to do wrong (compare Rehoboam in 1 Kings 12.1-19), or a ruler who himself is without scruples. Either way he is a ‘fool’. He listens to flattery, pays heed to wrong advice and accepts lies and deceit. But to have such a ruler is disastrous, for it means that the unrighteous gain control. It is an almost inevitable consequence of weak or bad rulership.
During his reign flattery rules (compare verse 5), the poor are neglected (verse 7), transgressors lay snares for men (verse 6). It bodes ill for the nation. Instead of those in authority asking how they can bring prosperity to the nation, they ask how they can obtain prosperity for themselves, and the consequence is that social structures disintegrate. Everyone is out for himself.
29.13
In 22.2 we read that, ‘the rich and poor meet together, YHWH is the Maker of them all.’ The idea was that in the end all are on a par before YHWH. They mingle together in society, and are all His creations. The idea here is very similar although now related to an oppressing man in authority. The thought is sandwiched between references to good and bad rulers. Note how it parallels the need to show concern for the poor in verse 7. Even an oppressor needs to take notice of the poor, for his activities will ensure that there are so many of them, and in a day when bands of brigands were a continual problem, it was necessary to prevent an increase in their numbers. Saul lived to regret the poor who flocked to David.
And the main point is that both the poor man and the influential man rub shoulders on earth, and both receive life from (Psalm 13.3), are revived and strengthened by (Ezra 9.8) and are enlightened by (Psalm 19.8), YHWH. Both receive the essentials of life from YHWH, and are dependent on Him. He thus reveals His concern about both. So the oppressor (there are many oppressors in public life today) needs to recognise what he owes to YHWH (his life and wellbeing are in His hands), and also to consider carefully how he treats the poor. He should remember that they also are in favour with YHWH. Unlike him, YHWH does not see them as irrelevant, and as people who can be ignored. They are extremely important to Him (see comments on verse 7). The weak or ruthless ruler in verse 12 would have done well to take note. Until rulers recognise that they themselves are simply potential poor men who have wealth and privileges they will never rule wisely.
29.14
In contrast to the bad ruler and the oppressor is the good king. He too is judged by his attitude towards the poor. It is the king who ‘faithfully judges the poor’ whose throne will be established for ever. ‘Judges’ here means rules over and provides them with justice and assistance, as with the judges in Judges. By treating them rightly, and fairly, and with consideration, and by not allowing them to be down trodden, he prevents resentment building up, and ensures their continual support. He also demonstrates his own worthiness to rule. Because he therefore earns favour with both God (verse 13) and man he ensures the stability of his throne, and hopefully the stability of his dynasty long into the future (‘for ever’ in this context means ‘into the foreseeable future’).
29.15
At the bottom end of the rulership scale was the rulership of father and mother. In ancient society this was the first line of serious authority, stretching up towards the king. Whilst today parents can be sidelined it was not so in those days. That was why father and mother had to be ‘honoured’ (Exodus 20.12). It was they who instilled in their children wisdom and the Torah (1.8), and the father especially was expected to judge them and discipline them, using the same method as was used by judges and the king, the rod. And if necessary he was to report them to the authorities. He was the family’s ‘king’ and ‘judge’. And alongside him was his wife who instructed the children in the Torah.
By the exercise of the rod, and by firm reproof, the father was to bring up his children in wisdom, recognising that by failing to use them he would be failing in love and failing in his duty (13.24; 22.15). The rod was the recognised form of discipline. Life was hard and basic, and there were few other ways of exerting pressure. Today we have other alternatives to hand that were not available then. We could replace the word ‘rod’ by ‘firm discipline’. But such firm discipline is still important.
Here the warning is given that if the child is left to behave as he wants he will in the end bring shame on his mother, because he will not have learned right from wrong. He will thus listen to the enticing voices of others who do not have his real good at heart.
In the proverbs of Solomon (including the Prologue) there are eleven references to the mother’s relationship to her children. This is the only one where the father is not mentioned as well. This makes clear that this proverb is to be read alongside that in verse 3 (where the father only is mentioned). This is brought out by the subsection chiasmus. It may also indicate that here young children are in mind. She has a special responsibility for them whilst the father and their older children are out working.
The Unrighteous May Prosper For A While, But The Righteous Know That One Day They Will Fall (29.16).
The subsection opened with a reference to the righteous and the unrighteous, and it now closes in the same way. The references therefore form an overall inclusio. In the opening reference emphasis was laid on the ‘increase’ of the righteous, in comparison with when the unrighteous rule, here it is on the ‘increase’ of the unrighteous with the righteous watching for their fall. Thus the to-ing and fro-ing of the opening reference is replaced by the certainty of the final downfall of the unrighteous, a fitting end to the subsection.
29.16
Here ‘increased’ can mean ‘increased in power and status’ or it can mean ‘increased in numbers’. Comparison with the second use of the verb suggests the latter (although it could be a play on words). Either way it results in transgression (rebellion against the covenant and against the Torah, and therefore against God) increasing. The whole subsection has included references to the behaviour of the unrighteous, and illustrated its dangers. Now it is all summed up in the term ‘transgressions (rebellions)’. But as the unrighteous are coming into conflict with God their final end is inevitable. The righteous are therefore to persevere in righteousness and wisdom, if necessary keeping their heads down (8.28) or restraining themselves, for they will in the end witness their fall. The triumph of God is inevitable.
Final Words (29.17-27).
In this final subsection the concentration is very much on the righteous and the unrighteous among the people, and the only reference to a ruler has nothing strictly to do with his behaviour, but has in mind people’s attitudes towards him. The final verse of the last subsection, which referred to the righteous and the unrighteous, and the increase in transgression, and the fall of the unrighteous, led into this subsection, preparing the way for the discussion. Here are given examples of increased transgression (verses 18a, 19, 22-23a, 24) , and a reminder that those who do not trust in YHWH will not be safe (25b). It ends with a Proverb that suitably emphasises the theme of the whole book, that to the righteous the ways of the unrighteous are an abomination, and that to the unrighteous the ways of the righteous are an abomination. Each opposes the other’s lifestyle.
The subsection is presented chiastically as follows:
Note that in A a corrected son brings rest and inner delight, whilst in the parallel an unjust (uncorrected) man is an abomination to the righteous. In B a lack of vision (from YHWH) results in people casting off restraint (and therefore being in danger of falling - verse 16), and the one who observes and treasures the Torah is happy, whilst in the parallel those who put their trust in YHWH will be safe, and a man has to finally account to YHWH (Who will judge people in the light of His Torah). In C a servant will not listen to just words, and in the parallel a thief’s partner will not take notice of an adjuration. Centrally in D reference is made to the one who is hasty in his words, and a servant who becomes a son, and in the parallel reference is made to the angry and wrathful man, and one who is of a lowly spirit who obtains honour.
Casting Off Or Not Casting Off Restraint (29.17-21).
These next five proverbs have in mind the casting off, or the not casting off, of restraint. The first and the last give examples of restraint, the corrected son (verse 17) and the delicately brought up servant (verse 21). In between are three proverbs demonstrating lack of restraint (verses 18-20). In verse 17 the son was to be prevented from casting off the restraint of the instruction of his father and mother by the use of the rod (29.17 with 29.3, 15). In verse 18 men who felt that they had no clear prophetic word would cast off the restraint of the Torah. In verse 19 a servant will not be prevented from casting off restraint by mere words In verse 20 we have reference to the hopeless man who casts off restraint on his words. In verse 21 the man who brings up his servant from a child has clearly shown great restraint, as has the child in being brought up as a member of the family. Thus one theme of these five proverbs is the casting off, or not casting off, of restraint. One purpose of wisdom was to teach restraint, Thus from their behaviour we can discern the wise from the foolish.
29.17
Following on verse 15 we have an instruction to a father to properly correct and discipline his son, and the consequence will be, that instead of bringing shame on him (verse 15), he will give him inward comfort and rest (being undisturbed, quiet and free from anxiety), and be an inward delight to him (compare Isaiah 14.7). This unusual address concerning ‘your son’ reminds us that the one called ‘my son’ (27.11) can be a father.
As a consequence of being disciplined the son has not cast of restraint. He responds to the authority of his father. It is thus firm discipline that stops a man from casting off restraint. The physical correction of his son by a loving father would necessarily be a cause of emotional pain to the father, as well as to the son, and we therefore learn the additional lesson here that in the spiritual realm joy and peace regularly come through suffering. If we would experience the joys of life we must be willing to go through the hard experiences.
29.18
The word for ‘vision’ occurs regularly in Scripture and without exception refers either to men’s visionary dreams, or to the source of prophetic words. Here it may well refer to Solomon’s own prophetic words, or to those of the established prophets like Nathan, in which case, in parallel with reference to the Torah (law), it here signifies the necessity of prophetic interpretation of the Torah. It is saying that if there is no spiritual guidance men cast off the restraint of the Torah. Compare 1 Samuel 3.1, ‘the word of YHWH was precious in those days, there was no open vision’. Indeed, that was why God raised up Samuel.
But now again there was a prophetic vision in the words of Solomon, as he expounded and interpreted the Torah in terms of God based wisdom teaching. In 2.6 Solomon clearly saw himself as having received the words of YHWH. The ‘vision’ is his prophetic interpretation of the Torah. It is now here so that the people no longer have grounds for casting off restraint. And this is evidenced by the fact that there are those who now observe and treasure the Torah, and through it have found happiness and blessedness.
Thus this proverb is underlining the importance of Solomon’s wisdom teaching as a revelation from God. Those who heed it, and thereby observe the Torah, are the truly happy and blessed. But those who reject it as a prophetic word are ‘casting off restraint’ (i.e. the restraint of the Torah). They live every man by his own wisdom, doing what is right in his own eyes (compare 12.15; 21.2; Deuteronomy 12.8; Judges 17.6; 21.25).
‘Cast off restraint’ or ‘run wild’. Elsewhere in Proverbs the verb is use of ‘refusing’ instruction (8.33; 13.18; 15.32), which confirms that the idea here is of refusal to obey the Torah, as interpreted in Proverbs.
29.19
It is not only a son, but a bondservant who needs correcting. Unless he is under the threat of chastisement he will not take notice of correction. This is probably not a reference to not obeying orders, but rather has in mind a case which needs ‘correction’. He has cast off restraint and is guilty of something fundamental, and feels about it to such an extent that he is unwilling to listen to admonition. Although it is explained to him clearly he will not take any notice. It may be that he has a drink problem, drinking himself unconscious on cheap wine in order to escape the awfulness of his life. He may have a tendency to interfere with servant girls. He may have a tendency to steal because he does not have enough, or because he covets things. Or it may just be that he resents his position and demonstrates it by his actions. However, if he would not allow himself to be corrected by words there was no other alternative in those days except a beating. Thus a beating is implied here (explicit in verse 15) which will hopefully cause him to restrain himself.
29.20
Here we have another example of someone who has cast off restraint. He does not stop to think before he speaks. His words are unrestrained. But all this will do is get him into trouble, and lose him friends. And it means that no one will trust him with any task of importance that involves words, for he is totally without tact. Indeed he is the despair of Solomon who declares that there is more hope for a fool than for him. The fact that he was not seen as a fool suggests that he was one of the naive, although some see it as meaning that he was a greater fool. Either way he was clearly not wise.
29.21
In verse 19 we met the servant who would not respond to admonition. Now we meet a servant who is fully responsive to admonition, because he is reared almost as a son. Rather than having hasty words spoken to him (verse 20), he is brought up delicately. He is seen as one of the family. And he will eventually be adopted as a beloved son. Thus as he grows up he practises restraint so as to please his master. Once again firm discipline has produced a good result. The lesson from the Proverb is then that if you treat someone well they will fulfil your lawful desires.
We found a similar idea in 17.2 where it said, ‘a wise servant will have rule over a son who causes shame, and will have part of the inheritance among the brothers’, although there it was not something purposed from the beginning. The adoption of a servant born in the house as a son, especially where there was no heir, was not an unusual feature of those times (compare Genesis 15.2).
Consider also the chiastic parallel in verse 23, ‘A man’s pride will bring him low, but he who is of a lowly spirit will obtain honour’. This could be seen as supporting this interpretation on the grounds that the servant, having humbly accepted his privileges will then be honoured. In our view this is decisive (unless further discoveries confirm a different meaning for manown).
Alternately it could signify that the spoiled servant takes advantage of his situation and becomes a usurper in the family, making himself the heir by virtue of the influence that he has built up. The lesson would then be that if you spoil and pamper someone they may eventually take advantage of you.
These interpretations take manown to mean ‘heir, son’ as derived from nuwn. However, the meaning of the word is in doubt. Others take it to mean ‘insolent’ or something similar, and translate ‘he who pampers his servant from a child will have him become insolent at last’. In this case it is just one more example of how unwise treatment of someone can cause him to cast off restraint.
Four Unwise Men (29.22-25).
As we approach the end of the proverbs of Solomon we are now warned against four unwise men: The angry man who stirs up strife and abounds in rebellion (verse 22); the proud man who will be brought low (verse 23); the associate of thieves who dare not testify (verse 24); and the fearful man who will end up in a snare (verse 25). And these are in contrast with the person of lowly spirit who in the end will find honour, and the man who puts his trust in YHWH who will be safe.
These verses are connected by different words for ‘man’: (’ish, baal (verse 22), adam (verse 23), with adam appearing also in verse 25a. These men have different approaches to authority. The angry man rebels against authority, the proud man sees himself as superior to authority, the associate of thieves is involved with secretly undermining authority, the fearful man submits to authority regardless of whether it be good or bad.
29.22
The first of the four unwise men is the angry man. Because he is angry with his family or with his community he stirs up strife (compare 15.18). In some cases this would only be temporary, but here the thought is rather of the continually angry man. He resents restrictions (in the parallel clause he abounds in rebellion), he feels that others have been favoured and that he has not been fairly treated, and he does not like his lot. He tries to win his way by angry argument, and thus stirs up, either with the ones he wants to replace, or with the arbiter. When he fails he is even more angry and resentful. He cannot stand not having his own way, and seeks to cause trouble. Solomon warned the wise not to make friends of such a man (22.24).
Solomon then adds that such a man abounds in rebellion/transgression. He becomes totally lacking in restraint. He becomes a troublemaker, and someone to be avoided. He is antagonistic to authority. He is best left to the authorities to deal with.
29.23
The second unwise man is the proud man. Through pride he seeks a higher position than he deserves, or treats people with contempt and ignores their rights and their feelings. He treads people down. Like the angry man he causes contention (13.10). He is contemptuous of authority. But pride goes before destruction, and a haughty spirit before a fall (16.18). Thus in the end he will be brought low.
In direct contrast to him is the man of lowly spirit. He waits to be appreciated and exalted by others, he does not push himself forward, he treats all men as his equals. He waits for the king to say, ‘come up higher’ (25.7). Such a man will finally be honoured and respected. He will gain the status that he deserves. If his master treats him well he will respond wisely, and may in the end be made a son (verse 21).
29.24
The idea here is that the one who is an associate of a thief ‘hates his own life’, because the association could well result in his death. The angry man argued with authority. The proud man despised authority. This man refuses to respond to authority. The Torah required that men respond to an adjuration (a call under oath, supported by a curse, demanding that the person respond to questioning and speak the whole truth. A man could not be adjured to testify against himself). To fail to do so would involve the man in being cursed by God. See Leviticus 5.1. But the associate of the thief, being loyal to his friend (or fearful of his friend’s other associates, compare the fear of man in verse 25), will refuse to testify, and will thus come under God’s curse. Alternately he will pretend that he knows nothing, providing no information. The court may not know that he is lying, but God will. He will thus be under God’s curse. His silence in the face of authority is like the silence of the servant who despises his master in verse 19.
29.25
The last of the four unwise men is the fearful man. He fears man and thus finds himself ensnared. This may signify that he obeys unrighteous authorities when they call on people to act contrary to YHWH’s requirements (contrast Exodus 1.17), or that he is frightened by unscrupulous men who persuade him to act against authority. The assumption is that because of his fear of men he does things which are displeasing to YHWH. He ignores the need to put the fear of YHWH first, something which is an emphasis of Proverbs (see 1.7 and often). As a consequence he brings himself under YHWH’s judgment (verse 26).
In contrast the one who puts his trust in YHWH (3.5-6) will be safe in God’s hands (‘set on high, inaccessible’). He will have nothing to fear for what can man do to him? (Psalm 118.6). Nothing can touch him without God’s permission.
Closing Words (29.26-27).
The section opened by stressing that riches would cease and the crown would not endure for all generation (27.24). It now ends by stressing that as a consequence people should seek YHWH’s favour rather than a ruler’s, for it is only YHWH Who is permanent. That is why men should fear YHWH and not man (verse 25). It is why their trust should be in YHWH (verse 25). And it then underlines the fact that the wise and upright are in no way compatible with each other. You must be one or the other. A clear choice lies between the two. It is a fitting end to Solomon’s proverbs.
29.26
Solomon reminds us that many seek the ruler’s favour. They do it in order to become wealthy, or in order to obtain status. Or because they are afraid of him (verse 25). It may even make them forget God. But in this section there has been a clear warning against being one of those who try to get rich quickly (28.20, 22), and a reminder that ‘riches will cease’ (27.25). And here there is a clear warning that the ruler’s favour is not important in the final analysis. The crown will not endure for all generations (27.25), nor will his appointments. In the end it is not the ruler who judges men, but YHWH (compare 21.2, 30). He is the One Who weighs and assesses men and offers them prosperity and life, including eternal life, or determines that they will fail to enjoy real life, and will in the end die and descend irrevocably into the grave world. It is He Who will determine whether they live or die forever.
Thus although whether rulers are good or bad certainly affects the course of day to day life (29.2, 4, 12), in the end both rulers and the poor are on the same level before YHWH (29.13). In the big scheme of things it is YHWH’s assessment of us that matters, which is the reason for writing the book.
With regard to the question of ‘eternal life’, there is constant reference in the Book of Proverbs to ‘life’ as the destiny of the wise in contrast with ‘death’ as the destiny of the foolish. Thus the destiny of the wise is ‘life’. And in 15.24 the significance of that is made clear. The righteous is on the upward way of life, and will therefore avoid permanent residence in the grave world. This is a clear reference to the hope of a future life, something confirmed by the constant warnings that the grave world is what awaits the foolish (5.5; 7.27; 9.18). If Sheol (the grave world) permanently awaits both wise and foolish what is the point of the warnings to the foolish, for the same fate awaits both? The warnings thus suggest that there is something better for the righteous (compare 14.27; Psalm 16.11; 17.15; 23.6). This gives new meaning to the words in Ecclesiastes 12.7, ‘and the dust return to the earth as it was, and the spirit return to the God Who gave it’
29.27
The section, and the Solomonic part of the book, end here. This verse underlines that what has been under scrutiny has not just been behaviour with regard to individual decisions, but a whole way of life. On the one hand are the righteous, the wise, the upright, those who love and respond to God’s wisdom, those who are true to God. On the other hand are the unrighteous, the foolish, the perverse (twisted). They reject God’s wisdom. They do not pay heed to God and His ways. They pay little heed to God. And there is thus a two way reaction. The unjust man, that is to say his way of life, and all that he aims at, is an abomination to the righteous. And that is because it goes against the way of God. And the way of life of the one who is upright in the way (of God’s wisdom) is hated by the unrighteous. And that is because he walks in the way of God, and the unrighteous feel guilty and resent it. For the unrighteous man wants his own way rather than God’s way. And all his thinking, and his way of life, demonstrate that fact.
IS THERE SOMETHING IN THE BIBLE THAT PUZZLES YOU?
If so please EMail us with your question and we will do our best to give you a satisfactory answer.EMailus. (But preferably not from aol.com, for some reason they do not deliver our messages).
FREE Scholarly verse by verse commentaries on the Bible.
THE PENTATEUCH --- GENESIS ---EXODUS--- LEVITICUS --- NUMBERS --- DEUTERONOMY --- THE BOOK OF JOSHUA --- THE BOOK OF JUDGES --- THE BOOK OF RUTH --- SAMUEL --- KINGS --- I & II CHRONICLES --- EZRA---NEHEMIAH---ESTHER---PSALMS 1-73--- PROVERBS---ECCLESIASTES--- SONG OF SOLOMON --- ISAIAH --- JEREMIAH --- LAMENTATIONS --- EZEKIEL --- DANIEL --- --- HOSEA --- --- JOEL ------ AMOS --- --- OBADIAH --- --- JONAH --- --- MICAH --- --- NAHUM --- --- HABAKKUK--- --- ZEPHANIAH --- --- HAGGAI --- ZECHARIAH --- --- MALACHI --- THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW ---THE GOSPEL OF MARK--- THE GOSPEL OF LUKE --- THE GOSPEL OF JOHN --- THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES --- READINGS IN ROMANS --- 1 CORINTHIANS --- 2 CORINTHIANS ---GALATIANS --- EPHESIANS--- PHILIPPIANS --- COLOSSIANS --- 1 THESSALONIANS --- 2 THESSALONIANS --- 1 TIMOTHY --- 2 TIMOTHY --- TITUS --- PHILEMON --- HEBREWS --- JAMES --- 1 & 2 PETER --- JOHN'S LETTERS --- JUDE --- REVELATION --- THE GOSPELS & ACTS