Leithart
PROVERBS 22:8
Solomon uses agricultural imagery to describe realities of life. Like Paul and Jesus, he says that we reap as we sow. Our actions are always a kind of planting. We are always sowing seed that will come to fruition later on. If we sow righteousness, we will reap eternal life; if we sow iniquity, we reap “vanity,” that is to say, insubstantial nothing.
The image suggests that this connection of cause and consequence is a “natural” one. We can no more reap weight and glory by sowing sin than we can harvest barley after sowing broccoli. There is a natural connection between what we reap and what we sow.
The second line of this Proverb is obscure. The one who sows iniquity is still in view, and he now has a rod rather than seed. The point seems to be twofold: On the one hand, the man who sows iniquity will find that he reaps nothing, and will be furious in his frustration. On the other hand, his frustration will be ineffectual. He won’t have authority or power because he will have no wealth (v. 27), because he harvests nothing.
The Lord is the great sower, who sows the word of His righteousness and reaps abundantly. And his rod is not frustrated.
PROVERBS 22:9
The NASB translation doesn’t get the specific image of the Hebrew, which says “The good (of) eye he shall be blessed, for he gives from his bread to the poor.” Jesus uses the image of the “eye” when talking about wealth as well: “If you eye is clear, then is your body full of light” (Matthew 6). The eye is an organ of judgment in Scripture, and it is also therefore an organ associated with valuations, including valuations of wealth. In the context, Jesus is talking about setting our hearts on storing heavenly treasures, and the “dark eye” is associated with a false valuation of earthly treasure while the “clear eye” is associated with a right evaluation of heavenly and earthly treasures.
There is, again, a connection with Genesis 3. Adam and Eve had their eyes opened by eating from the tree of knowledge. In that context, the eyes are eyes of judgment and rule, the eyes of kings. By eating from the tree, they were elevated to a royal status for which they were ill prepared. But if we connect that thematic with Proverbs 22:9, we can conclude that part of the elevation to kingship is elevation to generosity. A king is one with a good eye – to discern between good and evil, and to give to those who are in need.
Part of having a “good” or “clear” eye is generosity, as this verse makes clear (and as Jesus also makes clear in talking about alms-giving). One with a good eye is one who casts a kind eye on the needy and poor. Solomon says, as Jesus does, that God repays generosity to the poor. Those with good eyes will be blessed.
It is significant that the Proverb says that the man with a good eye gives “from” his bread, or as the NASB says “some of his bread.” That might sound less than fully generous: Why doesn’t he give it all away? Is Solomon endorsing a residual selfishness? I think instead we should view this as a description of hospitality. What happens to the rest of the bread? The man with a good eye consumes it, but consumes it along with the poor. The picture is of a man eating bread, confronted by a poor man, who gives part of his bread to the poor man. Hospitality, not unilateral dispossession, is the biblical ideal. Those who have should give to those who don’t have, but they give in such a way that they share the goods together . To put it another way, the economic reality of charity is part of the larger “social” reality of fellowship. The Table (like Jesus’ table during His lifetime) is the model.
PROVERBS 22:10
Scoffers are haughty and mock at all that is right and good. As mockers, they cause strife, and as long as there are mockers about the strife will not cease. Conflict is the inevitable result when there’s someone in the community who’s always snorting at the leaders, flouting the rules, tearing down what is good, using the acids of irony to eat away at the foundations. On a smaller scale, this happens in families, when parents get away with mocking children or children parents or children children. It can happen on a cultural scale, when a people develops habits of irony and scoffing.
Solomon says that expulsion is the only solution. A mocker may be rebuked, but Paul says that the time for rebukes comes to an end. We don’t rebuke forever and ever. At some point, the only solution to mockery is to guard the community from the mocker by getting rid of him.
PROVERBS 22:11
Purity of heart doesn’t refer to a purity that is completely inward. Rather, purity of heart refers to the unalloyed devotion of the heart. The term comes from the sacrificial and cleanliness system of
Jesus says on a number of occasions that there is a direction connection between the heart and the tongue. Out of the treasures of the heart the mouth speaks. Solomon says the same. A man with a pure heart speaks words of grace. This doesn’t mean that he speaks soft words. It means that his words edify, build up, because they express the devotion of his heart. He is not a yes-man, whose words are always “nice.” Jesus’ words were not always “nice,” but they were always full of grace, intended to and effective in building up His hearers.
Solomon says that a man of pure devotions, whose lips speak out the purity of his heart, will be a king’s friend. A king’s friend is an advisor to the king, not merely a king’s pal. Jesus calls the disciples king’s friends in this sense; they know what the King is doing, and they have the privilege of offering their advice to Him. We are all king’s friends, privileged to offer our words to King Jesus in prayer.
Solomon certai
nly has earthly kings in view, and the same principle holds. Who gets the ear of King Jesus? Whoever is pure of heart and speaks words full of grace. Who gets the ear of the king? Whoever is devoted, honest, straightforward, full of edifying speech. The way to political authority is not compromise, but faithfulness.
PROVERBS 22:12
The “eyes of Yahweh” are open for judgment (Psalm 11:4). His eyes roam about the earth to view what is going on and to pass judgment. Sometimes, the eyes are the source of the judicial action itself. It’s not simply that God sees and pronounces on something, but that His eyes see and His eyes take action.
Here, the Lord’s eyes are watchers, preserving and guarding. There is a connection with the tabernacle symbolism. The lampstand of the tabernacle is formed like a almond tree, with almond blossoms and buds. This fits with the story of Aaron’s rod, which budded like an almond tree. Aaron’s rod designated him as the true priest, who could flourish and bear fruit in the presence of God. But the fact that it was almond shows part of its significance. In Hebrew, the word for “almond” puns on the word for “watcher.” Aaron was being designated as the “watcher,” one of the “eyes of Yahweh” within the house. The almond-formed lampstand had the same symbolism. The lights of the lampstand were “watchers” that keep their “eyes” on the twelve loaves of showbread on the other side of the holy place.
How do the eyes of Yahweh preserve or guard knowledge? What does that mean? We can look at the second line of the Proverb for a clue. This says that Yahweh overthrows the words of a treacherous man, and this evidently contrasts with what the Lord does with the wise, faithful, or righteous man. A treacherous man speaks, issues orders, makes plans, announces judgments, but the Lord doesn’t preserve and guard them. He overthrows his words, the words of his knowledge. He tries to pass on knowledge to others, perhaps to his own children, but those words are without effect. The Lord overthrows them. But the Lord preserves, watches over, guards, and makes effective the words and knowledge of the faithful and righteous and wise.
Communication is never simply a matter of clarity of expression or conception. It is never simply a matter between two people. God, who is with His Word and who is His Word, is always involved in every act of human communication. God either protects knowledge, keeps His eyes on knowledge and words, to confirm and give them success; or He frustrates words and makes them fail. Good communication thus requires faithfulness and righteousness before God. Repentance is always part of the answer to poor communication.
PROVERBS 22:13
Slothfulness is a recurring theme in Proverbs, and has a number of aspects and result. Among other things, sloth leads to poverty and frustration, because the sluggard cannot get himself moving to work or satisfy his desires. Slothfulness has many manifestations, and may even take the form of frantic busyness, if that busyness is a way of avoiding the specific tasks we have been given.
Here, Solomon tells us that sloth is closely linked to cowardice, and hopelessness. The sluggard justifies his slothfulness with a “worse case scenario” mentality: He can’t get started with any project because it might fail, because it entails risk, because he might come to some harm. There is probably not a lion in the streets, but there might be, and so the sluggard grasps at the slimmest possibility of harm to justify his inaction.
Israel was a sluggard people when they refused to enter the land. Yahweh had promised that they would drive the Canaanites out of the land, but instead of trusting in Yahweh’s promise, they said “There are giants in the land!” The Holy Spirit is given at Pentecost to overcome such lethargy, to energize the apostles for conquest.
PROVERBS 22:14
Verse 14 reintroduces the “strange woman” of the early chapters of the book, Lady Folly, and also the literal adulteress. The word “strange” is applied in the Old Testament to non-Israelite inhabitants of the land, to Israel in the land, to intruders in the sanctuary, those who are unauthorized to approach Yahweh’s house. In different contexts, strangers are welcomed or shunned, and sometimes even kept away with violent force: “the stranger who comes near shall be put to death” (Numbers 1:51). The strange woman is to be shunned, associated with strange gods; and she is also like the stranger who seeks entry to the sanctuary, the “holy space” of the young man who is being instructed in Proverbs.
The adulteress is seductive, but this Proverb speaks of her as a consuming pit, a mouth and an open pit who swallows the unwary. She is a grave. She speaks with her mouth, and the words seem smooth as honey, but then, like some horror movie monster, her mouth opens to swallow. According to this Proverb, Yahweh is the ultimate cause of falling in this trap. She is able to catch those who are cursed of Yahweh. This is itself a curse, and part of the outworking of the Lord’s curse.
PROVERBS 22:15
Wisdom doesn’t come naturally for human beings, and wisdom doesn’t come easily. Instruction is essential, but without what Waltke calls “chastening lessons,” instruction doesn’t take root. Chastening lessons can be difficulties that arise from folly – the damaging consequences of wrong action. But chastening comes more easily when it comes from the rod, from a loving parent. Even Jesus learned obedience and grew in wisdom by what He suffered.
PROVERBS 22:16
This is an arresting Proverb. The first part points to a theme common in the Torah. The test of righteousness is the treatment of the vulnerable, the poor and the weak. A righteous man uses whatever power he has to advance justice, not to protect his own or his rich cronies’ interests. A king is judged by his refusal of bribes and his faithfulness in providing justice for the poor. Verse 16 applies this principle generally: Yahweh opposes oppression of the poor, and the poverty of the oppressed poor (like the leprosy of Naaman) will cling to those who mistreat them.
In a January 2008 interview, David Cay Johnston (author of Free Lunch) described how this works out in professional sports, for example: “George Steinbrenner is getting over $600 million for the new Yankee Stadium in New York. The New York Mets are getting over $600 million. In fact, the City of New York gave them money to lobby against the taxpayers to get more money. Rudy Giuliani gave $50 million to the two teams for that purpose.
“The new owners of the Washington Nationals baseball team in Washington, D.C., paid $450 million for the team. But, in fact, they got the team for free, because the subsidy they’re getting for the new stadium is worth $611 million. We actually paid these people to buy the team.
“Now, in this country right now, we are spending $2 billion a year subsidizing the big four sports: baseball, basketball, football and hockey. It accounts for all of the profits of that industry and more. Now, there may be individual teams that make money, but the industry as a whole is not profitable. And that’s astonishing because the big four leagues are exempt from the laws of competition. By the way, irony is not dead, because here are people who are in the business of competition on the field who are exempted by law from the rules of economic competition.
“If you go to England and you want to start a soccer team, they have to let you join the soccer league. There are thirteen commercial soccer teams in the London area. New York City, the biggest city in the country, there are two baseball teams, because there’s no free entry into the market. In Los Angeles, there’s no football team. And the owners use this power to prevent others from owning teams, to prevent municipal governments from owning teams, to prevent nonprofits from owning teams, to extract money from the taxpayers to build them new stadiums.”
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In