|
This is a text reader for the article below:
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Wednesday 11/19/25
Thru the Bible: Proverbs 22
Message Video Player
Message Audio Player:
Podcast: Download (Duration: 1:32:53 — 98.5MB)
Train up a Child?
Proverbs 22:1-29,
“(1) A good name is to be chosen rather than great riches, and favor is better than silver or gold.”
“Good” is implied, in reference to the word “name” and does not actually appear in the Hebrew.
The direction of thought here is not about one’s actual name being good because of its popularity, uniqueness or even its meaning. Reputation is what’s in view here. This is a progressive proverb since the idea of favor further proves the idea behind a “good name” while also offering greater depth of understanding for why a “good name” is preferred to wealth.
So this is saying that possessing a name which is held in respect and honor has more value than the riches of gold or silver!
“(2) The rich and the poor meet together; the LORD is the Maker of them all.”
Some take this as a call to show no social differences – like class systems since God Created both the poor and the rich.
It is translated as “have this in common” or “have a common bond” in the NAB, NASB, NIV & NLV. Since the initial translation I gave doesn’t seem to really say anything, I am inclined to believe that the point is that one has no advantage over the other.
This could be simply reminding us that God is the Creator of all people OR it could be saying that God is the One Who made the rich – rich and the poor – poor, so as to take away the pride which often SEPARATES THEM.
In any case, the overall point seems to be saying that humans should share mutual respect for each other regardless of their social or financial STATUS since in reality they are the same – God created them both.
“(3) The prudent sees danger and hides himself, but the simple go on and suffer for it.”
So something which might look to others as cowardice may in fact be the practical wisdom of common sense.
“(4) The reward for humility and fear of the LORD is riches and honor and life. (5) Thorns and snares are in the way of the crooked; whoever guards his soul will keep far from them.”
The riches spoken of here are literal. This is in keeping with the promises associated with the Old Covenant keeping of the Law as it was set before Israel in Deuteronomy 28.
IF you keep the commandments of the Lord your God, “these blessings will come on you and overtake you!”
So this is a covenant based promise.
However, honor and life are NOT bound to any one covenant. If one fears the Lord and in humility obey Him, God will honor them and make Himself known to them!
THAT I submit to you, is a BETTER promise, associated with our BETTER covenant!
“(6) Train up a child in the way he should go; even when he is old he will not depart from it.”
This is a difficult passage for parents of children who have forsaken the faith they grew up in.
The word “child” has a very broad usage and takes in everyone from a weaned child to a 24 year old. Of course in the Hebrew culture, particularly sons did not leave the home in marriage until much later in life than is typical today.
The NET Notes have this:
This proverb pictures a child who is dedicated by parents to the LORD and morally trained to follow Him. On the other hand, a popular expositional approach suggests that it means “to motivate”.
It reflects the point the book of Proverbs is making that there is a standard of life to which he must attain.
Saadia, a Jewish scholar who lived A.D. 882-942, first suggested that this could mean the child should be trained according to his inclination or bent of mind. We used to suggest this meaning years ago.
While this may have some merit in practice, it is not likely what the proverb had in mind.
In the book of Proverbs there are only two ways that a person can go, the way of the wise or righteousness, and the way of the fool. One takes training, and the other does not.”
These proverbial statements are true, or at least true in general. Those who study the Hebrew proverbs are inclined to say that these are NOT universal truths. There are always exceptions, but they are realized as truth more often than not.
“(7) The rich rules over the poor, and the borrower is the slave of the lender.”
This statement is another which is not universal, but which is so overwhelmingly the experience of people everywhere that it stands as a reliable proverb!
“(8) Whoever sows injustice will reap calamity, and the rod of his fury will fail.”
The expression “rod of his fury [or wrath]” is of course illustrative. The “rod” itself is a symbol of power; “fury or wrath” is a metonymy of cause, indicating what wrath will do.
Therefore this proverb seems to be saying that when the harvest for sowing injustice comes in, the impact will be so profound that they will no longer be able to wield the rod of their fury at others. So in some ways this may be indicating that the reward for their sin (which we know to be some expression of death) will break them!
“(9) Whoever has a bountiful eye will be blessed, for he shares his bread with the poor.”
This is a different understanding of the words “bountiful eye” than I would have anticipated.
My initial thought was like a child whose face is pressed against the glass of the candy display. Invariably their eyes are bigger than their stomachs can handle.
However, this is a far more positive statement regarding the promise of God to bless those of a generous spirit.
“(10) Drive out a scoffer, and strife will go out, and quarreling and abuse will cease.”
At first this sounds like a promise that is too good to be true, but when you consider it – the proverb makes practical sense. Strife and quarrelings need an instigator – someone who gets it going and keeps it going and it makes sense that scoffers would make great instigators. They are the ones in the crowd who often get complaints rolling and who taunt others which is a type of “abuse”. So I suppose that if you can get that guy out of the way, the turmoil will quickly die down on its own.
“(11) He who loves purity of heart, and whose speech is gracious, will have the king as his friend.”
Understanding the phrase “purity of heart” is very helpful in grasping this proverb. It essentially means someone with obvious and honest intentions. Like Nathaniel, this is a person in which there is no pretense or deception. [See – John 1:47]
Rulers have to watch their backs. There are opportunists around every corner. Some are currying for favor and others for an opportunity to slander or defeat.
Rare indeed is the one who is “pure of heart”, whose intentions are clear and honest.
No wonder this person would be attractive to a King. They would very likely be the only person they could truly trust! What a rare and valuable gift indeed.
To sweeten the pot, Solomon is pointing out someone who on top of being pure in motive is also gracious in what they say. Friendship with this person will be among the king’s most priceless possessions!
But such is not limited to kings. A person like this is valuable to anyone!
“(12) The eyes of the LORD keep watch over knowledge, but He overthrows the words of the traitor.”
I almost don’t like pointing out translations which differ from the majority, but in this case I think it makes more sense.
I mean the first line, if standing alone, makes sense as does the second, but when you place them together they don’t seem to offer any of the typical flow of proverbial statements. They do not really complete one another. They do not stand in contrast to each other. They do not expand on or further explain one another. So you are sort of left scratching your head.
Which is why I considered the New English interpretation, and the reasons behind the word choices seem legit.
The word “knowledge” is an abstract meaning of the Hebrew word and creates an awkward direct object for the subject and verb of the line. It is properly translated this way in Proverbs 5:2 but the expression is different.
But it also appears in another way when used in parallelism as in chapter 29:7, where the word is translated “cause or legal claim”.
So when you translate this passage with “a cause or legal claim” the proverb practically sells itself.
The word “traitor” is not bad, but seems to be a narrowing down of the broader meaning which is a “treacherous” person. A “traitor” is a treacherous person, but to reduce the meaning of “treachery” to “traitor” alone is unnecessary and I believe introduces a narrowing of possible meanings without cause.
The NET words it this way,
“The eyes of the LORD watched over a cause, and subverted the words of the treacherous person.” – Proverbs 22:12
To me this makes more sense, so I thought I’d suggest it to you. If it is right then its accord with Proverbs 29:7 is acute since God is THE righteous One and He does care for those unjustly treated!
“The righteous person cares for the legal rights of the poor; the wicked does not understand such knowledge.” – Proverbs 29:7
“(13) The sluggard says, “There is a lion outside! I shall be killed in the streets!”
Ah, there is our little sluggard friend again! Any reason at all to avoid labor – even if it has to be far fetched or imagined!
“(14) The mouth of forbidden women is a deep pit; he with whom the LORD is angry will fall into it.”
Man this is loaded with suggestion! I mean, sure the mouth or rather the seductive speech of a woman who you have no business being with is a snare.
No doubt!
But for the Lord to take ownership of seeing to it that the man with whom He is angry will fall by her, is a little unnerving!
It is just possible that the two are not as unrelated as it might appear.
Perhaps the one with whom the Lord is angry is one who is unfaithful to his wife. The “forbidden” woman can in fact be translated as an adulteress.
If that IS the case, that he would fall by means of her words seems fitting! However, I am assuming much with this understanding.
It could also simply mean that God will use the seducing and deceptive words of a loose woman to bring about the downfall of the one He is angry at.
“(15) Folly is bound up in the heart of a child, but the rod of discipline drives it far from him.”
This is encouraging because it is regarding a child that you might have reasoned was beyond hope – because the words “bound up” is a passive participle and being used figuratively. This at least implies that the child’s folly is bound to his nature and is not simply an impulsive and occasional act.
So we are talking about a child whose natural inclination is towards silly foolishness.
In any case, physical and punitive chastisement will leave a lasting effect that will suppress this bent in the child and encourage or even develop better character.
“(16) Whoever oppresses the poor to increase his own wealth, or gives to the rich, will only come to poverty.”
This happens a lot. Today in America this has taken on a national expression taking in even the upper-middle class through political leaders. But it is also true on a consumer level and certainly in health care and medical drugs. The gag orders on anyone who show natural remedies… and the list just goes on and on from there. Of being a proverb this is more centered on the actions of the individual.
The folly of making the rich richer than the rich richer… Some restaurants will not charge a celebrity -BECAUSE they are a celebrity. Some stores will do the same. People who are comparatively poor will give them gifts as if they needed anything.
Furthermore, companies pay them and give them free products just to associate their name with their company. This is done through outfitting teams with gear and jerseys, sound equipment and even cars just to use their popularity to sell their products. So the people who can most afford things, will often never have to pay for them.
I heard that Ozzy Osbourne threw away SO MUCH stuff because he had no room for it all. Everywhere he went fans gave him stuff. People would pay big bucks to meet him backstage or in certain events and then would turn around and give him gifts at that same meeting that cost them to attend. The only person making a killing is the person who doesn’t need it!
Interestingly enough, the testimony of Ozzy’s son was that his dad truly appreciated the gifts, even though much of them were junk. He hated to do it, but had no choice but to get rid of much of it. So at least, in his case, there was appreciation for the heart behind the gifts.
This next segment is a bit unique in that the next 5 verses seem to be intended to build on one another.
“(17) Incline your ear, and hear the words of the wise, and apply your heart to my knowledge, (18) for it will be pleasant if you keep them within you, if all of them are ready on your lips. (19) That your trust may be in the LORD, I have made THEM known to you today, even to you. (20) Have I not written for you thirty sayings of counsel and knowledge, (21) to make you know what is right and true, that you may give a true answer to those who sent you?”
One of the reasons we know that this series is taken together is because it employs pronouns linking it back to the verse before. Verse 19 says, “I have made THEM known to you today”. Them what? So far in verse 19 there is no noun it points back to or represents. But is pointing back to “words of the wise” and “my knowledge” found in verse 17.
If you follow the whole set of 5 verses you will clearly see the outline of Jesus’ parable of ‘the Heart Soils’.
Now we have 3 sets of 2 verses which are to be taken together.
“(22) Do not rob the poor, because he is poor, or crush the afflicted at the gate, (23) for the LORD will plead their cause and rob of life those who rob them.”
We MUST be easily moved with compassion and not let questions choke out our compassion. God does not tell us to scrutinize the poor as to whether they deserve help.
He says, “Give to the one who asks of you, and do not turn away from him who wants to borrow from you“ – Matthew 5:42.
Now taking into consideration Who Jesus was, and who He was speaking to provides a greater context for His words.
Primarily Jesus was addressing “the lost sheep of the house of Israel” which is who He was sent to. So first and foremost this was nothing more than reminding them of their obligation under the law. Jews were to treat their fellow Jews with deference and make sure they were never without. Certainly never impoverished!
We have seen this MUCH in our studying of the Old Testament. Suffice it to say God feels strongly about oppressing the poor.
Secondarily, Jesus was addressing Jews WITHIN the Roman empire. “Give to the one who asks you” was almost certainly referring to those who begged. Beggars were viewed very differently in that day – at least among the Jews.
The poor person was referred to in the Torah as “your brother” (achikha), fostering a sense of community responsibility rather than disdain.
The Bible taught that showing kindness to the poor was like “lending to the Lord,” and a good deed that God would repay. The prophets often castigated the rich for oppressing the poor.
The religious obligation of tzedakah (righteousness/justice), required the Jewish people to support the poor both as a community and as individuals. Poverty was viewed as a misfortune to be alleviated through justice and compassion, not a personal failing.
Giving aid was not considered merely an act of voluntary “charity” or benevolence, but a requirement of justice and righteousness commanded by God in the Torah.
The wealthy were seen as stewards of God’s money, with a duty to distribute it as He wished.
The Law God dictated to Moses as well as the human contributions and traditions superficially added by the rabbis in the “fence laws” collaborated together to instituted a system of prevention and alleviation of poverty, which minimized professional begging in early biblical times.
Landowners were required to leave the corners of their fields (pe’ah), gleanings, and forgotten sheaves for the poor, widows, and orphans to harvest themselves, allowing for aid while maintaining dignity.
Laws included the cancellation of debts in the sabbatical year and the return of ancestral land in the Jubilee year, preventing long-term systemic poverty.
In post-Temple times, communities established organized funds (kuppah) and soup kitchens (tamḥui) to ensure no resident poor person went without food and basic necessities.
Jewish law emphasized the importance of preserving the dignity (kavod habriyot) of the poor. The highest form of tzedakah was enabling a person to become self-sufficient (e.g., through a loan or job), so they would not become a permanent burden. As such, giving alms in a way that shamed the recipient was discouraged.
While professional beggars who were perceived as feigning afflictions or being lazy were at times looked down upon in later periods, the overarching religious and social framework ensured a general attitude of compassion and an obligation to provide support for the genuinely needy.
In stark contrast is our modern age – especially in 1st world countries! Today, beggars are often viewed with annoyance as an intrusions into our busy, self-indulgent lives.
If a person was begging, they were seen as taking action to do something about their need, rather than just being a burden on their families and greater community.
The modern Christian response is, “Well I don’t want to empower them in their poverty.” or “What if they go spend it on alcohol.” To which Jesus would likely say, “What if they do?!”
Solomon tells us in Chapter 31, “(6) Give strong drink to the one who is perishing, and wine to those who are bitterly distressed; (7) let them drink and forget their poverty, and remember their misery no more.”
While I am highly unlikely to ever do that, I would buy them some food and drink or a means of staying warm. If all else fails, you can give them money. What they do with it is none of your affair. Your Master told you not to turn away. Of course all of this hinges on your ability to do so. If you are barely making it and have nothing at the moment to give, then that is NOT turning away, it is an inability to give something monetary. BUT you CAN stop, sit, talk, pray and if necessary even lay hands on.
“(24) Make no friendship with a man given to anger, nor go with a wrathful man, (25) lest you learn his ways and entangle yourself in a snare.”
I can attest to this. I used to have a hot streak. I had settled it down to a dull roar, but it was still there. I then took to hanging around a friend who lived with a hair trigger temper. I found it reversing my tiny bit of restraint. This is solid advice and counsel!
“(26) Be not one of those who give pledges, who put up security for debts. (27) If you have nothing with which to pay, why should your bed be taken from under you?”
I am not certain if it is ever truly advisable to provide security for another, though I suspect doing so for your children “might” be permissible, but even still it may not always be wise! But the example we are seeing here is someone who has no business doing so since they are unable to afford it themselves.
“(28) Do not move the ancient landmark that your fathers have set.”
This would be a crime of fraud AND theft since these were property boundary markers.
“(29) Do you see a man skillful in his work? He will stand before kings; he will not stand before obscure men.”
While the word “skilled” is general enough to apply to any trade, it may have specific reference to a scribe or some other official. The most noteworthy of these in a kingdom will work exclusively for the royal family!
Blessings!
