Deeper Commentary
Pro 28:1 The wicked flee when no one pursues; but the righteous are
as bold as a lion-
This was the situation promised for Israel if they were obedient to the
covenant. But they were not at Hezekiah's time; the victory was by grace,
but he gives no space for that consideration. This is a Hezekiah Proverb
(see on Prov. 25:1), and the allusion would be to the remaining Assyrians
fleeing after the Angel slew 185,000 of them. The lion was a symbol of
Assyria, but as the remnant raced out of Jerusalem to gather their spoil,
they were the bold lions. But Hezekiah likes to think that the Assyrians are
the wicked, and the Jews were the righteous. He has the same overly
simplistic worldview which Solomon also had, whose Proverbs are now being
reused by him. For the prophets condemn the Jews at that time; there was
only a tiny righteous minority, and the whole salvation of Zion at this time
was by grace and not their own righteousness.
See on :12.
Pro 28:2 In rebellion, a land has many rulers, but order is maintained by a
man of understanding and knowledge-
When Solomon laments that a sinful land has many rulers, but stability
comes from a wise ruler, he is stating an inspired truth; but it is
inevitable that he framed it in such terms as justified his own dictatorial
rule, as if his wisdom justified him in crushing any opposition leaders. It
was really Solomon's self-justification.
And in the Hezekiah context (see on Prov. 25:1), this becomes a prophecy
of how his descendants were to indeed be "many princes" (AV) just before the
Babylonian overthrow of the kingdom.
Pro 28:3 A needy man who oppresses the poor is like a driving rain which
leaves no crops-
Pro 28:4 Those who forsake the law praise the wicked; but those who keep
the law contend with them-
Pro 28:5 Evil men don’t understand justice; but those who seek Yahweh
understand it fully-
This is true, but Solomon had established himself as the judge of
Israel, and considered that his judgments were ultimately just and beyond
criticism. He condemns any who did criticize him as not seeking Yahweh and
evil.
Pro 28:6 Better is the poor who walks in his integrity, than he who is
perverse in his ways, and he is rich-
This must be placed alongside Solomon's common theme that the wise
are blessed with riches, and the poor are poor because they are foolish.
So he admits that some wicked people do get rich, but comparing it with
the other Proverbs, he sees this as only temporary.
Pro 28:7 Whoever keeps the law is a wise son; but he who is a companion of
gluttons shames his father-
This desperate avoidance of shame at all costs is a major theme in
Solomon's Proverbs, and reflects his overall focus upon the external
rather than the internal. He does indeed talk about the heart, but on
balance I would conclude that he is more concerned about appearances
before men than before God. And this led to his own spiritual downfall.
The Lord's parable of the prodigal son appears to deconstruct Solomon's
approach here. For the prodigal was a companion of sinners and didn't keep
the law; but his father wasn't unduly worried about the shame on him, and
didn't therefore disown the son. Instead he watched constantly for his
return, and when he sees him, he runs out [it was shameful for an older
man to run in public] through the streets, in order to escort his son home
and protect him from shame in the village. And the elder son who claimed
to have kept the law was the one who finally rejected himself from the
Father's house.
Pro 28:8 He who increases his wealth by excessive interest gathers it for
one who has pity on the poor-
Solomon on one hand teaches pity towards the poor (Prov. 14:21,31;
19:17; 28:8). But on the other, he mocks the poor as being poor because of
their unwisdom, believing that wealth is given in response to wisdom. He
is very conflicted in his attitude to the poor. The Divine revelation of
truth to him was clearly that he should be generous to the poor. But he
fences against this in other places by saying that the poor are being
punished for their unwisdom. So like us when we encounter need that
requires our generosity, he hedges his position very carefullly; rather
than accepting the simple force of the wisdom given to him, that pity to
the poor as it were transfers our wealth from earth to heaven, and we will
receive it back in due time (Prov. 19:17). And he is quite obsessive about
not being collateral for the poor. Solomon had not known need, neither material nor spiritual, and it
shows in his attitude to so obsessively forbidding the giving of
collateral to guarantee a loan (Prov. 6:1-3; 11:15; 17:18; 20:16; 22:26;
27:13- all quite some emphasis). It makes hollow all Solomon's
exhortations
to be generous to your poor neighbour and to be a brother in adversity to
your neighbour (Prov. 14:21; 17:17). Solomon is here reasoning from the
viewpoint of secular wisdom. The law of Moses didn't forbid giving or
taking collateral for loans, it accepted this would happen (Ex. 22:25-27).
Another approach is to understand Solomon's positive comments about
helping the poor as historical allusion to his father David.
Pro 28:9 He who turns away his ear from hearing the law, even his prayer
is an abomination-
"Abomination" is the common word for idols (e.g. Dt. 7:25,26).
Idoltary is here interpreted as things like pride and telling lies (:17).
These seven things are the essence of idolatry. There is a recurring
nature to them, just as idols got a grip on the mind of the worshipper.
Solomon often uses the word for quiet, secret sins, words and the matters
of the heart, internal attitudes and judgments (Prov. 11:1,20; 12:22;
13:19; 15:26; 16:5; 17:15; 20:10,23; 24:9; 26:25; 28:9; 29:27). And this
of course is the essence of idolatry in our age; this is the practical
force to us of all Biblical teaching about idolatry.
Pro 28:10 Whoever causes the upright to go astray in an evil way, he will
fall into his own trap; but the blameless will inherit good-
Both Solomon and Hezekiah (see on Prov. 25:1) doubtless had
individuals in view, who were the subtext of this wisdom. But to describe
the wise as "blameless" is an example of their over simplistic worldview.
All have sinned, none are blameless (Rom. 3:23), as David reflected in his
Bathsheba Psalms. But Solomon had whitewashed his parents' sin, and knew
nothing of the grace David had discovered at that time. The Lord's
parables of the lost in LK. 15 may be seeking to deconstruct Solomon's
attitude. The self righteous older son, who considered himself blameless,
connects with the 99 sheep who "need no repentance". But "all we like
sheep have gone astray", those 99 only thought they needed no repentance,
and being so snug in their sheepfold actually only enhanced their sense of
self righteousness, and that they were not in fact the lost. The phrase
"inherit good" is only found again in 1 Chron. 28:8, where David says that
this is to be the outcome for those who "seek" for obedience to God's
ways. But 'seeking' is not being "blameless". None are blameless, but the
spiritually minded seek for God's ways and will therefore "inherit good".
Solomon totally lacked this humility and spiritual reality of David. And
so did Hezekiah (see on Prov. 25:1), who never seems repentant for any of
his failures [such as giving the gold of the temple to buy off invaders].
Pro 28:11 The rich man is wise in his own eyes; but the poor who has
understanding sees through him-
Not being 'wise in our own eyes' is a major theme of Solomon's
Proverbs (Prov. 3:7; 12:15; 26:12,16; 28:11). We are to recognize that
there is no inherent wisdom in man; it must be taught to us from God's
word. And yet we live in a postmodern world, where what seems or feels
good to our own gut is taken to be the highest personal truth. This was
what led Judah to condemnation (s.w. Is. 5:21), because trusting in their
own opinions and gut feelings left them insensitive to God's word. Paul
quotes the idea in Rom. 12:16; to be wise in our own eyes means that we
ignore those whom we naturally consider worthy of being ignored. But that
is not necessarily the way of the Spirit. But when Solomon lost his faith,
he comments that whether a man has wise eyes or not (s.w.) is irrelevant
in the face of death (Ecc. 2:14). He clearly conceived wisdom as only
helpful for this life; he had no real personal faith in the resurrection
of the dead or the establishment of the future Kingdom of God. And this
led him to ultimately despise his own wisdom as futile.
Pro 28:12 When the righteous triumph, there is great glory; but when the
wicked rise, men hide themselves-
Pro 28:13 He who conceals his sins doesn’t prosper, but whoever confesses
and renounces them finds mercy-
Pro 28:14 Blessed is the man who always fears; but one who hardens his
heart falls into trouble-
This may be true, but Solomon ended up terrorizing his own people,
allowing no opposition, beating them into submission (1 Kings 12:11), and
thereby inculcating a culture of fear. And he was abusing wisdom such as
this to justify that climate he wished to create for his own ends. Both
Solomon and Hezekiah hardened their hearts in that they decided that they
would maintain a set psychological attitude to spiritual things until
their deaths. And so they did, as witnessed by Ecclesiastes and Is. 39:8.
Pro 28:15 As a roaring lion or a charging bear, so is a wicked ruler over
helpless people-
The book of Proverbs has in view a bad ruler (s.w. Prov. 28:15;
29:2,12,26; Ecc. 9:17). And this bad ruler offers deceitful food (Prov.
23:3), which Solomon in Prov. 23 advises against eating. We need to recall
that eating together was seen as a sign of fellowship and acceptance of
each other within the same cause. Solomon may have in view Jeroboam, who
clearly sought to usurp Solomon as king. Or he may be alluding back to the
various people like Absalom and Adonijah who had feasted to celebrate
their apparent usurping of David's throne. The LXX in Prov. 23:1-8 reads
rather differently to the Masoretic Text, and speaks much of the evil of
the ruler in view.
Pro 28:16 A tyrannical ruler lacks judgment. One who hates ill-gotten gain
will have long days-
"What hath the wise more than the fool?" (Ecc. 6:8) shows how
effectively Solomon despised his wisdom; he lost sight of the Kingdom
which it led to ultimately, and the God manifestation which it could
enable in this life. He had written in his Proverbs that the ruler who
lacks wisdom will oppress his people (28:16 AV); and although his wisdom
remained with him right to the end, in terms of knowledge (Ecc. 2:9;
12:10), yet at the end of his reign Solomon was the ruler who did oppress
his people. And he had gone on in Prov. 28:16 to warn against covetousness
in a ruler, even though he went ahead with practicing every conceivable
form of it in Ecc. 2.
See on Prov. 8:6.
In the same way as Solomon criticized flirting with Gentile girls but then went and did this himself, so he said many other things in his wisdom which actually condemned himself. Thus “the prince that lacketh understanding is also a great oppressor” (Prov. 28:16 AV). Yet Solomon did oppress the people (1 Kings 12:11)- despite possessing wisdom. He insists that throughout his life, his wisdom had remained with him (Ecc. 2:9 RVmg.). So what does this indicate? Surely that the wisdom which he had did not affect his life practically, and thus it was as if he lacked wisdom completely. Mere possession of truth leads to great temptations- for like Solomon, we can reason that this alone justifies us in any behaviour.
Pro 28:17 A man who is tormented by having taken life blood will be a
fugitive until death; no one will support him-
David's prayer of repentance and request to be saved from "blood
guiltiness" (Ps. 51:14) is literally 'from blood'. He was a man of blood
and was guilty of Uriah's innocent blood. David had asked for 'men of
blood' to be slain (Ps. 55:23 s.w.), those who had taken the blood of the
innocent (Ps. 94:21), and for 'men of blood' to be expelled from his
presence (Ps. 139:19). And it is not at all clear whether all those Psalms
were written before his sin with Bathsheba. God was trying to teach David
that he was the type of person whom he condemned. And yet it is unclear if
he learned that lesson. Solomon liberally condemns the man who sheds
innocent blood (Prov. 6:17; 28:17), refusing to recognize that his much
lauded father had done just this, and was only saved by grace and not by
any obedience to wisdom. There is so little grace in the book of Solomon's
Proverbs because Solomon had failed to perceive the grace shown to his
father.
Pro 28:18 Whoever walks blamelessly is kept safe; but one with perverse
ways will fall suddenly-
We wonder at the possible arrogance in assuming that he or any man
can walk blamelessly. Only the Lord Jesus fits this. And yet this is the
phrase used in God's command to Abraham and his seed (Gen. 17:1). It was
only possible for Abraham to do so by his faith in imputed righteousness,
by grace through faith. David only realized that after he had to learn it
through reflection upon the wonder of how God had counted him righteous
after the sin with Bathsheba.
Pro 28:19 One who works his land will have an abundance of food; but one
who chases fantasies will have his fill of poverty-
Solomon speaks often of how hard work will "satisfy with
bread" (Prov. 12:11; 20:13; 28:19). David his father uses the phrase in
the context of saying that being 'satisfied with bread' is part of God's
gracious blessing (Ps. 132:15). We see here how Solomon became focused
upon works, rather than faith in the blessings which come from Divine
grace. And yet he uses the words his father had used; but he interprets
them as justification of works rather than acceptance of grace.
Solomon repeatedly sees poverty as being the fault of the poor, and their refusal of his teaching of wisdom (s.w. Prov. 6:11; 10:4,15; 13:7,8,18,23; 24:34; 28:19; 31:7). Many of these passages are effectively mocking the poor, which Solomon condemns in Prov. 17:5. He fails to take his own wisdom, as we also see in his behaviour with foreign women. Again we see Solomon's works based approach to righteousness, and lack of grace; refusing to accept that we are all poor men before God, as David himself exemplified when he cried to God as a poor man (Ps. 34:6). But his much beloved father David was unashamed to say he was a materially "poor man" (1 Sam. 18:23); and Uriah, whom he wronged, is described also as a "poor man" (2 Sam. 12:1). The poor were to be defended and given to (Ps. 82:3), and the Bible is clear that poverty isn't necessarily a result of sin or unwisdom. But Solomon fails to appreciate this, so obsessed is he with works, and the idea that obedience to his anthology of Proverbs will make the poor prosperous, as if God's truth is a kind of wealth creation scheme.
Pro 28:20 A faithful man is rich with blessings; but one who is eager to
be rich will not go unpunished-
This states clearly Solomon's position that the faithful are blessed
in this life [note "is rich"], and the blessings for
faith are riches. But this is simply not true to spiritual reality. The
righteous are often poor, and the wicked prosper. And the blessings
promised to Abraham were of forgiveness of sins and a future eternal
inheritance of the earth at the resurrection of the body. And the
patriarchs died without having received what God promised in this life.
These most basic aspects of the Gospel of the Kingdom were not at all
appreciated by Solomon nor Hezekiah. Hezekiah was blessed with wealth
after his sickness, as was Solomon at the start of his reign; but hee is
wrong to thereby deduce that he wasa "faithful" and the wealth was some
kind of reward for that.
Pro 28:21 To show partiality is not good; yet a man will do wrong for a
piece of bread-
See on :22. Solomon was famous for his wise judgment of the two prostitutes. He
showed no partiality in that judgment. And so again, whilst what he says
is true, he is using Divine truths to justify himself.
And he is also having a swipe at his competitor Absalom, who set
himself up as the judge of Israel and yet showed partiality towards his
potential supporters (2 Sam. 15:5,6).
Pro 28:22 A stingy man hurries after riches, and doesn’t know that poverty
waits for him-
Both Solomon and Hezekiah [after his deliverance from the Assyrians]
were suddenly given great riches by God. They didn't have to seek wealth,
because it was just given to them. And yet here they criticize those who
seek wealth and are "stingy" in order to attain it. It's easy to criticize
people in situations which we haven't been in, and to moralize against
them. So whilst the Proverbs warning against seeking to become rich are
true enough, they were clearly used by Solomon and Hezekiah as
self-justification.
Pro 28:23 One who rebukes a man will afterward find more favour than one
who flatters with the tongue-
This may be Solomon justifying how David gave favour to Nathan who
rebuked him, whilst rejecting those who merely flattered. The same phrase
is used of Ahithophel (Ps. 55:21). And yet Solomon uses the phrase about
the danger of Gentile women who flatter with the tongue (Prov. 2:16; 7:5).
But he honoured exactly those women. He is a stellar example of assuming
that truth possessed does not need to apply to me. It is beyond hypocrisy;
it is a psychological situation whereby the person considers themselves
beyond the truth which they themselves assent to and teach to others, even
demanding it of them. It is pride and conceit in their worst form.
Pro 28:24 Whoever robs his father or his mother and says, It’s not wrong
is a partner with a destroyer-
See on :3 and Ps. 62:10. David likely has in view Absalom and other
brothers of Solomon who were seeking to usurp Solomon.
The "destroyer" uses the same word which is applied to the Assyrians in
Hezekiah's time (2 Kings 18:25; 19:12; Is. 51:13; 54:16). The Assyrians
become the epitomy of evil and foolishness in Hezekiah's Proverbs. But he
fails to take on board the fact that the Jews were as wicked as them. His
simplistic dichotomies take no account of this.
Pro 28:25 One who is greedy stirs up strife; but one who trusts in Yahweh
will prosper-
AV "He that is of a proud heart". Perhaps Hezekiah has in view the
Assyrians, with himself as the prospering one who trusted in Yahweh (2
Kings 18:5). Again he is using these truths to justify himself.
Solomon correctly implies here that pride is an outcome of lack of faith, and this was exactly true in Solomon's case. His lack of faith in the future kingdom led him to be proud. An example of indirect reference to Solomon's pride is found in the way the record points a similarity between Paul and Solomon. Each was given wisdom, and each was given a Satan to humble them because of the way wisdom bloats a man's ego. The fact that we have 'the truth' in basic doctrinal terms - plus a fair bit of other Divine wisdom - really will tempt us to be proud. This is the sort of thing we individually and collectively need to exhort ourselves strongly about. Like us, Solomon knew theoretically the paramount danger of pride; he lists it as the most fundamental of the seven things God hates (Prov. 6:17 cp. 16:5,18).
Pro 28:26 One who trusts in himself is a fool; but one who walks in wisdom
is kept safe-
"Trusts" is s.w. "trusted" in Prov. 3:5. Hezekiah is commending
himself again (2 Kings 18:5). Trust in God is indeed
predicated upon some form of "understanding" or 'wisdom', for faith comes
by hearing the word of God; although not necessarily of the abstract,
academic type which Solomon had in view. Trusting and having wisdom are
parallel; to trust in Yahweh requires "understanding" and 'having wisdom'.
For faith must have some basis, there are things which need to be believed
before "faith" can be faith. Thus David predicates "trust" (s.w.) upon
knowing Yahweh's Name, His character (Ps. 9:10). But David's "trust" in
God was connected with his trust or belief in God's mercy to him regarding
his sins (Ps. 13:5; 21:7; 32:10 s.w.). But Solomon doesn't seem to have
had any conscience of personal sin, and so trust in the Yahweh whose lead
characteristic is grace and forgiveness was not elicited within him.
Pro 28:27 One who gives to the poor has no lack; but one who closes his
eyes will have many curses-
David predicates "no lack" upon fearing Yahweh and simply trusting in
Him (Ps. 34:8,9). Solomon picks up the idea of the righteous experiencing
"no lack" but instead claims it is a reward for generosity (s.w. Prov.
28:27). This is a parade example of the difference between David and
Solomon. Solomon picks up his father's words and conclusions, but reframes
them to justify himself and works rather than faith.
Pro 28:28 When the wicked rise, men hide themselves; but when they perish,
the righteous thrive-
Saul 'rose up' against David (s.w. 1 Sam. 25:29; 26:2), and then
evil men 'rose up' against David out of his own family (2 Sam. 12:11
s.w.), especially Absalom who rose up against his father (2 Sam. 18:31,32
s.w.). But David has a tendency to assume that all who rose up against him
were arising against God. It's not always so that our enemy is God's
enemy. Relationships and the hand of God in human affairs and
relationships is more complex than that. And David in Ps. 139:21 goes
further, to assume that his hatred of people is justified, because they
must, he assumes, hate God because they are against him. Solomon seems to
make the same mistake when he alludes to such 'risings up' in Prov. 28:28.
We must note that "all in Asia" turned away from Paul personally (2 Tim.
1:15), and yet according to the letters to the seven churches of Asia in
Rev. 2,3, there were many faithful individuals amongst them.
Previous Chapter
