Deeper Commentary
Pro 6:1 My son, if you have become collateral for your neighbour, if
you have struck your hands in pledge for a stranger-
The law of Moses didn't forbid giving or taking collateral for loans, it
accepted this would happen (Ex. 22:25-27). But Solomon in the Proverbs is
quite obsessed with forbidding it in very strong terms (Prov. 6:1-3; 11:15;
17:18; 20:16; 22:26; 27:13- all quite some emphasis).
Perhaps Solomon recalled some bad experience in his family because of this.
There is the otherwise curious statement in 1 Sam. 17:18 that David's
brothers, Solomon's uncles, were to return a collateral. Perhaps this ruined
the family and Solomon's wisdom has some human element in it, reflecting his
own bad experiences in his family life. But there is nothing wrong with
giving or taking collateral for a loan; what is condemned in God's law is
the abuse of the debtor and the abuse of the situation. Indeed David and
Hezekiah ask God to be collateral for their needs and debts in various ways
(Ps. 119:122; Is. 38:14). And God gives the Holy Spirit in our hearts as
collateral on His debt, as He sees it, to save us (2 Cor. 1:22; 5:5; Eph.
1:14); and in response we give our hearts as a pledge to Him (Jer. 30:21
Heb.). So forbidding the practice seems out of step with the spirit of
grace. It would mean asking of God what we are unprepared to do for others.
Solomon had not known need, neither material nor spiritual, and it shows in
his attitude to this matter. 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.
Pro 6:2 you are trapped by the words of your mouth. You are ensnared with
the words of your mouth-
Prov. 5:22 uses this language about those snared by major sins. As
noted on :1, Solomon appears to be quite obsessively outlawing the giving of
collateral for loans. And he doesn't leave it as mere advice, but presses
the point that to disagree with him on this is a heinous sin- and yet this
is a matter which has to be judged one case at a time. We again get the
impression that he presents a narrative whereby people are either spotlessly
perfect, or awful sinners. This is not a mature spiritual position. Any
disagreement with his advice makes a person a wicked sinner. Even on such a
delicate personal matter, where cases will always be different, and God's
law allowed the use of collateral.
Pro 6:3 Do this now my son and deliver yourself, since you have come into
the hand of your neighbour. Go, humble yourself. Press your plea with your
neighbour-
As noted on :1,2, Solomon is making a huge issue over this matter of
obeying his advice [for in such a nuanced matter it can be no more than
that] regarding collateral. He sees humility as humility to his advice and
positions, rather than before God.
Pro 6:4 Give no sleep to your eyes, nor slumber to your eyelids-
The
words of Prov. 6 show that Solomon's motivation for teaching God's ways
to his son (Rehoboam) was because this is how his father had taught
him. “Give not sleep to thine eyes, nor slumber to thine eyelids”, he
exhorts his son (Prov. 6:4), in the very language used to describe his
father’s zeal for the building of the temple (Ps. 132:4). Solomon prayed
to God in the terms and language of his father (2 Chron. 6:41,42 cp. Ps.
132:1,8,9). He was familiar with his father’s Psalms- after all, all Israel
sung them. It must have been like being the son of a world-famous singer.
The words were even in Solomon’s subconscious it seems, for when he tells
his son “Give not sleep to thine eyes nor slumber to thine eyelids” (Prov.
6:4) he is alluding unconsciously, it seems (in that it is out of context)
to David’s promise not to give sleep to his eyes until he had found a
resting place for the ark (Ps. 132:4). But Solomon's spirituality was
finally revealed as merely living out parental expectation.
Pro 6:5 Free yourself, like a gazelle from the hand of the hunter, like a
bird from the snare of the fowler-
As explained on :2, Solomon elsewhere uses this language about those
snared by major sins. For him it was a heinous sin to disagree with his
attitude to the difficult and very personal matter of giving collateral.
Pro 6:6 Go to the ant, you sluggard. Consider her ways, and be wise-
The Proverbs contain repeated condemnation of laziness. Lack of a
zealous work ethic is a rejection of wisdom, according to Solomon. As
Solomon explains in Ecc. 1, he was an active person, not lazy by nature.
And yet he lacked spirituality. He claimed that his service of God was due
to his spirituality, but it was in reality merely a semblance of serving
God when it was really just reinforcing his own personality type. His
mocking of the "sluggard" or "lazy one" is so frequent (Prov. 6:6,9;
10:26; 13:4; 15:19; 19:24; 20:4; 21:25; 22:13; 24:30; 26:13-16). But it is
a reflection of his own works-based approach to righteousness; the 'wise'
"do" good things, and the wicked don't do enough good things. Personal
spiritual mindedness and relationship with God are simply not emphasized.
Pro 6:7 which having no chief, overseer or ruler-
Solomon taught that if the ants can be so
zealous, well why can’t the ecclesia of God be zealous [for it was
‘believers’ that he was teaching]. The ants scurry around, working as if
there is no tomorrow, to build up something so precarious that is in any
case so tragically short lived. Can’t we be yet more zealous, with a like
loving co-operation, building the eternal things that we are (Prov. 6:6,7)?
And Solomon pressed the point further, in that ants are self-motivated; they
need no “guide, overseer or ruler”. This was surely a reference to the
complex system of overseers which Solomon had to place over Israel in order
to build the temple and build up the Kingdom. The same Hebrew word for
“overseer” is found in 1 Chron. 23:4; 26:29. Yet ideally, he seems to be
saying, every Israelite ought to be a zealous worker. Prov. 12:24 says the
same: “The hand of the diligent [whoever
he / she is] shall bear rule [in practice]” [s.w. Prov. 6:7 “ruler”]. And we
must ask ourselves, whether for whatever reason the new Israel hasn’t
slumped into the same problem, of lack of self-motivation, waiting to be
asked to do something before we do it, over-relying upon our “overseers”.
The ants aren’t like this. They see the job to be done, and naturally get on
with it.
The self-motivated example of the ant should inspire our service and operations. They need no “guide, overseer or ruler”. But these are the very words used about Solomon’s elaborate hierarchy of foremen and slave drivers whom he used to ‘get the job done’ in his kingdom. He rejected his own wisdom.
Pro 6:8 yet provides her bread in the summer and gathers her food in the
harvest-
See on :7. This again glorifies works and hard work inappropriately.
Good harvests were God's blessing for obedience to the covenant; bad
harvests were judgment for breaking the covenant (Jer. 5:17 s.w.). But
Solomon assumes that hard work will bring good harvests. Again, real
spirituality is ignored, and the conditional nature of Divine blessing is
also overlooked, just as Solomon did in his own life.
Pro 6:9 How long will you sleep, lazy one? When will you arise out of your
sleep?-
See on :6. This despising of sleep is in contrast to the spiritual
maturity of David, who understood that true blessing comes from God alone
and not from human works, and God gives His beloved sleep, in contrast to
vainly rising early and working late to achieve blessing (Ps. 127:2). Time
and again, we find Solomon glorifying "my father David", seeking to live
out parental expectations; and yet quite out of step with David's
spirituality.
Pro 6:10 A little sleep, a little slumber, a little folding of the hands
to sleep-
I have suggested on :9 that this condemnation of sleep and laziness
is part of a works based mentality that at best is not very spiritually
mature. It is therefore significant that when these words are repeated in
Prov. 24:33, Solomon doesn't claim this to be part of the package of
Divine wisdom given to him; rather he says he worked this out from his own
observations of broken down houses and farmsteads, and in mock humility
claims to have thereby "received instruction" (Prov. 24:32).
Pro 6:11 so your poverty will come as a robber, and your scarcity as an
armed man-
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 6:12 A worthless person, a man of iniquity, is he who walks with a
perverse mouth-
True as the Proverbs are which condemn "a worthless / wicked person"
(Prov. 6:12; 16:27; 19:28), again we have a subtext of Solomon seeking to
justify himself and his father David, and to criticize the various
competitors to Solomon's throne. "A worthless person" is the term used for
Nabal (1 Sam. 25:17), those in David's camp who were not fully supportive
of David (1 Sam. 30:22), Sheba who plotted to overthrow the Davidic line
as king (2 Sam. 20:1), and particularly of those who wanted to overthrow
Solomon as king (2 Chron. 13:7).
Pro 6:13 who winks with his eyes, who signals with his feet, who motions
with his fingers-
The body language of sinners is commented upon several times in the
Bible. This is the degree to which God observes human behaviour. And we
have wonderful insights into that of the Lord Jesus; His eyes and hands
are often as it were zoomed in upon in the Gospel records. Body language
is indeed a "signal" of our innermost heart; and for the wicked, they
yield all the members of their bodies to work unrighteousness (Rom. 6:19).
Pro 6:14 in whose heart is perverseness, who devises evil continually, who
always sows discord-
Solomon here reasons as if any of his opponents (see on :12) are
wrong because they "sow discord". This has ever been an argument deployed
by autocratic rulers- any criticism or opposition is wrong because it
undermines "unity".
Pro 6:15 Therefore his calamity will come suddenly. He will be broken
suddenly, and that without remedy-
Being broken without remedy (as in Prov. 29:1) suggests that what is
in view is an earthen vessel smashed, a figure used in the prophets of the
last judgment. Israel were likewise smitten without remedy at the hands of
their invaders (s.w. 2 Chron. 36:16; Jer. 8:15; 14:19). Many of Solomon's
warnings of judgments in the Proverbs come exactly true for the Israel
whom he wrongly assumed would be his eternal kingdom. The "remedy" Solomon
has in mind is giving heed to wisdom. The "sudden" nature of condemnation
is also a Biblical theme. The Bible is very clear about what will lead to
condemnation, and yet when it comes, the condemned will as it were be
taken by surprise. For they have ignored all the teaching about judgment
and assumed it doesn't apply to them.
Pro 6:16 There are six things which Yahweh hates; yes, seven which are an
abomination to Him-
"Abomination" is the common word for idols (e.g. Dt. 7:25,26).
Idolatry 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 6:17 proud eyes, a lying tongue, hands that shed innocent blood-
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. 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).
Indeed, Solomon correctly implies in Prov. 28:25 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.
Pro 6:18 a heart that devises wicked schemes, feet that are swift in
running to mischief-
As so often in the Bible, action is presented as the direct result of
thought. This was a conception foreign to their contemporary belief
systems, where all that mattered was external behaviour. The Lord's
"sermon on the mount" develops this teaching as the essence of all
spiritual life. Israel were condemned by God specifically for their wicked
schemes / imaginations (s.w. Is. 55:7; 59:7; Jer. 4:14). Is. 59:7 repeats
this verse about Judah generally. The Proverbs so often end up
descriptions of the house of Judah in their later history; whereas Solomon
liked to think that his kingdom would be eternal, governed according to
his principles as taught in the book of Proverbs.
Pro 6:19 a false witness who utters lies, and he who sows discord among
brothers-
This is true, and needs to be given its due weight by those who
divide brethren in Christ. But Solomon also doubtless has in view the
discord between him and his half brothers, who were contenders for his
throne. He considers the cause of the divisions to be "lies", a slander
campaign against him and his father. But the division amongst David's sons
was a direct fulfilment of Nathan's prediction of the consequence of
David's sins associated with Bathsheba. But Solomon seeks to whitewash
David, considering any friction arising from his father's sins as mere
slander. He doesn't follow David in openly confessing sin and rejoicing in
Divine grace.
Pro 6:20 My son, keep your father’s commandment, and don’t forsake your
mother’s teaching-
David so often talks about God's
"law", using the word torah. But Solomon so often speaks of his
own torah, and that of his wife, the mother of "my son" (s.w.
Prov. 1:8; 3:1; 4:2; 6:20; 7:2; 13:14; 31:26). Yet elsewhere in the Bible,
the well over 200 occurrences of torah are always about God's
law. Solomon applies the word to his own teachings and that of his wife,
and thereby plays God. whilst it could be argued that Solomon's teachings
were Divinely inspired, all the same he ought surely to have spoken of
them as God's torah rather than his own torah. This kind
of playing God is seen so often in the teachers of God's people.
Solomon exhorted others to keep the law of their mother, so that it would keep the from the attractive Gentile girl. And don't think, he went on, that in this context you can take fire into your hands and not be burnt. You can't play around with your own sexuality without it having a permanent spiritual effect upon you (6:27). But dear Bathsheba's words to Solomon warning against the Gentile woman in Prov. 31 were completely forgotten by him.
Solomon told his son, and presumably all his sons, to keep their father’s
commandment and not forsake the teaching of their mother. In this he was
just blindly repeating his own experience of youth, and yet the way he
repeated it was irrelevant seeing that his wives were largely Gentiles. To
tell them to follow the laws of their mothers was hardly good advice. But
he said it because it seemed the right thing, it was what he had been told
as a child. David was motivated by a desire to fulfil
the Law's command that the
word should be enthusiastically taught by parents to
their children. Externally, Solomon likewise obeyed the
command. But he did so as a result of living out parental
expectation; he did what his parents had done to him. Yet
Rehoboam didn't really take Divine principles very seriously
in his later life, although there is reason to think that
he did so originally. And so he too lived out the
spiritual experience of his father Solomon; the rot of
only external spirituality snaked through
those generations, until the real spirit of the Truth
was lost, and only an external shell remained. There is
ample evidence that this is exactly the
situation in many areas today.
Pro 6:21 Bind them continually on your heart. Tie them around your neck-
Solomon made the classic mistake of assuming that his will and word
were effectively equivalent to the word of God. In Prov. 6:21 he speaks of
the need to bind the law about your heart and neck; but in Song 8:6 he
asks his Gentile lover to “set me
as a seal upon your heart” and arm. And often in Proverbs he uses the
language of the blessings for keeping God’s law and turns them into the
blessings for keeping his law.
Pro 6:22 When you walk, it will lead you. When you sleep, it will watch
over you. When you awake, it will talk with you-
Solomon's prophetic sonship of David was conditional upon him
preserving or observing Yahweh's ways (1 Kings 2:4; 1 Chron. 22:13; 2
Chron. 7:17); but he didn't preserve of observe them (1 Kings 11:10,11);
despite David praying that Solomon would be given a heart to observe them
(1 Chron. 29:19). We can pray for God to work upon the hearts of others,
but He will not force people against their own deepest will and heart
position. Solomon stresses overmuch how God would keep or preserve the
righteous (Prov. 2:8; 3:26), without recognizing the conditional aspect of
this. Why did Solomon go wrong? His Proverbs are true enough, but he
stresses that obedience to his wisdom and
teaching would preserve his hearers (Prov. 4:4; 6:22; 7:1; 8:32; 15:5),
preservation was through following the example of the wise (Prov. 2:20);
rather than stressing obedience to God's ways, and replacing
David his father's simple love of God with a love of academic wisdom:
"Yahweh preserves all those who love Him" (Ps. 145:20).
Pro 6:23 For the commandment is a lamp, and the law is light. Reproofs of
instruction are the way of life-
The connection is with Ps. 119:105: "Your word is a lamp to my feet,
and a light for my path". The "word" in
view was the prophetic word that David would be king and Saul would be
destroyed. Solomon reapplied this in Prov. 6:23; but his legalism comes
out, in that he changed "Your word" (of promise) to "the law" and the
"commandments".
Pro 6:24 to keep you from the immoral woman, from the flattery of the
wayward wife’s tongue-
The blindness of Solomon is driven home time and again; he knew
Divine truth, but the more he knew it, the more he lived the very
opposite, failing to grasp the deeply personal relevance of truth to
himself. A whole string of passages in Proverbs warn of the "strange"
(AV) woman (Prov. 2:16; 5:20; 6:24; 7:5; 20:16; 23:27; 27:13). Yet the very
same word (translated "outlandish", AV) is used in Neh. 13:26
concerning the women Solomon married. The antidote to succumbing to the
wicked woman was to have wisdom- according to Proverbs. And Solomon
apparently had wisdom. Yet he succumbed to the wicked woman. He was
writing Song of Solomon at the same time as Proverbs. The reason for this
must be that Solomon didn't really have wisdom. Yet we know that he was
given it in abundance. The resolution of this seems to be that Solomon
asked for wisdom in order to lead Israel rather than for himself,
he used that wisdom to judge Israel and to educate the surrounding
nations. But none of it percolated to himself. As custodians of true
doctrine- for that is what we are- we are likely to suffer from over
familiarity with it. We can become so accustomed to 'handling' it, as we
strengthen each other, as we preach, that the personal bearing of the
Truth becomes totally lost upon us, as it was totally lost upon Solomon.
Pro 6:25 Don’t lust after her beauty in your heart, neither let her
captivate you with her eyelids-
The blindness of Solomon is driven home time and again. He
warned the typical young man about being captivated by the eyelids
of the Gentile woman (Prov. 6:25); yet it was the eyes of Miss Egypt
that he openly admitted stole his heart (Song 4:9; 6:5).
Solomon often emphasized the importance of keeping the heart (Prov.
2:10-16; 3:5,6; 4:23-5:5; 6:23-26); he had foreseen that the essential sin
of God’s people was “the plague of his own heart” (1 Kings 8:46), and he
imagined how for this sin God’s people would later pray towards the
temple. And yet his wives turned away
his heart (1 Kings 11:13), for
all this awareness that the heart must be kept. It was as if the more he
knew the truth of something, the more he wanted to do the very opposite.
And this is exactly true of our natures. It’s why we ourselves can discern
the same perversity in our lives. Perhaps with Solomon he reasoned that in
his case, foreign wives wouldn’t turn away
his
heart. Just as our flesh thinks ‘Yes, but it can’t happen to
me’. Perhaps too he reasoned that if the temple somehow could
bring forgiveness for the plague of the heart, his heart was incorruptible
because of the temple.
Pro 6:26 For a prostitute reduces you to a piece of bread. The adulteress
hunts for your precious life-
Truth flowed through Solomon's mouth with ease, but took no
lodgment
at all in his heart. Truth, absolute and pure, flows through our hands in
such volume. Bible study after Bible study, chapter after chapter... But
does it mean anything at all to us? Prov. 6:26 warns the young man that
the Gentile woman will take his money and leave him destitute at the end.
These words seem to be alluded to by Solomon years later in Ecc. 6:2,
where he laments that despite his wealth and success, a Gentile would
have it all after his death. He saw in later life that his warnings to
the young men of Israel had been in the form of painting a picture of a
typical young man who epitomized youthful folly; but now he saw
that he had been making a detailed prophecy of himself.
Pro 6:27 Can a man scoop fire into his lap, and his clothes not be burned?-
He soberly warns against the strange (i.e. Gentile) woman, observing
that a man cannot take this kind of fire into his bosom and not be burned
by it. Yet this is exactly what he was doing at the time he wrote that.
His public removal of his Egyptian wife from the house of David "because
the places are holy" (2 Chron. 8:11) is therefore to be seen as spiritual
pride, appearing to do the right thing, when his heart was far from it.
Pro 6:28 Or can one walk on hot coals, and his feet not be scorched?-
This is exactly what Solomon thought he could do with women. And he
was scorched, a figure for condemnation. "Hot coals" is the word used to
figuratively describe condemnation (Ps. 120:4; 140:10; Prov. 25:22;
26:21). The man who gets involved with sexual sin reasons that he can tip
toe over condemnation without being destroyed or his clothes catching fire
(Prov. 6:27). A sober warning of the psychology of all human sin.
Pro 6:29 So is he who goes in to his neighbour’s wife-
When he warns his son not to go in to his neighbour’s wife, this may
be thought to be looking back to his parents’ failure; for Bathsheba was
the literal neighbour to David, living next door to his palace. But
Solomon so glorifies his parents that I wonder if in fact he had so
whitewashed their behaviour in his own mind that he is, as it were,
unaware of how he was sounding. He may have been genuinely convinced they
had done nothing wrong, and it was all a case of fake news and slander.
Despite David's psalms of penitence.
Whoever touches her will not be unpunished-
The book of Proverbs outlines the basis upon which Solomon was to
judge Israel. This can be read as Solomon warning that he would not show
any grace to a man who went in to his neighbour's wife. But he was only
conceived by David because God had not punished David as that iniquity
deserved. We see here Solomon's utter refusal to accept grace, or to
reflect the grace shown to his family to others. His harsh legalism leads
me to conclude that he had [in his own mind] whitewashed his parents as if
their sin had never happened.
Pro 6:30 Men don’t despise a thief, if he steals to satisfy himself when
he is hungry-
Solomon is arguing that there is utterly no excuse for adultery, and
therefore he will always prosecute it to the ultimate term; he is arguing
that adultery with the woman next door is just inexcusable for any reason.
As noted on :29, he is totally hardened by his legalism to any kind of
grace; were it not for the grace shown to his father, David would have
died before Solomon was even conceived.
Pro 6:31 but if he is found, he shall restore seven times. He shall give
all the wealth of his house-
The wealth or substance of a man's house is the phrase used in Prov.
1:13, of those who fill their houses with wealth by violence. Solomon
presents a perhaps simplistic caricature of the wicked; they use violence,
steal, commit adultery etc. And the righteous are consistently wise and
righteous, according to Proverbs. Whereas in reality, sin and
righteousness is far more subtle. A man like Solomon's father David was
righteous and yet also sinned.
Pro 6:32 He who commits adultery with a woman is void of understanding. He
who does it destroys his own soul-
Solomon didn't commit adultery, but he sinned sexually by taking 1000
wives / concubines, who were Gentiles and idolaters. As so often happens,
people who fail in the general area of sexuality love to focus upon the
specific sins of others in that general area which they themselves have
not committed. This is classic human psychology. Solomon is ever
glorifying his father David, and he appears to not consider David and his
own mother to have committed adultery. Yet he so openly justifies David,
whilst condemning adultery in the strongest terms. It seems to me that he
had found a way of whitewashing his parents' sin, as so many tend to do in
various areas. Solomon simply fails to perceive that God's true people sin
as do other sinners; it is faith in grace which makes the difference. But
Solomon doesn't perceive this critical nuance. His father David had
understanding, but committed adultery. So Solomon's simplistic worldview,
whereby the world is divided between stellar examples of spirituality on
one hand and vile criminal sinners on the other, is shown to be bankrupt
and at best unrealistic.
Pro 6:33 He will get wounds and dishonour, his reproach will not be wiped
away-
This is indeed what happened to Solomon's father David; but I have
argued on :29-32 that Solomon doesn't consciously have David's experience
in view. His Proverbs often subtly criticize his half brothers and all who
had been problematic for David after his sin with Bathsheba. Solomon sees
their behaviour as solely their fault and lack of wisdom. He doesn't
accept any of that behaviour was in fact provoked by the sins of David his
father.
Pro 6:34 For jealousy arouses the fury of the husband. He won’t spare in
the day of vengeance-
Solomon seems to be saying that such refusal by the husband to pity /
spare in the day of judgment is the attitude he will uphold as the judge
(see on :29). Solomon is out of step with his father David, who spared
Saul and his family (s.w. 1 Sam. 23:21; 2 Sam. 21:7); and was condemned
because he showed no pity / sparing to Uriah in taking his wife (s.w. 2
Sam. 12:4,6). Refusal to accept the reality of sin and God's consequent
grace makes people harsh in their judgments.
Pro 6:35 He won’t regard any ransom, neither will he rest content, though
you give many gifts-
I suggested on :34 that Solomon is saying that the husband's insistence
upon the death penalty rather than any "ransom" will be eagerly upheld by
him in judgment (:29). David his father committed murder, for which no
ransom was to be accepted (s.w. Num. 35:31). But God spared David by
grace. And God does constantly ransom / redeem hopeless sinners from
condemnation; this was what led Him to give His Son for the world's
redemption. "Ransom" is a form of the Hebrew word for covering or
atonement. But the very core of God's gracious operation with men was not
appreciated by Solomon at all, and his technical wisdom only led him to
deny this grace.
Previous Chapter
