Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Proverbs 22:28
Remove not the ancient landmark, which thy fathers have set.
28. Comp. Pro 23:10; Deu 19:14.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
A protest against the grasping covetousness Isa 5:8 which is regardless of the rights of the poor upon whose inheritance men encroach (compare the margin reference). The not uncommon reference of the words to the landmarks of thought or custom, however, natural and legitimate, is foreign to the mind of the writer.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Pro 22:28
Remove not the ancient landmarks.
The old landmarks
The wisdom of the Mosaic code is nowhere more manifest than in its provisions touching the tenure of land. Every man in Israel was a landowner, and he must remain so. It was customary to mark the boundaries of estates by corner-stones. To remove these landmarks, if an envious neighbour were so disposed, was an easy matter. But it was prohibited under a severe penalty. We deal with the spiritual inheritance handed down by our fathers as a rich bequest of truth and virtue. An attempt to remove the landmarks of this inheritance is noted as one of the dangerous tendencies of modern thought.
1. One landmark is belief in the supernatural. The hand reached forth to remove this boundary is Agnosticism.
2. Another is Revelation. By which is meant the Holy Scriptures. The enemy of Scripture to-day is Rationalism. To the present controversy as to the trustworthiness of Scripture is due loss of reverence and loss of faith.
3. Another is belief in Christ. The enemies are the various forms of humanitarianism.
4. Another is tradition. There is danger in clamouring against a thing because it bears the seal of antiquity. Progress in theological circles has come to mean a reckless abandonment of everything that age has sanctified. Dogma is objected to because it has been handed down. In fact, a dogma is nothing more nor less than a formulated truth bearing the marks of age, and of long trial, and the warrant of venerable authority. (D. J. Burrell, D.D.)
Old landmarks
I. Some of the landmarks threatened.
1. Those of doctrine. The deity of Christ. Salvation by atonement. The necessity for regeneration.
2. Those of Christian life. Laxity in doctrine results in laxity of life.
II. Reasons why these landmarks should be left. Loyalty to God as King forbids us from tampering with them, and affection to Him as a Father says, Respect them. They are the ramparts of the Church. They are the foundations of all true happiness, and the men who have most faithfully stood by them, and most humbly paid homage to them, have been the men who have been the glory of the Church. (Archibald G. Brown.)
Eastern land-divisions
Eastern fields were not divided by hedge, or wall, or ditch, so there was much danger of confusing the separate properties of individuals. In the East advantage was taken, wherever possible, of natural divisions, such as river-beds, tributary stream-lines, and edges of valleys. But in the open ground the separate properties were only marked by a deeper furrow, or large stones almost buried in the soil. The injunction not to remove a neighbours landmarks was, therefore, of the utmost importance, as stealthy encroachments might easily be made by shifting these stones. (Biblical Things not Generally Known.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Verse 28. Remove not the ancient landmark] Do not take the advantage, in ploughing or breaking up a field contiguous to that of thy neighbour, to set the dividing stones farther into his field that thou mayest enlarge thy own. Take not what is not thy own in any case. Let all ancient divisions, and the usages connected with them, be held sacred. Bring in no new dogmas, nor rites, nor ceremonies, into religion, or the worship of God, that are not clearly laid down in the sacred writings. “Stand in the way; and see, and ask for the old paths, which is the good way, and walk therein; and ye shall find rest for your souls;” Jer 6:16. But if any Church have lost sight of the genuine doctrines of the Gospel, calling them back to these is not removing the ancient landmarks, as some have falsely asserted. God gave a law against removing the ancient landmarks, by which the inheritances of tribes and families were distinguished. See De 19:14, from which these words of Solomon appear to be taken.
Even among the heathens the landmark was sacred; so sacred that they made a deity of it. Terminus signifies the stone or post that served as a landmark. And Terminus was reputed a god, and had offerings made to him. Hence OVID: –
Tu quoque sacrorum, Termine, finis eras.
FAST. lib. i., ver. 50.
Nox ubi transierit, solito celebratur honore,
Separat indicio qui Deus arva suo.
Termine, sive lapis, sive es defossus in agro
Stipes, ab antiquis sic quoque Numen habes.
Te duo diversa domini pro parte coronant;
Binaque serta tibi, binaque liba ferunt.—-
Conveniunt, celebrantque dapes vicinia simplex;
Et cantant laudes, Termine sancte, tuas.
Tu populos, urbesque, et regna ingentia finis:
Omnis erit, sine te, litigiosus ager.
FAST. lib. ii., ver. 639.
Here we find the owners of both fields bringing each his garland and libation to the honour of this god. They sung its praises, put on its top a chaplet of flowers, poured out the libation before it; and the inhabitants of the country held a festival in its honour. It was, in short, celebrated as the preserver of the bounds and territorial rights of tribes, cities, and whole kingdoms; and without its testimony and evidence, every field would have been a subject of litigation.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Landmark, whereby the lands of several possessors were distinguished and divided. Do not enrich thyself with the injury of other men; do not invade the rights of others.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
28. (Compare Pr23:10). Do not entrench on others (Deu 19:14;Deu 27:17).
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Remove not the ancient landmark which thy fathers have set. Or, “the ancient border” or “boundary” n; by which lands, estates, and inheritances, were marked, bounded, and distinguished; set by ancestors in agreement with their neighbours; which to remove was contrary to a law, and a curse is denounced upon those that did it,
De 19:14; and was always reckoned a very heinous crime in early times; [See comments on Job 24:2]. This was so sacred a thing among the Romans, that they had a deity which presided over those bounds, and had its name from them. Some apply this, in a political sense, to laws of long standing, and customs of long prescription; and others interpret it, in a theological sense, of doctrines and practices settled by the fathers of the church; which, if understood of Christ and his apostles only, will be allowed; but if of the ancient fathers of the church that followed them, it should not be received; since they were but fallible men, and guilty of many errors and mistakes, both in doctrine and practice.
n “terminum antiquum”, Pagninus, Junius & Tremellius, Piscator, Michaelis, Schultens.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
A fourth proverb – a distich – beginning with the warning :
28 Remove not the perpetual landmark
Which thy ancestors have set up.
28a = Pro 23:10. Regarding the inviolability of boundaries established by the law, vid., at Pro 15:25. denotes “the boundary mark set up from ancient times, the removal of which were a double transgression, because it is rendered sacred by its antiquity” ( Orelli, p. 76). = signifies to remove back, Hiph. to shove back, to move away. has the meaning of ( ) , , quippe quod . Instead of , the Mishna reads, Pea v. 6, , which in the Jerusalem Gemara one Rabbi understands of those brought up out of Egypt, another of the poor; for “to rise” (in the world) is a euphemism ( ) for “to come down” (be reduced in circumstances).
(Note: As an analogical example, , seeing clearly = blind.)
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
28 Remove not the ancient landmark, which thy fathers have set.
1. We are here taught not to invade another man’s right, though we can find ways of doing it ever so secretly and plausibly, clandestinely and by fraud, without any open force. Let not property in general be entrenched upon, by robbing men of their liberties and privileges, or of any just ways of maintaining them. Let not the property of particular persons be encroached upon. The land-marks, or meer-stones, are standing witnesses to every man’s right; let not those be removed quite away, for thence come wars, and fightings, and endless disputes; let them not be removed so as to take from thy neighbour’s lot to thy own, for that is downright robbing him and entailing the fraud upon posterity. 2. We may infer hence that a deference is to be paid, in all civil matters, to usages that have prevailed time out of mind and the settled constitutions of government, in which it becomes us to acquiesce, lest an attempt to change it, under pretence of changing it for the better, prove of dangerous consequence.
Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary
Sanctity of Property Boundaries
Verse 28 forbids encroachment upon the property rights of another by moving the landmark that established the boundary. Strict laws governed the land, Deu 19:14; Num 36:7. Divine judgment and wrath was decreed for those who violated property rights, Deu 27:17; Hos 5:10; Pro 23:10-11.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
(28) Remove not the ancient landmark.The stones marking the boundaries of the fields: evidently a not uncommon crime, from the earnestness with which it is forbidden. (Comp. Pro. 23:10; Deu. 19:14; Deu. 27:17.)
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
28. Remove not the ancient landmark The marks, frequently stones, by which lands were divided, whether private estates or the territories of tribes, were held very sacred, not merely among the Hebrews, but among other ancient nations. To change them, secretly or by force, was a high offence and injustice, and brought on litigations and wars. Estates passed down from generation to generation, and hence these “marks” are described as “the ancient landmarks which thy fathers have set.” (See Deu 19:14; Deu 27:17.) It is probable that a tropical sense may be intended here. Some think it is the principal one. The sense of the passage then would be, applying the general principle: Change not the ancient and approved usages of the fathers, whether political, social, or religious; be not restless innovators. Duly qualified, this is an excellent maxim. Doubtless improvements are frequently effected by changes; but to innovate is not to necessarily improve. See note on Job 24:2. Comp. Hos 5:10; Pro 23:10-11.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
v. 28. Remove not the ancient landmark,
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
Pro 22:28. Remove not the ancient land-mark The plain meaning of this seems to be, “Be content with thy paternal estate, and endeavour not to increase it by unjust means.” See chap. Pro 23:10.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Pro 22:28 Remove not the ancient landmark, which thy fathers have set.
Ver. 28. Remove not the ancient landmark. ] Unless ye covet a curse. Deu 27:17 Let levellers look to it, and know that property is God’s ordinance; Act 5:4 Psa 17:14 that magistracy is the hedge of a nation; a and that “he that breaks a hedge, a serpent shall bite him”; Ecc 10:8 that the ministry is Christ’s own institution; Eph 4:11 and that lay preachers may look to speed as Nadab and Abihu, as Uzzah and Uzziah, or as other usurpers: See Trapp on “ Deu 19:14 “
a .
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
ancient = age-long.
landmark = boundary stone.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Pro 22:28
Pro 22:28
“Remove not the ancient landmark, Which thy fathers have set.”
Moving an ancient landmark was a device of fraudulent men, because such landmarks defined the boundaries of farms and estates. Moving a landmark was a crime easy to commit and hard to prove, therefore God gave the sternest warnings against it, not only in the books of Law and Prophecy, but in the Wisdom literature also.
Pro 22:28. Pro 23:10 also contains this prohibition. The original law behind this saying is in Deu 19:14 : Thou shalt not remove thy neighbors landmark, which they of old time have set, in thine inheritance which thou shall inherit, in the land that Jehovah thy God giveth thee to possess it. It was one of the twelve special curses to be pronounced from Mt. Ebal: Cursed be he that removeth his neighbors landmark. And all the people shall say, Amen (Deu 27:17). This would be like removing steel stakes or buried rocks of surveyings today. It was even worse then because the official description of a property line is recorded at the courthouse today while in Bible days the landmark was all there was.
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
remove: Pro 23:10, Deu 19:14, Deu 27:17, Job 24:2
landmark: or, bound
Reciprocal: Pro 24:15 – spoil Hos 5:10 – remove
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Pro 22:28. Remove not the ancient landmark Whereby the lands of several possessors were distinguished and divided. Do not enrich thyself with the injury of other men: do not invade the rights of others.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Moving boundaries in fields, usually marked by stone pillars or piles of stones (cairns), resulted in individuals losing and gaining property and wealth. In Israel, this was also a sin against God, since God owned and apportioned all the land (cf. Deu 19:14; Deu 27:17; Job 24:2). The warning is against appropriating someone else’s property, not disrespecting historical markers.
"Probably the boundary stone was moved annually only about an inconspicuous half-inch, which in time could add up to a sizeable land grab." [Note: Ibid., p. 235.]