Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Proverbs 30:1

The words of Agur the son of Jakeh, [even] the prophecy: the man spoke unto Ithiel, even unto Ithiel and Ucal,

1. the prophecy ] Lit. the burden, as the word is frequently rendered (e.g. Zec 9:1; Mal 1:1, where see notes in this Series). It may mean either burden from its weighty character, as a Divine announcement, or oracle, or prophecy, as being “taken up” (comp. Num 23:18) by the speaker.

The reading of R.V. marg. Jakeh of Massa, making Massa a proper name, is however preferred by some scholars. See Pro 31:1, note.

the man ] a title of excellence ( vir), used of himself as a prophet or teacher by Balaam, Num 24:3, and by David, 2Sa 23:1.

spake ] or saith. The word is commonly used of Divine or oracular utterance, as in the frequent phrase, “saith, the Lord.”

lthiel and Ucal ] He addresses himself to his favourite disciple, associating with him another scarcely less favoured, and through them to every one that has an ear to hear.

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

See the introduction to Proverbs. According to the different reading, there noted, the inscription ends with: the man spake, and the words that follow, are the beginning of the confession, I have wearied myself after God and have fainted.

Spake – The Hebrew word is that commonly used of the utterance of a divine oracle.

Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible

CHAPTER XXX

Agur’s confession of faith, 1-6.

His prayer, 7-9.

Of wicked generations, 10-14.

Things that are never satisfied, 15, 16.

Of him who despises his parents, 17.

Three wonderful things, 18-20.

Three things that disquiet the land, 21-23.

Four little but very intelligent animals, 24-28.

Four things that go well, 29-31.

A man should cease from doing foolishly, and from strife,

32, 33.

NOTES ON CHAP. XXX

Verse 1. The words of Agur the son of Jakeh] The words Agur, Jakeh, Ithiel, and Ucal, have been considered by some as proper names: by others, as descriptive characters. With some, Agur is Solomon; and Jakeh, David; and Ithiel and Ucal are epithets of Christ.

The Vulgate translates, Verba congregantis filii vomentis: visio, quam locutus est sir, cum quo est Deus, et qui Deo secum morante confortatus, ait. “The words of the collector, the son of the vomiter: the vision of the man who has God with him, and who is fortified by God dwelling with him, saith.”

COVERDALE makes the following words a title to the chapter:

“The wordes of Agur the sonne of Jake.

“The prophecie of a true faithfull man, whom God hath helped; whom God hath comforted and nourished.”

The whole might be thus translated, keeping near to the letter: –

“The words of the epistle of the obedient son.” Or,

“The words of the collector, the son of Jakeh. The parable which haggeber, the strong man, the hero, spake unto him who is God with me; to him who is God with me, even the strong God.”

The visioun that a man spake with whiche is God, and that God with him, wonyng confortid.-Old MS. Bible.

From this introduction, from the names here used, and from the style of the book, it appears evident that Solomon was not the author of this chapter; and that it was designed to be distinguished from his work by this very preface, which specifically distinguishes it from the preceding work. Nor can the words in Pr 30:2-3; Pr 30:8-9, be at all applied to Solomon: they suit no part of Solomon’s life, nor of his circumstances. We must, therefore, consider it an appendix or supplement to the preceding collection; something in the manner of that part which the men of Hezekiah, king of Judah, had collected. As to mysteries here, many have been found by them who sought for nothing else; but they are all, in my view of the subject, hazarded and precarious. I believe Agur, Jakeh, Ithiel, and Ucal, to be the names of persons who did exist, but of whom we know nothing but what is here mentioned. Agur seems to have been a public teacher, and Ithiel and Ucal to have been his scholars; and what he delivers to them was done by prophesy. It was what the prophets generally term massa, an ORACLE, something immediately delivered by the Holy Spirit for the benefit of man.

Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible

Agur the son of Jakeh; a person so called, as appears from the designation of his own and his fathers name, who lived either in Solomons time, or rather afterwards, and was famous in his generation for wisdom, and piety, and prophecy; and therefore his proverbs were thought fit to be added to those of Solomon, either by those men of Hezekiah, mentioned Pro 25:1, or by some other. But that this should be meant of Solomon may easily be supposed, but cannot be proved; nor is it probable, as being contrary both to the style of the whole chapter, and to the matter of some part of it, as Pro 30:7-9, which agrees not to Solomon; and to the laws of good interpretation, one of which is, that all words should be taken in their most natural and proper sense, when there is no evidence nor necessity of understanding them improperly and figuratively, which is the present case.

The prophecy; the prophetical instruction; for as the prophets were public preachers as well as foretellers of things to come, so their sermons, no less than their predictions, are commonly called their prophecies.

Unto Ithiel and Ucal; two friends, or disciples, and contemporaries of Agur, called by those names, who having a great and just opinion of his wisdom, desired his instructions. Others, concerning Ithiel and Ucal; which they understand of Christ, called

Ithiel, which signifies God with me, and answers to Immanuel, which is God with us; and

Ucal, which signifies power or prevalency. But if he had meant this of Christ, why should he design him such obscure and ambiguous names, as if he would not be understood? Why did he not call him by the name of Shiloh or Messiah, or some other Scripture title belonging and ascribed to him? Besides, this interpretation agrees not with the contents of this chapter, wherein there is only a short and occasional mention of Christ, but the chapter consists in a manner wholly of counsels and sentences of a quite other kind.

Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole

1. This is the title of thischapter (see Introduction).

the prophecyliterally,”the burden” (compare Isa 13:1;Zec 9:1), used for any divineinstruction; not necessarily a prediction, which was only a kind ofprophecy (1Ch 15:27, “asong”). Prophets were inspired men, who spoke for God to man, orfor man to God (Gen 20:7; Exo 7:14;Exo 7:15; Exo 7:16).Such, also, were the New Testament prophets. In a general sense, Gad,Nathan, and others were such, who were divine teachers, though we donot learn that they ever predicted.

the man spakeliterally,”the saying of the man”; an expression used to denote anysolemn and important announcement (compare 2Sa 23:1;Psa 36:1; Psa 110:1;Isa 1:24, &c.). Ithiel andUcal were perhaps pupils.

Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible

The words of Agur the son of Jakeh,…. Here begins, according to Aben Ezra, the fourth part of this book; though, according to others, it is the fifth; [See comments on Pr 22:17]; Who this Agur was is a matter of doubt; some of the Jewish writers, as Jarchi and Gersom, and likewise some Christian writers f, take him to be Solomon himself, who calls himself Agur, which is said to signify “a gatherer”; and so the Vulgate Latin version renders it, “the words of the gatherer, the son of the vomiter”; just as he calls himself Koheleth, or “the caller”, or “preacher”, Ec 1:1. The reason given of this name is, because he gathered wisdom and the law g; or, as Jarchi, he gathered wisdom, and vomited it; that is, delivered it out to others; so he did, he sought after and attained to more wisdom than any before him, for he was wiser than all men; and it may be added, that he “gathered” silver and gold, and the treasure of kings, and increased in riches more than any before him, Ec 1:13. But then all this does not agree with the person whose words these are; for he speaks of himself as being very ignorant, and as not having learned wisdom, Pr 30:2; and desires neither poverty nor riches, Pr 30:8; besides, the word “Agur” signifies not “a gatherer”, but “gathered”, as Hillerus h renders it; and so Cocceius, who thinks also that Solomon is meant, yet not for the above reasons, but translates the clause thus, “the words of the recollected son of the obedient”; as if it described Solomon the son of David, the obedient one, the man after God’s own heart, when he was restored by repentance; but it seems better, with Aben Ezra, to understand this of some very good, knowing, and worthy man, who lived in those times, either before the times of Solomon, or in the same, whose pithy sayings and sentences he had a great regard for, and joined them to his own; or who lived in the times of Hezekiah, or before, whose proverbs were collected by his men, and added to those of Solomon’s they had copied in the preceding chapters; see Pr 25:1;

[even] the prophecy; or “burden” i, as many of the prophecies are called; it designs something received from the Lord, taken up and carried to others; so Balaam is said to “take up his parable”,

Nu 23:7. Here it does not design a prediction of future events, unless it can be thought that there is in the following words a prophecy of the Messiah; but an instruction, a declaration of things useful and profitable; so preaching in the New Testament is called prophesying often, 1Co 14:1. This is a part of the word of God, of the prophecy which came not by the will of man, but by the inspiration of God, 2Pe 1:19; which prophecy

the man spake, this excellent good man Agur, who was divinely inspired; see Nu 24:3;

unto Ithiel, even unto Ithiel and Ucal; who were either the children of Agur, whom he instructed in the knowledge of divine things; or they were, as Aben Ezra, either his companions with whom he conversed about sacred things, or his disciples who inquired of him about these things, and learned them of him. Some think k these are titles of God himself, to whom Agur directs his speech, and acknowledges his ignorance of the divine Being, whom he might justly call Ithiel and Ucal, that is, “God with me”, and “the mighty One”; and certain it is that Agur does direct a prayer to God, Pr 30:7; And some read these words themselves as a prayer, “let God be with me, and one shall prevail” l, that is, over all mine enemies; for, if God is on the side of his people, who shall be against them? or, “I shall be able” to do all things through the Lord’s strength, Ro 8:31; But I rather think the words should be read, as Jarchi observes, “concerning Ithiel and Ucal” m; that is, concerning the Messiah, to whom these names agree. Ithiel, or “God with me”, is very similar to a phrase used by Christ himself in the days of his flesh, Joh 8:29. God was with him as the eternal Word, and his only begotten Son, from all eternity, which denotes his co-existence, nearness of union, equality of nature, and distinction of persons; he was with him as Mediator before the world began, in the council of peace, which was between them both; in the covenant of grace made with him, in which all things were agreed upon respecting the salvation of his people; he was with him in the beginning of time down to his incarnation; he was with him in the creation of all things, in the sustentation of them; in the works of providence, and in the government of the church; he was with him during his state of humiliation; in his infancy, to protect him from the malice of Herod; he was with him when disputing with the doctors in the temple, to direct him; he was with him at his baptism, transfiguration, and other times; he was with him throughout his public ministry, from the beginning to the end of it; he did good and healed all manner of diseases, and wrought amazing miracles, God being with him, Joh 3:2

Ac 10:38; and he was with him in his sufferings and at his death; and so he is with him in his exalted state; he raised him from the dead, set him at his own right hand, and ever attends to his prevalent intercession; and will be with him in raising the dead and judging the world. “Ucal”, which has the signification of being able, strong, mighty, and powerful, agrees with Christ, who is the mighty God the most mighty, the Almighty; and which appears by the works he did before his incarnation, as the creation of all things out of nothing, the preservation of all things, and the several wonderful events in which he was; concerned, as the confusion of languages, the burning of Sodom and Gomorrah, the conducting the children of Israel through the wilderness, with others; also what he did when here on earth, the mighty works and miracles done by him, and especially the great work of man’s redemption, and also the raising of himself from the dead: moreover, what he now does and will do for his people show him to be the mighty One; taking the care of all the churches and providing for them; supplying all the wants of his people, bearing all their burdens, supporting them under all their temptations, and delivering them out of them; strengthening them for his service, protecting them from their enemies, keeping them from falling, raising their dead bodies, and bringing all the sons of God to glory: or if the word should be rendered, as it may, “eaten” or “consumed” n, it is true of Christ, whose zeal ate him up, Ps 69:9; and who is the antitype of the sacrifice consumed by fire.

f De Dieu, Cocceius, Teelman. Specimen. Explicat. Parabot. p. 378. g Jelammedenu apud Buxtorf. Lex. Rab. col. 26. h Onomastic. Sacr. p. 39. i “onus”, Mercerus; “prophetia gravis”, Tigurine version. k Jermin in loc. l See Trapp in loc. m So Junius & Tremellius, Aamama, Calovius, Cartwright. n Vid. Teelman. Specimen. Expliicat. Parabol. p. 391.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

The title of this first appendix, according to the text lying before us, is:

“The words of Agur the son of Jakeh, the utterance.”

This title of the following collection of proverbs is limited by Olewejored; and , separated from the author’s name by Rebia, is interpreted as a second inscription, standing on one line with , as particularizing that first. The old synagogue tradition which, on the ground of the general title Pro 1:1, regarded the whole Book of Proverbs as the work of Solomon, interpreted the words, “Agur the son of Jakeh,” as an allegorical designation of Solomon, who appropriated the words of the Tora to the king, Deu 17:17, and again rejected them, for he said: God is with me, and I shall not do it (viz., take many wives, without thereby suffering injury), Schemth rabba, c. 6. The translation of Jerome: Verba congregantis filii Vomentis , is the echo of this Jewish interpretation. One would suppose that if “Agur” were Solomon’s name, “Jakeh” must be that of David; but another interpretation in Midrash Mishle renders (“son”) as the designation of the bearer of a quality, and sees in “Agur” one who girded ( = ) his loins for wisdom; and in “son of Jakeh” one free from sin ( ). In the Middle Ages this mode of interpretation, which is historically and linguistically absurd, first began to prevail; for then the view was expressed by several (Aben Ezra, and Meri the Spaniard) that Agur ben Jakeh was a wise man of the time of Solomon. That of Solomon’s time, they thence conclude (blind to Pro 25:1) that Solomon collected together these proverbs of the otherwise unknown wise man. In truth, the age of the man must remain undecided; and at all events, the time of Hezekiah is the fixed period from which, where possible, it is to be sought. The name “Agur” means the gathered (Pro 6:8; Pro 10:5), or, after the predominant meaning of the Arab. ajar , the bribed, mercede conductum ; also the collector (cf. , fowler); or the word might mean, perhaps, industrious in collecting (cf. ‘alwak , attached to, and other examples in Mhlau, p. 36). Regarding = binj (usual in ), and its relation to the Arab. ibn , vid., Genesis, p. 555. The name Jakeh is more transparent. The noun , Pro 30:17; Gen 49:10, means the obedient, from the verb ; but, formed from this verbal stem, the form of the word would be (not ). The form is the participial adj. from , like from ; and the Arab. wakay , corresponding to this , viii. ittakay , to be on one’s guard, particularly before God; the usual word fore piety regarded as . Mhlau (p. 37) rightly sees in the proper names Eltekeh [Jos 19:44] and Eltekon [Jos 15:59] the secondary verbal stem , which, like e.g., ( ), , , has originated from the reflexive, which in these proper names, supposing that is subj., means to take under protection; not: to give heed = cavere. All these meanings are closely connected. In all these three forms – , , – the verb is a synonym of ; so that denotes

(Note: According to the Lex. ‘Gezer (from the Mesopotamian town of ‘Geziret ibn ‘Amr), the word wakihon is, in the Mesopotamian language, “the overseer of the house in which is the cross of the Christians;” and accordingly, in Muhammed’s letter to the Christians of Negran, after they became subject to him, “a monk shall not be removed from his monastery, nor a presbyter from his presbyterate, ( wakahtah ) wala watah wakahyttah ” (this will be the correct phrase), “nor an overseer from his office.” The verbal stem wak – ah ( ) is, as it appears, Northern Semitic; the South Arabian lexicographer Neshwan ignores it (Wetzstein in Mhlau).)

the pious, either as taking care, , or as keeping, i.e., observing, viz., that which is commanded by God.

In consequence of the accentuation, is the second designation of this string of proverbs, and is parallel with . But that is absolutely impossible. (from , to raise, viz., the voice, to begin to express) denotes the utterance, and according to the usage of the words before us, the divine utterance, the message of God revealed to the prophet and announced by him, for the most part, if not always ( vid., at Isa 13:1), the message of God as the avenger. Accordingly Jewish interpreters ( e.g., Meri and Arama) remark that designates what follows, as , i.e., an utterance of the prophetic spirit. But, on the other hand, what follows begins with the confession of human weakness and short-sightedness; and, moreover, we read proverbs not of a divine but altogether of a human and even of a decaying spiritual stamp, besides distinguished from the Solomonic proverbs by this, that the I of the poet, which remains in the background, here comes to the front. This of prophetic utterances does not at all harmonize with the following string of proverbs. It does not so harmonize on this account, because one theme does not run through these proverbs which the sing. requires. It comes to this, that never occurs by itself in the sense of a divine, a solemn utterance, without having some more clearly defining addition, though it should be only a demonstrative (Isa 14:28). But what author, whether poet or prophet, would give to his work the title of , which in itself means everything, and thus nothing! And now: the utterance – what can the article at all mean here? This question has remained unanswered by every interpreter. Ewald also sees himself constrained to clothe the naked word; he does it by reading together , and translating the “sublime saying which he spoke.” But apart from the consideration that Jer 23:31 proves nothing for the use of this use of , the form ( ) is supported by 2Sa 23:1 (cf. Pro 30:5 with 2Sa 22:31); and besides, the omission of the , and in addition of the relative pronoun ( ), would be an inaccuracy not at all to be expected on the brow of this gnomology ( vid., Hitzig). If we leave the altogether unsuspected undisturbed, will be a nearer definition of the name of the author. The Midrash has a right suspicion, for it takes together Hamassa and Agur ben Jakeh, and explains: of Agur the son of Jakeh, who took upon himself the yoke of the most blessed. The Graecus Venetus comes nearer what is correct, for it translates: . We connect Pro 31:1, where , “Lemuel (the) king,” is a linguistic impossibility, and thus, according to the accentuation lying before us, also are to be connected together; thus it appears that must be the name of a country and a people. It was Hitzig who first made this Columbus-egg to stand. But this is the case only so far as he recognised in a Lemuel, the king of Massa, and recognised this Massa also in Pro 30:1 ( vid., his dissertation: Das Knigreich Massa [the kingdom of Massa], in Zeller’s Theolog. Jahrbb. 1844, and his Comm.), viz., the Israelitish Massa named in Gen 25:14 (= 1Ch 1:30) along with Dumah and Tema. But he proceeds in a hair-splitting way, and with ingenious hypothesis, without any valid foundation. That this Dumah is the Dumat el-jendel (cf. under Isa 21:11) lying in the north of Nejed, near the southern frontiers of Syria, the name and the founding of which is referred by the Arabians to Dm the son of Ishmael, must be regarded as possible, and consequently Massa is certainly to be sought in Northern Arabia. But if, on the ground of 1Ch 4:42., he finds there a Simeonitic kingdom, and finds its origin in this, that the tribe of Simeon originally belonging to the ten tribes, and thus coming from the north settled in the south of Judah, and from thence in the days of Hezekiah, fleeing before the Assyrians, were driven farther and farther in a south-east direction towards Northern Arabia; on the contrary, it has been shown by Graf ( The Tribe of Simeon, a contribution to the history of Israel, 1866) that Simeon never settled in the north of the Holy Land, and according to existing evidences extended their settlement from Negeb partly into the Idumean highlands, but not into the highlands of North Arabia. Hitzig thinks that there are found traces of the Massa of Agur and Lemuel in the Jewish town

(Note: Cf. Blau’s Arab. im sechsten Jahrh. in the Deutsch. Morgl. Zeits. xxxiii. 590, and also p. 573 of the same, regarding a family of proselytes among the Jews in Taima.)

of , of Benjamin of Tudela, lying three days’ journey from Chebar, and in the proper name (Arab.) Malsa (smooth), which is given to a rock between Tema and Wady el-Kora ( vid., Kosegarten’s Chestom. p. 143); but how notched his ingenuity here is need scarcely be shown. By means of more cautious combinations Mhlau has placed the residence of Agur and Lemuel in the Hauran mountain range, near which there is a Dumah, likewise a Tm; and in the name of the town Mismje, lying in the Lej, is probably found the Mishma which is named along with Massa, Gen 25:14; and from this that is related in 1Ch 5:9., 1Ch 5:18-22, of warlike expeditions on the part of the tribes lying on the east of the Jordan against the Hagarenes and their allies Jetur, Nephish, and Nodab,

(Note: Mhlau combines Nodab with Nudbe to the south-east of Bosra; Blau ( Deut. Morg. Zeit. xxv. 566), with the of Eupolemos named along with the . The Kams has Nadab as the name of a tribe.)

it is with certainty concluded that in the Hauran, and in the wilderness which stretches behind the Euphrates towards it, Israelitish tribes have had their abode, whose territory had been early seized by the trans-Jordanic tribes, and was held “until the captivity,” 1Ch 5:22, i.e., till the Assyrian deportation. This designation of time is almost as unfavourable to Mhlau’s theory of a Massa in the Hauran, inhabited by Israelitish tribes from the other side, as the expression “ to Mount Seir ” (1Ch 4:42) is to Hitzig’s North Arabian Massa inhabited by Simeonites. We must leave it undecided whether Dumah and Tm, which the Toledoth of Ismael name in the neighbourhood of Massa, are the east Hauran districts now existing; or as Blau ( Deut. Morgl. Zeit. xxv. 539), with Hitzig, supposes, North Arabian districts (cf. Genesis. p. 377, 4th ed.).

(Note: Dozy ( Israeliten in Mecca, p. 89f.) connects Massa with Mansh, a pretended old name of Mecca.)

“Be it as it may, the contents and the language of this difficult piece almost necessarily point to a region bordering on the Syro-Arabian waste. Ziegler’s view ( Neue Uebers. der Denksprche Salomo’s, 1791, p. 29), that Lemuel was probably an emir of an Arabian tribe in the east of Jordan, and that a wise Hebrew translated those proverbs of the emir into Hebrew, is certainly untenable, but does not depart so far from the end as may appear at the first glance” (Mhlau).

(Note: These German quotations with the name of Mhlau are taken from the additions to his book, which he placed at my disposal.)

If the text-punctuation lying before us rests on the false supposition that Massa, Pro 30:1; Pro 31:1, is a generic name, and not a proper name, then certainly the question arises whether should not be used instead of , much more , which is suggested as possible in the article “Sprche,” in Herzog’s Encycl. xiv. 694. Were , Gen 10:30, the region , on the northern border of the Persian Gulf, in which Apamea lay, then it might be said in favour of this, that as the histories of Muhammed and of Benjamin of Tudela prove the existence of an old Jewish occupation of North Arabia, but without anything being heard of a , the Talmud bears testimony

(Note: Vid., Neubauer’s Le Gographie du Talmud, pp. 325, 329, 382.)

to a Jewish occupation of Mesene, and particularly of Apamea; and by the mother of Lemuel, the king of Mesha, one may think

(Note: Derenbourg’s Essai sur l’Hist. et la Gog. de la Palestine, i. p. 224.)

of Helena, celebrated in Jewish writings, queen of Adiabene, the mother of Monabaz and Izates. But the identity of the Mesha of the catalogue of nations with is uncertain, and the Jewish population of that place dates at least from the time of the Sassanides to the period of the Babylonian exile. We therefore hold by the Ishmaelite Massa, whether North Arabian or Hauranian; but we by no means subscribe Mhlau’s non possumus non negare, Agurum et Lemulem proseytos e paganis, non Israelitas fuisse . The religion of the tribes descended from Abraham, so far as it had not degenerated, was not to be regarded as idolatrous. It was the religion which exists to the present day among the great Ishmaelite tribes of the Syrian desert as the true tradition of their fathers under the name of Dn Ibrhm (Abraham’s religion); which, as from Wetzstein, we have noted in the Commentary on Job (p. 387 and elsewhere), continues along with Mosaism among the nomadic tribes of the wilderness; which shortly before the appearance of Christianity in the country beyond the Jordan, produced doctrines coming into contact with the teachings of the gospel; which at that very time, according to historic evidences ( e.g., Mjsin’s chronicles of the Ka’be), was dominant even in the towns of Higz; and in the second century after Christ, was for the first time during the repeated migration of the South Arabians again oppressed by Greek idolatry, and was confined to the wilderness; which gave the mightiest impulse to the rise of Islam, and furnished its best component part; and which towards the end of the last century, in the country of Neged, pressed to a reform of Islam, and had as a result the Wahabite doctrine. If we except Pro 30:5., the proverbs of Agur and Lemuel contain nothing which may not be conceived from a non-Israelitish standpoint on which the author of the Book of Job placed himself. Even Job 30:5. is not there (cf. Job 6:10; Job 23:12) without parallels. When one compares Deu 4:2; Deu 13:1, and 2Sa 22:31 = Psa 18:31 (from which Pro 30:5 of the proverbs of Agur is derived, with the change of into ), Agur certainly appears as one intimately acquainted with the revealed religion of Israel, and with their literature. But must we take the two Massites therefore, with Hitzig, Mhlau, and Zckler, as born Israelites? Since the Bible history knows no Israelitish king outside of the Holy Land, we regard it as more probable that King Lemuel and his countryman Agur were Ishmaelites who had raised themselves above the religion of Abraham, and recognised the religion of Israel as its completion.

If we now return to the words of Pro 30:1, Hitzig makes Agur Lemuel’s brother, for he vocalizes , i.e., Agur the son of her whom Massa obeys. Ripa and Bjrck of Sweden, and Stuart of America, adopt this view. But supposing that is connected with the accusative of him who is obeyed, , as the representative of such an attributive clause, as of its virtual genitive, is elsewhere without example; and besides, it is unadvisable to explain away the proper name , which speaks for itself. There are two other possibilities of comprehending , without the change, or with the change of a single letter. Wetzstein, on Pro 31:1, has said regarding Mhlau’s translation “King of Massa:” “I would more cautiously translate, ‘King of the Massans,’ since this interpretation is unobjectionable; while, on the contrary, this is not terra Massa , nor urbs Massa . It is true that the inhabitants of Massa were not pure nomads, after 30 and 31, but probably, like the other tribes of Israel, they were half nomads, who possessed no great land as exclusive property, and whose chief place did not perhaps bear their name. The latter may then have been as rare in ancient times as it is in the present day. Neither the Sammar, the Harb, the Muntefik, nor other half nomads whom I know in the southern parts of the Syrian desert, have any place which bears their name. So also, it appears, the people of Uz ( ), which we were constrained to think of as a dominant, firmly-settled race, since it had so great a husbandman as Job, possessed no . Only in certain cases, where a tribe resided for many centuries in and around a place, does the name of this tribe appear to have remained attached to it. Thus from , ‘the low-country of the Dumahns,’ or , ‘the city of Dumahns,’ as also from , ‘the city of the Temans,’ gradually there arose (probably not till the decline and fall of this tribe) a city of Dumah, a haven of Midian, and the like, so that the primary meaning of the name came to be lost.” It is clear that, from the existence of an Ishmaelite tribe , there does not necessarily follow a similar name given to a region. The conj. , for ( vid., Herzog’s Encycl. xiv. 702), has this against it, that although it is good Heb., it directly leads to this conclusion ( e.g., 2Sa 23:20, 2Sa 23:29, cf. 1Ki 17:1). Less objectionable is Bunsen’s and Bttcher’s . But perhaps may also have the same signification; far rather at least this than that which Malbim, after , 1Ch 15:27, introduced with the lxx : “We ought then to compare 2Sa 23:24, , a connection in which, after the analogy of such Arabic connections as kaysu’aylana , Kais of the tribe of ‘Ailn ( Ibn Coteiba, 13 and 83), or Ma’nu Tayyin , Ma’n of the tribe of Tay, i.e., Ma’n belonging to this tribe, as distinguished from other men and families of this name (Schol. Hamasae 144. 3), is thought of as genit”

(Note: In ‘ , Jer 8:5, ‘ is though of as genit., although it may be also nom., after the scheme of apposition instead of annexion. That it is genit., cf. Philippi’s St. Const. pp. 192-195.)

(Mhlau). That (instead of ) is easily changed, with Thenius and Wellhausen, after 1Ch 11:26, into , and in itself it is not altogether homogeneous, because without the article. Yet it may be supposed that instead of , on account of the appelat. of the proper name (the lifting up, elatio ), the word might be also employed. And since , along with , forms, as it were, one compositum, and does not at all destroy

(Note: We say, in Arab., without any anomaly, e.g., Alju – bnu – Muhammadin Tajjin , i.e., the Ali son of Muhammed, of the tribe (from the tribe) of Tay; cf. Jos 3:11; Isa 28:1; Isa 63:11; and Deu 3:13.)

the regulating force of , the expression is certainly, after the Arabic usus loq., to be thus explained: The words of Agur the son of Jakeh, of the tribe (the country) of Massa.

The second line of this verse, as it is punctuated, is to be rendered:

The saying of the man to Ithel, to Ithel and Uchal,

not Ukkal; for, since Athias and van der Hooght, the incorrect form has become current. J. H. Michaelis has the right form of the word . Thus, with raphatum, it is to be read after the Masora, for it adds to this word the remark , and counts it among the forty-eight words sometimes written defectively without ( vid., this list in the Masora finalis, 27b, Col); and since it only remarks the absence of the letter lengthening the word where no dagesh follows the vocal, it thus supposes that the has no dagesh, as it is also found in Codd. (also Jaman.) written with the Raphe. is doubly accentuated; the Tarcha represents the Metheg, after the rule Thorath Emeth, p. 11. The after is, in the sense of the punctuation, the same dat. as in , Psa 110:1, and has an apparent right in him who asks in the 4th verse. Ithel and Uchal must be, after an old opinion, sons, or disciples, or contemporaries, of Agur. Thus, e.g., Gesenius, in his Lex. under , where as yet his reference to Neh 11:7 is wanting. is rendered by Jefet and other Karaites, “there is a God” = ; but it is perhaps equivalent to , “God is with me;” as for rof sa ”;e , the form is also found. ( ) nowhere occurs as a proper name; but in the region of proper names, everything, or almost everything, is possible.

(Note: Vid., Wetzstein’s Inschriften aus den Trachonen und dem Haurangebirge (1864), p. 336f.)

Ewald sees in 1b-14 a dialogue: in Pro 30:2-4 the , i.e., as the word appears to him, the rich, haughty mocker, who has worn out his life, speaks; and in Pro 30:5-14 the “ Mitmirgott ” [= God with me], or, more fully, “ Mitmirgott-sobinichstark ” [= God with me, so am I strong], i.e., the pious, humble man answers. “The whole,” he remarks, “is nothing but poetical; and it is poetical also that this discourse of mockery is called an elevated strain.” But (1) is a harmless word; and in , Num 24:3, Num 24:15; 2Sa 23:1, it is a solemn, earnest one; (2) a proper name, consisting of two clauses connected by Vav, no matter whether it be an actual or a symbolical name, is not capable of being authenticated; Ewald, 274b, recognises in ‘ , 1Ch 25:4, the naming, not of one son of Heman, but of two; and (3) it would be a very forced, inferior poetry if the poet placed one half of the name in one line, and then, as if constrained to take a new breath, gave the other half of it in a second line. But, on the other hand, that and are the names of two different persons, to whom the address of the man is directed, is attested by the, in this case aimless, anadiplosis, the here unpoetical parallelism with reservation. The repetition, as Fleischer remarks, of the name Ithel, which may rank with Uchal, as the son or disciple of Agur, has probably its reason only as this, that one placed a second more extended phrase simply along with the shorter. The case is different; but Fleischer’s supposition, that the poet himself cannot have thus written, is correct. We must not strike out either of the two ; but the supposed proper names must be changed as to their vocalization into a declaratory clause. A principal argument lies in Pro 30:2, beginning with : this supposes a clause which it established; for, with right, Mhlau maintains that , in the affirmative sense, which, by means of aposiopesis, proceeds from the confirmative, may open the conclusion and enter as confirmatory into the middle of the discourse ( e.g., Isa 32:13), but cannot stand abruptly at the commencement of a discourse (cf. under Isa 15:1 and Isa 7:9). But if we now ask how it is to be vocalized, there comes at the same time into the sphere of investigation the striking phrase . This phrase all the Greek interpreters attest by their rendering, ( Venet. ); besides, this is to be brought forward from the wilderness of the old attempts at a translation, that the feeling of the translators strives against the recognition in of a second personal name: the Peshito omits it; the Targ. translates it, after the Midrash, by (I may do it); as Theodotion, , which is probably also meant by the (from , to be acquainted with) of the Venet.; the lxx with ; and Aquila, (both from the verb ). As an objection to is this, that it is so bald without being followed, as at Num 24:3, Num 24:15; 2Sa 23:1, with the attributive description of the man. Luther was determined thereby to translate: discourse of the man Leithiel…. And why could not be a proper-name connection like ( )? Interpreted in the sense of “I am troubled concerning God,” is might be a symbolical name of the , as of one who strives after the knowledge of divine things with all his strength. But (1) , with the accus. obj., is not established, and one is rather inclined to think of a name such as , after Psa 84:3; (2) moreover, cannot be at one time a personal name, and at another time a declarative sentence – one must both times transform it into ; but has to be taken as a vocative, not as accus., as is done by J. D. Michaelis, Hitzig, Bunsen, Zckler, and others, thus: I have wearied myself, O God!… The nakedness of is accordingly not covered by the first Leithiel. Mhlau, in his work, seeks to introduce changed into : “The man from Massa,” and prefers to interpret generically:

(Note: Thus, viz., that denotes, not the man as he ought to be, but the man as he usually is (the article, as the Arabic grammarians say, “not for the exhaustion of the characteristic marks of the genus,” but for the expression of “the quality mhje of the genus”).)

“proverb (confession) of the man ( i.e., the man must confess): I have wearied myself, O God!…” Nothing else in reality remains. The article may also be retrospective: the man just now named, whose “words” are announced, viz., Agur. But why was not the expression then used? Because it is not poetical to say: “the (previously named) man.” On the other hand, what follows applies so that one may understand, under , any man you choose. There are certainly among men more than too many who inquire not after God (Psa 14:2.). But there are also not wanting those who feel sorrowfully the distance between them and God. Agur introduces such a man as speaking, for he generalizes his own experience. Psa 36:2 ( vid., under this passage) shows that a proper name does not necessarily follow . With Agur then introduces what the man has to confess – viz. a man earnestly devoted to God; for with the ideas of that which comes from the heart and the solemnly earnest are connected. If Agur so far generalizes his own experience, the passionate anadiplosis does not disturb this. After long contemplation of the man, he must finally confess: I have troubled myself, O God! I have troubled myself, O God!… That the trouble was directed toward God is perhaps denoted by the alliteration of with . But what now, further? is read as , , , , , and it has also been read as . The reading no one advocates; this that follows says the direct contrary, et potui ( pollui ). Geiger ( Urschrift, p. 61) supports the reading , for he renders it interrogatively: “I wearied myself in vain about God, I wearied myself in vain about God; why should I be able to do it?” But since one may twist any affirmative clause in this way, and from a yes make a no, one should only, in cases of extreme necessity, consent to such a question in the absence of an interrogative word. Bttcher’s , I have wearied myself out in vain, is not Hebrew. But at any rate the expression might be , if only the Vav did not stand between the words! If one might transpose the letters, then we might gain , according to which the lxx translates: . At all events, this despairing as to the consequence of further trouble, “I shall be able to do nothing (shall bring it to nothing),” would be better than (and I shall withdraw – become faint), for which, besides, should be used (cf. Pro 22:8 with Job 33:21). One expects, after , the expression of that which is the consequence of earnest and long-continued endeavour. Accordingly Hitzig reads , and I have become dull – suitable to the sense, but unsatisfactory on this account, because , in the sense of the Arab. kall , hebescere , is foreign to the Heb. usus loq. Thus will be a fut. consec. of . J. D. Michaelis, and finally Bttcher, read it as fut. consec. Piel or ( vid., regarding this form in pause under Pro 25:9), “and I have made an end;” but it is not appropriate to the inquirer here complaining, when dissatisfaction with his results had determined him to abandon his research, and let himself be no more troubled. We therefore prefer to read with Dahler, and, finally, with Mhlau and Zckler, , and I have withdrawn. The form understood by Hitzig as a pausal form is, in the unchangeableness of its vocals, as accordant with rule as those of , Pro 27:17, which lengthen the a of their first syllables in pause. And if Hitzig objects that too much is said, for one of such meditation does not depart, we answer, that if the inquiry of the man who speaks here has completed itself by the longing of his spirit and his soul (Psa 84:3; Psa 143:7), he might also say of himself, in person, or . An inquiry proceeding not merely from intellectual, but, before all, from practical necessity, is meant – the doubled means that he applied thereto the whole strength of his inner and his outer man; and , that he nevertheless did not reach his end, but wearied himself in vain. By this explanation which we give to 1a, no change of its accents is required; but 1b has to be written:

(Note: The Munach is the transformation of Mugrash, and this sequence of accents – Tarcha, Munach, Silluk – remains the same, whether we regard as the accusative or as the vocative.)

Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

The Words of Agur.

      1 The words of Agur the son of Jakeh, even the prophecy: the man spake unto Ithiel, even unto Ithiel and Ucal,   2 Surely I am more brutish than any man, and have not the understanding of a man.   3 I neither learned wisdom, nor have the knowledge of the holy.   4 Who hath ascended up into heaven, or descended? who hath gathered the wind in his fists? who hath bound the waters in a garment? who hath established all the ends of the earth? what is his name, and what is his son’s name, if thou canst tell?   5 Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him.   6 Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.

      Some make Agur to be not the name of this author, but his character; he was a collector (so it signifies), a gatherer, one that did not compose things himself, but collected the wise sayings and observations of others, made abstracts of the writings of others, which some think is the reason why he says (v. 3), “I have not learned wisdom myself, but have been a scribe, or amanuensis, to other wise and learned men.” Note, We must not bury our talent, though it be but one, but, as we have received the gift, so minister the same, if it be but to collect what others have written. But we rather suppose it to be his name, which, no doubt, was well known then, though not mentioned elsewhere in scripture. Ithiel and Ucal are mentioned, either, 1. As the names of his pupils, whom he instructed, or who consulted him as an oracle, having a great opinion of his wisdom and goodness. Probably they wrote from him what he dictated, as Baruch wrote from the mouth of Jeremiah, and by their means it was preserved, as they were ready to attest it to be his, for it was spoken to them; they were two witnesses of it. Or, 2. As the subject of his discourse. Ithiel signifies God with me, the application of Immanuel, God with us. The word calls him God with us; faith appropriates this, and calls him “God with me, who loved me, and gave himself for me, and into union and communion with whom I am admitted.” Ucal signifies the Mighty One, for it is upon one that is mighty that help is laid for us. Many good interpreters therefore apply this to the Messiah, for to him all the prophecies bear witness, and why not this then? It is what Agur spoke concerning Ithiel, even concerning Ithiel (that is the name on which the stress is laid) with us, Isa. vii. 14.

      Three things the prophet here aims at:–

      I. To abase himself. Before he makes confession of his faith he makes confession of his folly and the weakness and deficiency of reason, which make it so necessary that we be guided and governed by faith. Before he speaks concerning the Saviour he speaks of himself as needing a Saviour, and as nothing without him; we must go out of ourselves before we go into Jesus Christ. 1. He speaks of himself as wanting a righteousness, and having done foolishly, very foolishly. When he reflects upon himself he owns, Surely I am more brutish than any man. Every man has become brutish, Jer. x. 14. But he that knows his own heart knows so much more evil of himself than he does of any other that he cries out, “Surely I cannot but think that I am more brutish than any man; surely no man has such a corrupt deceitful heart as I have. I have acted as one that has not the understanding of Adam, as one that is wretchedly degenerated from the knowledge and righteousness in which man was at first created; nay, I have not the common sense and reason of a man, else I should not have done as I have done.” Agur, when he was applied to by others as wiser than most, acknowledged himself more foolish than any. Whatever high opinion others may have of us, it becomes us to have low thoughts of ourselves. 2. He speaks of himself as wanting a revelation to guide him in the ways of truth and wisdom. He owns (v. 3) “I neither learned wisdom by any power of my own (the depths of it cannot be fathomed by my line and plummet) nor know I the knowledge of the holy ones, the angels, our first parents in innocency, nor of the holy things of God; I can get no insight into them, nor make any judgment of them, further than God is pleased to make them known to me.” The natural man, the natural powers, perceive not, nay, they receive not, the things of the Spirit of God. Some suppose Agur to be asked, as Apollo’s oracle was of old, Who was the wisest man? The answer is, He that is sensible of his own ignorance, especially in divine things. Hoc tantum scio, me nihil scire—All that I know is that I know nothing.

      II. To advance Jesus Christ, and the Father in him (v. 4): Who ascended up into heaven, c. 1. Some understand this of God and of his works, which are both incomparable and unsearchable. He challenges all mankind to give an account of the heavens above, of the winds, the waters, the earth: “Who can pretend to have ascended up to heaven, to take a view of the orbs above, and then to have descended, to give us a description of them? Who can pretend to have had the command of the winds, to have grasped them in his hand and managed them, as God does, or to have bound the waves of the sea with a swaddling band, as God has done? Who has established the ends of the earth, or can describe the strength of its foundations or the extent of its limits? Tell me what is the man’s name who can undertake to vie with God or to be of his cabinet-council, or, if he be dead, what is his name to whom he has bequeathed this great secret.” 2. Others refer it to Christ, to Ithiel and Ucal, the Son of God, for it is the Son’s name, as well as the Father’s, that is here enquired after, and a challenge given to any to vie with him. We must now exalt Christ as one revealed they then magnified him as one concealed, as one they had heard something of but had very dark and defective ideas of. We have heard the fame of him with our ears, but cannot describe him (Job xxviii. 22); certainly it is God that has gathered the wind in his fists and bound the waters as in a garment; but what is his name? It is, I am that I am (Exod. iii. 14), a name to be adored, not to be understood. What is his Son’s name, by whom he does all these things? The Old-Testament saints expected the Messiah to be the Son of the Blessed, and he is here spoken of as a person distinct from the Father, but his name as yet secret. Note, The great Redeemer, in the glories of his providence and grace, can neither be paralleled nor found out to perfection. (1.) The glories of the kingdom of his grace are unsearchable and unparalleled; for who besides has ascended into heaven and descended? Who besides is perfectly acquainted with both worlds, and has himself a free correspondence with both, and is therefore fit to settle a correspondence between them, as Mediator, as Jacob’s ladder? He was in heaven in the Father’s bosom (Joh 1:1; Joh 1:18); thence he descended to take our nature upon him; and never was there such condescension. In that nature he again ascended (Eph. iv. 9), to receive the promised glories of his exalted state; and who besides has done this? Rom. x. 6. (2.) The glories of the kingdom of his providence are likewise unsearchable and unparalleled. The same that reconciles heaven and earth was the Creator of both and governs and disposes of all. His government of the three lower elements of air, water, and earth, is here particularized. [1.] The motions of the air are of his directing. Satan pretends to be the prince of the power of the air, but even there Christ has all power; he rebuked the winds and they obeyed him. [2.] The bounds of the water are of his appointing: He binds the waters as in a garment; hitherto they shall come, and no further, Job xxxviii. 9-11. [3.] The foundations of the earth are of his establishing. He founded it at first; he upholds it still. If Christ had not interposed, the foundations of the earth would have sunk under the load of the curse upon the ground, for man’s sin. Who and what is the mighty He that does all this? We cannot find out God, nor the Son of God, unto perfection. Oh the depth of that knowledge!

      III. To assure us of the truth of the word of God, and to recommend it to us, Pro 30:5; Pro 30:6. Agur’s pupils expect to be instructed by him in the things of God. “Alas!” says he, “I cannot undertake to instruct you; go to the word of God; see what he has there revealed of himself, and of his mind and will; you need know no more than what that will teach you, and that you may rely upon as sure and sufficient. Every word of God is pure; there is not the least mixture of falsehood and corruption in it.” The words of men are to be heard and read with jealousy and with allowance, but there is not the least ground to suspect any deficiency in the word of God; it is as silver purified seven times (Ps. xii. 6), without the least dross or alloy. Thy word is very pure, Ps. cxix. 140. 1. It is sure, and therefore we must trust to it and venture our souls upon it. God in his word, God in his promise, is a shield, a sure protection, to all those that put themselves under his protection and put their trust in him. The word of God, applied by faith, will make us easy in the midst of the greatest dangers, Psa 46:1; Psa 46:2. 2. It is sufficient, and therefore we must not add to it (v. 6): Add thou not unto his words, because they are pure and perfect. This forbids the advancing of any thing, not only in contradiction to the word of God, but in competition with it; though it be under the plausible pretence of explaining it, yet, if it pretend to be of equal authority with it, it is adding to his words, which is not only a reproach to them as insufficient, but opens a door to all manner of errors and corruptions; for, that one absurdity being granted, that the word of any man, or company of men, is to be received with the same faith and veneration as the word of God, a thousand follow. We must be content with what God has thought fit to make known to us of his mind, and not covet to be wise above what is written; for, (1.) God will resent it as a heinous affront: “He will reprove thee, will reckon with thee as a traitor against his crown and dignity, and lay thee under the heavy doom of those that add to his words, or diminish from them,” Deu 4:2; Deu 12:32. (2.) We shall run ourselves into endless mistakes: “Thou wilt be found a liar, a corrupter of the word of truth, a broacher of heresies, and guilty of the worst of forgeries, counterfeiting the broad seal of heaven, and pretending a divine mission and inspiration, when it is all a cheat. Men may be thus deceived, but God is not mocked.“

Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary

PART IV.

WORDS OF AGUR

Pro 30:1-33

Introduction

Verse 1 introduces the words of Agur (meaning gatherer) the son of Jakeh (meaning obedient or pious) and indicates these words were addressed to Ithiel and Ucal. Ithiel means “God with me.” Ucal means “strong” or “zealous.” Beyond this the only information on these men is what can be gleaned from Agur’s words and the significance of the names.

Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary

CRITICAL NOTES.

Pro. 30:1. Agur. There have been many conjectures about this person. Many consider that it is a figurative name, and some have adopted the old Jewish tradition that it is an allegorical designation of Solomon. The name, says Delitzsch, means the gathered (see chap. Pro. 6:8; Pro. 10:5), also the collector, or the word might mean, perhaps, industrious in collecting. The son of Jakeh, etc. Stuart and Zckler adopt here the reading of Hitzig and others, and read The son of her who was obeyed in Massa (or the princess of Massa): I have toiled for, or wearied myself about, God, and have ceased. For their reasons the student is referred to their commentaries, where the subject is discussed at great length. Ithiel and Ucal signify respectively God with me, and the son of the mighty, and the common opinion is that they were Agars disciples. From the great differences between the language and style of the last two chapters of the book, and those which have preceded them, most scholars believe that they were written outside the land of Palestine. Zckler thinks that Agur and Lemuel might very properly be regarded as Arabian-Israelitish shepherd-princes or kings of a colony of Israelites of the tribe of Simeon that had emigrated to northern Arabia. (See 1Ch. 4:38-43; Mic. 1:15; Mic. 2:8; Mic. 2:10.) Delitzsch suggests that they were Ishmaelites who had raised themselves above the religion of Abraham, and recognised the religion of Israel as its completion.

Pro. 30:2. Brutish, i.e., without reason.

Pro. 30:10. Stuart and Zckler here read Cause not a servant to slander his master. Delitzsch agrees with the English version.

NOTE.The following is Millers unique translation of the first four verses of this chapter with his reasons for the same, and the teaching which he sees in the passage. It struck us that we would take the simple Hebrew and inquire its meaning. We would accept nothing as a proper name till we found it destitute of sense; and, following no intricate conceits, we would fail of a directer meaning before we went off into anything more difficult. It is astonishing how facile the result. We believe that all was the work of Solomon. We believe that there was no such man as Agur, except the great man Jesus Christ. We believe there was no such king as Lemuel. We believe everything is the work of Solomon as much as any other proverb. If it appear Arabic or extra-Hebraic no matter. Solomon gathered his materials over a wide surface. We believe it is distinctly what it says, The prophecy. We count it as all finished in the four first verses, and Jakeh and Ithiel, and Ucal and Muel in the next chapter (Pro. 30:1-4). We would be quite willing to read that way, if, like Lo-ammi in the prophet, or Lo-ruhamah, words confessedly significant (Hos. 1:8-9), it were thought euphonious or wise to give them without a translation. But what the Hebrews saw why not our people see? Certain it is that the words to a Hebrew were about as follow:

1. Words of I-fear, Son of the Godly: The Prophecy:

The Strong Man speaks to God-with-me, to God-with-me and to I-am-able.

2. Forasmuch as I am more brutish as to myself, than a man of the better sort,

and have not the intelligence of a common man.

3. and have not been taught wisdom and yet know the knowledge of holy things.

4. who has gone up to heaven and come down?

who has gathered the winds in his fists?
who has bound the waters in a garment?
who has set firm all the extremities of the earth?
what is his name, and what is his sons name? Because, Thou knowest.

Let us examine, first, the language, and then the result as to the sense. I-fear. This is the very simplest Hebrew. It actually occurs in Deuteronomy (Deu. 32:27). The verb is the familiar one , which means primarily to turn out of the way. And this turning out of the way for danger is a prudent and innocent character of fear. Agur therefore, or I-fear, with the light we get afterward, marks himself as the Strong Man of the next clause; the Son of the Godly, because descended out of the loins of the Church (see Rev. 12:5); and the Manjust as Muel (chap. Pro. 31:1) is God and mancontemplating the low humanity of Christ, which is about to express its wonder at its amazing knowledge. Godly; from a root meaning to venerate: Jakeh is in the singular, and means the pious one; which keeps in view what is too often forgotten, that Christ was not the son of the abandoned, but, as His mother expresses it (chap. Pro. 31:2), the son of my vows. The Prophecy; not needfully prediction, as in the present case, but an oracle, vision, or inspired elation of any kind. The words that follow constitute the prophecy for though the speech of the Man-Christ does not begin till the second verse, the very names in the next clause are predictive; and the most vitally so of the whole of the vision. The Strong Man; strong, though weak; strong because he sees in himself such wonderful conditions. The word strong is implied in the noun that is selected. Speaks; oracularly. It is the solemn, poetic, and in fact, rare expression. To-God-with-me. That the Man-Christ should address the Deity has innumerable precedents. If it were necessary, we could imagine the Human Nature as addressing the Divine Nature; for that really occurs in high Eastern vision, in the Book of Zechariah (chap. Pro. 3:4; Pro. 3:6-8). In lofty texts, like this, it is perfectly admissible. Christ speaks of His Divine Nature (Joh. 3:13); and speaks of it as being where the Man Christ Jesus was not, viz., in Heaven. But the fourth verse of this chapter mentions both Father and Son; and therefore in this, which is so near it, it is not necessary to distinguish. The Strong Man speaks to the God which was with (Him), and calls Him Ucal, which means I-am-able. There was a powerful Divinity in Christ, and that He was wondering about. His mother repeats the wonder in the after case (chap. Pro. 31:2). The whole is a grand Prophecy of Christ in the form of a grand inquiry. Agur makes it of Ithiel, That is, the Man, I-fear, goes searching into the God-with-me. There is an I-fear part and an I-am-able part, of His one Grand Person; and these parts speak even in the New Testament with the humility (Joh. 5:19) and with the splendour (Joh. 8:58) that belong to each. Forasmuch as; the simple particle because. I am more brutish, i.e. more the mere untaught animal. As to Myself, i.e. as to my human self; for it is the Strong Man that speaks. The emphasis is laid by the mere expression of the pronoun. Than a man of the better sort; than an educated, refined man, which Christ was not. And have not the intelligence of a common man. That is, he had not the education usually given to the more lowly. The commonness of the humanity is expressed again by the noun. And have not been taught wisdom. Here the emphasis is on taught. And yet know the knowledge of holy things. The meaning of the whole is, that he has singular light. He confronted the doctors in the temple, and, as a little child, was a miracle. Whence came this? This is what the prophecy represents as a surprise. Who has gone up to Heaven and come down? Somebody has. The Strong Man addresses this appeal to the God-with-me; and ends it significantly;Who is it? Because Thou knowest. One word back in the third verse:know the knowledge. We have not altered this, nor said have the knowledge, which would be better English, because this seems the intentional form. The words that Christ gave to His disciples, God gave to Him; and Christ, in saying so, would include all senses; the outer word; the inner word; the outward blessed revelation, and the inner teaching. He knew the knowledge; i.e., He discerned in perfect ways what the Spirit without measure was there to impart. Going up to heaven, gathering the wind, binding the waters, and setting firm the extremities of the earth, were the work of a Divinity. Some Divinity had been at work upon Him. He applies to the Able One, to the God with Him, to explain a low mans wonderful knowledge, and then adds, as significant of the reply, Because Thou knowest.

This extract is given here, not because we agree with Millers view of the passage, but as affording a specimen of the mode of interpretation which he adopts throughout the book.

MAIN HOMILETIC OF THE PARAGRAPH.Pro. 30:1-9

THE SOURCE OF TRUE HUMILITY

I. In proportion as men know God they confess they know Him not. A child looks above his head at the midnight sky and he concludes that the stars that he sees are only so many shining points which have no use beyond that of beautifying the heavens and giving a little light to our world. He does not think that there is any more to know about the stars, but this conclusion of his is based upon complete ignorance. How different is the attitude of the astronomer in relation to the stars. He has good reason to believe that each one is a sun like unto that which makes the centre of our own system of planets, and this enlarged knowledge enables him to form some idea of how much he has to learn about them, and so draws from him such a confession of ignorance as a child would never utter. He realises that what he knows is nothing in comparison with what there is to know, and it is his increased knowledge which makes him feel thus. So men who never reflect upon the nature or character of God have no conception of the height and depth of the knowledge of the Infinite, and hence have no conception of their ignorance concerning Him. It is only the man who has in some degree apprehended the greatness of his Maker that has any idea of how far he is from comprehending Him, and his consciousness of ignorance increases with his growth in the knowledge of God. Agur, who here declares that he has no knowledge of the Holy, and is without understanding on the highest and deepest subjects, was evidently a man who had endeavoured by searching to find out God, and his confession is the result of his knowledge and not of his ignorance. But what he knew only served to show him how much remained unknown.

II. Therefore humility is the great sign of high attainments in Divine knowledge, and those who know most will be the most able and willing to be taught more. Humility is the effect of the most thorough acquaintance with any subject, and of the most profound meditation upon it. When men utter their opinions in the spirit of self-conceit, and are lifted up by their acquirements, we must ascribe it to their ignorance and not to their knowledge. Those who have learned most are the most teachable scholars and the first to welcome instruction from whatever source it may come. If we were to tell a savage of the wonderful capabilities of electricity he would most likely look upon us with contempt, and refuse to believe our statements; but if we were to speak to an experienced electrician about some new theory or discovery in relation to it he would not turn from us in disdain simply because he was unacquainted with it, but would gladly welcome any new light upon the subject. This is pre-eminently the case in the knowledge of all that relates to the Divine Being. When He becomes the object and subject of study and contemplationwhen a creature who had no existence a few years ago seeks to know Him who is God from everlasting to everlasting he finds himself embarked upon an ocean without a shore, and is compelled to exclaim: Such knowledge is too wonderful for me, it is high, I cannot attain unto it. (Psa. 139:6.) His humble reverence will always be in proportion to the progress that he has made. He who knew as much about God and His dealings as any man who has ever lived, gave, as the result of his researches, that His ways are past finding out, and was led by it to ascribe to Him glory for ever (Rom. 11:33-36); and all who have trodden the same path, either before or after him, have arrived at the same conclusion, and have acquired the same spirit of humility. And this is the spirit which makes a man willing and therefore able to receive a higher and deeper revelation. Because he knows that he has not already attainedthat there is no comparison between what he knows and what there is to knowhis mind is ever open to receive new instruction, and be welcomes any means by which he can advance a step nearer to that light which no man can approach unto and catch a fresh glimpse of Him whom no man hath seen or can see. (1Ti. 6:16.)

III. The unsearchableness of God is no hindrance to practical godliness. If Agur could not know all that he desired about God, he knew enough to trust Him, and enough to make him desire to serve Him. He could from experience testify that God had spoken to men, and that His word was to be depended on, and that there was a reward to those who kept it. If God is unknowable in some aspects of His nature, godly men in all ages have found him a shield in danger, and a rock of certainty, upon which it is safe to rest. Although Agur could not ascend into heaven and read the secrets of the other world, he felt that he could strive to walk with God in this world, and the effect of a real conviction of the greatness and majesty of God is not to drive men from Him but to draw them near in holy living as well as in humble adoration.

OUTLINES AND SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS

Pro. 30:2. This was true humility, that like true balm ever sinks to the bottom, when hypocritical, as oil, swims on the top He that looks intently on the sun hath his eyes dazzled; so he that beholds the infinite excellencies of God, considers the distance, cannot but be sensible of his own naughtiness, nothingness. It is fit the foundation should be laid deep, where the building is so high! Agurs humility was not more low than his aims lofty: Who hath ascended up to heaven? It is a high pitch that he flies, for he knew well that godliness, as it begins in a right knowledge of ourselves, so it ends in a right knowledge of God.Trapp.

Pro. 30:4. The discourse is philosophically accurate, as well as religiously devout. It is through the mutual relations of air, earth, and water, that the Supreme Ruler gives or withholds the food of man (Pro. 30:8). These three, each in its own place and proportion, are alike necessary to the growth of grain, and consequently to the sustenance of life. The earth is the basis of the whole operation Alike in its creation and its arrangement, its material and its form, the final cause of the earth has obviously been the growth of vegetation and the support of life. But the earth could not bear fruit at any portion of its surface without the concurrence of water; and how shall the supply of this necessary element be obtained? Who hath bound the waters in a garment? Again the clouds and showers, the springs and streams, with one voice answer, God. So wide is the dry land, and so low lies the water in its ocean storehouse, that we could not even conceive how the two could be made to meet, unless we had seen the cosmical hydraulics in actual operation from day to day and from year to year. Here lies the earth, rising into mountains and stretching away in valleys, but absolutely incapable, by itself, of producing food for any living thing. There lies the sea, held by its own gravity helpless in its place, heaving and beating on the walls of its prison-house, but unable to rise and go to the help of a barren land. In this straitwhen the land could not come to the water and the water could not come to the landa Mediator was found, perfectly qualified for the task. Who hath gathered the wind in His fists? The air goes between the two, and brings them together for beneficent ends. The atmosphere softly leans on the bosom of the deep, and silently sucks itself full. The portion so charged then moves away with its precious burden, and pours it out partly on the plains but chiefly on vertebral mountain ranges. Thus the continents are watered from their centres to the sea.Arnot.

MAIN HOMILETICS OF Pro. 30:5-6

THE WORD OF GOD

I. God has given man a knowledge of His character and will. Although, as we have just seen from the preceding verses, God is so great and incomprehensible in His nature, there is a knowledge of Him which is possible to man and which he possesses. This seems reasonable before experience. If a man built a vessel which he intended to send his son to navigate across an unknown sea, we should conclude beforehand that he would put a compass in the vessel. And we should likewise conclude before experience that a just God would not build a world, and call into existence a creature like man to dwell in it, without furnishing him with a compass by which to guide his lifea revelation and a law by obedience to which he can be blest and saved. And what might have been expected has come to pass. God has spoken, and has thus met human expectation and human need. Agur recognised this fact in the days of old, and we, to whom in these last days God has spoken by His Son (Heb. 1:1), have a clearer revelation. In answer to Agurs question, Who hath ascended up into heaven, or descended, we can bring the words of Christ, No man hath ascended up to heaven but He that came down from heaven, even the Son of Man which is in heaven (Joh. 3:13), and in the record of His life and death obtain the fullest and clearest revelation of God that it is possible for Him to give and for us to receive.

II. The word of God is what of necessity it must be. The sun is in its nature light, and therefore rays of light must proceed from it. That which flows from it must of necessity be of the same nature as the sun whence it comes, and the fountain of natural light being pure the streams which flow from it must be pure also. When human words are a reflection of the human soul, and out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh (Mat. 12:34), the spoken word must be of the same nature and character as the inward feelings. The purity of the outward word will be in proportion to the purity of the inner life. God is moral lightIn Him is no darkness at all (1Jn. 1:5)therefore, rays of moral light must flow from Him; all that proceeds from Him must be, like Himself, perfectly free from all shadow of moral imperfection.

III. Because the word of God is what it is, it must be carefully preserved from human additions. It is manifest that nothing that man can add to what God has said can make His word more fitted to a mans needs, any more than any intervention of man can make the sun more perfectly adapted to human vision. It is therefore a criminal act for any creature to add to the Divine Word by putting his own ideas on an equality with the revealed thoughts of God, and most foolish for him to expect them to have the same power on the heart and conscience as Divine words have. The law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul (Psa. 19:7), and man must not tamper with its perfection. All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness. That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works (2Ti. 3:16-17). The fact that it comes from God is a guarantee that blessing will come from seeking to understand and obey it, and condemnation by seeking to improve it by human addition.

OUTLINES AND SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS

It is the saying of Tertullian, This is the first thing which we believe, that there is nothing beside Gods word to be believed. At least it must not be taught or received, as added to His words, either as of equal authority with them, or as supposing any defect in them. He therefore that addeth to Gods words, shall add unto his own words the just and sharp reproof of God upon them; and whatsoever any may think to find by the doing of it, he shall himself therefore be found a liar. Search them thou mayest to find the depth of them, explain them thou mayest that others may be able to find the meaning of them: but in searching, in explaining, let nothing be added that is contrary to them. For what can he be but a liar that opposeth truth itself?Jermin.

The learner is far in advance of his starting-point now. He set out in quest of knowledge to gratify a curious intellect; he ends it by finding rest for a troubled soul. He addressed himself successively to the air, and the water, and the earth; but they were all dumb. They sent back to him only the echo of his own cry. Turning next to the Scriptures, he finds what he sought and more. His darkness vanishes, and his danger too. No sooner has he learned that the word is pure than he learns that the speaker is gracious.Arnot.

There is, perhaps, in the expression here a more immediate reference to the unmingled truth of Gods word. This suits the connection with what follows:He is a shield unto them that put their trust in him. Scepticism and infidelity unsettle the mind. They leave it without confidence and without security. The mind under their influence is like a vessel that has drifted from its moorings, and has been left to drive out to sea, without rudder and without anchor,unmanned, and at the mercy of the winds and waves and currents:or, to keep nearer to the allusion in the verse under comment, it is like a soldier in the thick and peril of the battle without a shield, in danger from every arrow that flies, and every sword that is raised against him. They make their unhappy subject the sport and the victim of every delusive theory and every temptation of Satan. Hence such expressions as that of Paul to the Ephesians:Over all, taking the shield of faith, wherewith ye shall be able to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked. God is the SHIELD of all who trust in Him. And it is the trust,it is the firm faith in God,that imparts the feeling of security. So, what is here said of God himself is said of His truth or faithfulness:His truth shall be thy shield and buckler. God could not be a shield, though His power be almighty, unless He were faithful. It is His faithfulness that renders Him the object of trust. And when this view of Gods faithfulness is such as to impart perfect trustthe spirit, calm and tranquil, feels as if it were under the protection of an all-covering shield.Wardlaw.

MAIN HOMILETICS OF Pro. 30:7-9

THE MIDDLE WAY

I. A desire that our circumstances should be favourable to our godliness reveals a soul alive to the meaning of existence. The man who values his health more than his raiment, and is more anxious to keep his body in a fit condition to work than to clothe it in purple and fine linen, reveals that he rightly estimates the comparative value of the two, and values most that which is worth most. But no man attains to a right estimate of the comparative worth of all that belongs to him until he values his character more than all things else, and is willing to suffer the loss of all his other possessions in order to preserve that. He is a wise man who, in the choice of clothes, considers first what will conduce to health; but the highest wisdom is that which leads a man in choosingso far as he is ablehis position in life, to consider first of all what will be favourable to his souls welfare. Such a man reveals that he has made the all-important discovery that the chief end of man is to glorify God, and that he can do this only by a holy life. He therefore makes it the aim of his life to say in deed as well as in word Hallowed be thy name; for he has learned the lesson of the text, that anything less than perfect dependence upon God is a denial of Him, and any act of doubtful integrity is taking His name in vain.

II. A prayer that our circumstances may be thus favourable, reveals a soul conscious of its own weakness. There can be no doubt that a mans confidence in God ought to be so strong as to remain unshaken in the most adverse circumstances, and his spirituality ought to be deep enough to remain uninjured in the greatest temporal prosperity, but this is but seldom the case. All sincere and humble servants of God acknowledge their proneness to yield to temptation, and the more vital their godliness, the more earnestly do they put up the petition, Lead me not into temptation. Paul could say without boastfulness, I know both how to be abased, and I know how to abound. I can do all things through Christ that strengtheneth me (Php. 4:12-13), but there have been but few men who could say this with truth, and those who have been most like him in spirit have been the most ready to acknowledge the danger of being exposed to either extreme. A very robust man can keep in perfect health either in the arctic regions or in the torrid zone, but there is most safety in living in a region between these two extremes, and the wisest men acknowledge this, and unless duty calls them, prefer the latter to either of the former. So a man of God, although he hopes that he might be found faithful in any circumstances, reveals a right spirit of humility when he puts up the prayer of Agur. For he knows that the tempter of man is most skilful in using our circumstances against our godliness, and that both great wealth and extreme poverty are weapons which he can use with great skill.

OUTLINES AND SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS

Pro. 30:7. Agur re-enforces his request. It was honest, else he would never have begun it; but being so, he is resolved to follow it. So Jacob would have a blessing, and therefore wrestles with might and slight; and this he doth in the night and alone, and when God was leaving Him, and upon one leg. When poor men ask us two things we think we deal well if we grant them one. Few are Naamans that when you beg one talent will force you to take two. But God heaps mercies on his suppliants, and blames them for their modesty in asking.Trapp.

Pro. 30:8. We are not only to pray for the removal of sin, but for the removal of it at a great distance from us. As God removes it far away in pardon, the soul that abhors sin desires to have it far removed from the heart and life. Our Lord teaches us not only to pray against sin, but against temptation; for there is a strong inclination in the hearts of men to comply with temptations when they are presented to the soul. If a man has a bag of powder in his hands, he will certainly wish to keep at a distance from the fire.Lawson.

Food convenient is obviously not a fixed measure. It implies, not a bare sufficiency for natural life, but a provision varying according to the calling in which God has placed us. If Agur be the master of a family, then that is his competency, which is sufficient to maintain his wife, children, and household. If Agur be a public person, a prince or a ruler of the people; then that is Agurs sufficiency, which will conveniently maintain him in that condition. Jacob when he had become two bands, evidently required more than when in his earlier life with his staff he had passed over Jordan. (Gen. 32:10.) What was sufficient for himself alone, would not have been sufficient for the many that were then dependent upon him. The immense provisions for Solomons table, considering the vast multitude of his dependants, might be only a competency for the demand (1Ki. 4:22.) The distribution of the manna was food convenientnothing too much, but no deficiencyHe that gathered much had nothing over; and he that gathered little had no lack. (Exo. 16:18.) And thus, in the daily dispensation of Providence, a little may be a sufficiency to one, while an overflowing plenty is no superfluity to another. Only let Christian self-denial, not depraved appetite, be the standard of competency.Bridges.

Pro. 30:9. Many in their low estate could serve God, but now resemble the moon, which never suffers eclipse but at her full, and that is by the earths interposition between the sun and herself.Trapp.

For Homiletics on the subject of Pro. 30:10 see on chap. Pro. 24:28-29, page 689.

Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell

CHAPTER 30
TEXT Pro. 30:1-10

1.

The words of Agur the son of Jakeh; the oracle.

The man saith unto Ithiel, unto Ithiel and Ucal:

2.

Surely I am more brutish than any man,

And have not the understanding of a man;

3.

And I have not learned wisdom,

Neither have I the knowledge of the Holy One.

4.

Who hath ascended up into heaven and descended?

Who hath gathered the wind in his fists?

Who hath bound the waters in his garment?
Who hath established all the ends of the earth?
What is his name, and what is his sons name, if thou knowest?

5.

Every word of God is tried:

He is a shield unto them that take refuge in him.

6.

Add thou not unto his words,

Lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.

7.

Two things I have asked of thee;

Deny me them not before I die:

8.

Remove far from me falsehood and lies;

Give me neither poverty nor riches; Feed me with the food that is needful for me:

9.

Lest I be full, and deny thee, and say, Who is Jehovah?

Or lest I be poor, and steal,

And use profanely the name of my God.

10.

Slander not a servant unto his master,

Lest he curse thee, and thou be held guilty.

STUDY QUESTIONS OVER 301-10

1.

Who was Agur (Pro. 30:1)?

2.

What does oracle mean (Pro. 30:1)?

3.

Who were Ithiel and Ucal (Pro. 30:1)?

4.

Does brutish in v. mean what we usually understand by this word?

5.

What is meant by the statements in Pro. 30:3?

6.

What is the author getting at in Pro. 30:4?

7.

Tried in what sense (Pro. 30:5)?

8.

Where else in the Bible is the same instruction given (Pro. 30:6)?

9.

What are these two things (Pro. 30:7)?

10.

Was this his own falsehood or somebody elses (Pro. 30:8)?

11.

What is the danger of having too much (Pro. 30:9)?

12.

What is a danger of having too little (Pro. 30:9)?

13.

What is slander (Pro. 30:10)?

PHARAPHRASE OF Pro. 30:1-10

1.

These are the messages of Agur, son of Jakeh, from Massa, addressed to Ithiel and Ucal:

24.

I am tired out, O God, and ready to die. I am too stupid even to call myself a human being! I cannot understand man, let alone God. Who else but God goes back and forth to heaven? Who else holds the wind in his fists, and wraps up the oceans in His cloak? Who but God has created the world? If there is any other, what is nameand his sons nameif you know it?

56.

Every word of God proves true. He defends all who come to Him for protection. Do not add to His words, lest He rebuke you, and you be found a liar.

710.

O, God, I beg two favors from you before I die: First, help me never to tell a lie. Second, give me neither poverty nor riches! Give me just enough to satisfy my needs! For if I grow rich, I may become content without God. And if I am too poor, I may steal, and thus insult Gods holy name. Never falsely accuse a man to his employer, lest he curse you for your sin.

COMMENTS ON 30:1-10

Pro. 30:1. Four names are here introduced to us, unknown to us but probably well known in those days: Agur (the author), Jakeh (his father); and Ithiel and Ucal (the ones being addressed). Ithiel is more important of the two in that he is not only mentioned first but twice. These last two chapters contain material that is not compiled by Solomon (this chapter by Agur and chapter 31 by King Lemuel). Both chapters depart from the one-verse sayings to sections of material. The word Oracle shows that what follows is inspired even if not written by Solomon.

Pro. 30:2. Whoever Agur was, he here reveals the fact that it was not through natural endowment that he was about to write. Psa. 73:22 also uses the word brutish, and it carries the idea of a low level of understanding.

Pro. 30:3. And this verse shows that it was not through education received from others that he was about to write. It is very probable that he was a rustic, without education, and without any human help, as was the prophet Amos; and that all that he knew now was by the inspiration of the Almighty, independent of which he was rustic and uneducated (Clarke).

Pro. 30:4. Here are five questions dealing with the sublime and divine, Concerning the ascending and descending, Rom. 10:6-7 asks two questions: Who shall ascend into heaven?…and Who shall descend into the abyss? What would be the purpose of such ascending and descending? Deu. 30:11-13 is that from which Romans 10 is quoting, and it shows that such going up and going down (or out) was for the purpose of gaining divine knowledge and bringing it back to mankind: This commandment…is not in heaven, that thou shouldest say, Who shall go up for us to heaven, and bring it to us, and make us hear it, that we may do it? Neither is it beyond the sea, that thou shouldest say, Who shall go over the sea for us, and bring it to us? The answer to the first four questions in this verse is, No man! Creation and Providence are the works of GodJob 38 – Psalms 104; Isa. 40:12-14 (questions 24), and so is the Revelation1Co. 2:9-11 (question 1). If somebody insisted that some man has done these things which we attribute to God, Agur wanted to know his name and his sons name.

Pro. 30:5. As the light of nature and metaphysical speculation are of no avail in obtaining the perfect knowledge of God which the seeker craves, he must be all the more thankful for the revealed Word of God, which teaches him as much as he is capable of learning (Pulpit Commentary). The message that Agur is bringing is the Word of God, and every word of it is true for it is tried: The words of Jehovah are pure words; As silver tried in a furnace of the earth, Purified seven times (Psa. 12:6); Thy word is very pure (Psa. 119:140). Psa. 19:8 again states its purity and what it does for mankind: The precepts of Jehovah are right, rejoicing the heart: The commandment of Jehovah is pure, enlightening the eyes. God and His Word are spokes of as a shield to those who take refuge in Him: The word of Jehovah is tried; He is a shield unto all them that take refuge in him Psa. 18:30); Jehovah God is a sun and a shield (Psa. 84:11); O Israel, trust thou in Jehovah: He is their help and their shield. O house of Aaron, trust ye in Jehovah: He is their help and their shield. Ye that fear Jehovah, trust in Jehovah: He is their help and their shield (Psa. 115:9-11)

Pro. 30:6. Since Gods Word is pure (just like He wants it), true, and right, He does not want man tampering with it. Twice in Deut. did God sound the same warning: Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish from it (Deu. 4:2); What thing soever I command you, that shall ye observe to do: thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it (Deu. 12:32). And the last warning in the Bible says, If any man shall add unto them, God shall add unto him the plagues which are written in this book: and if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part from the tree of life, and out of the holy city, which are written in this book (Rev. 22:18-19). Anyone wrestling (twisting) the Scripture does so to his own destruction (2Pe. 3:16). If we deny Gods Word, He will reprove us (prove us wrong, deal with us), and we will be found to be nothing less in His sight than a liar (absolutely wrong). Examples: 2Ki. 6:24-31; 2Ki. 7:1-17; Jer. 27:2; Jer. 27:6; Jer. 27:8; Jer. 28:1-4; Jer. 28:10-17.

Pro. 30:7. This chapter contains several groupings (Pro. 30:7-9, Pro. 30:11-14, Pro. 30:15-16, Pro. 30:18-19, Pro. 30:21-23, Pro. 30:24-28, Pro. 30:29-31), and this verse introduces the first group or set. Two things were urgently desired or were asked of God, and which he did not want to be denied. Before I die means while I am in the flesh or while I live.

Pro. 30:8. No. 1: Remove far from me falsehood and lies; No. 2: Give me neither poverty nor riches. Feed me with the food that is needful for me goes with No. 2 as a restatement of it. And Pro. 30:9 is an explanation of request No. 2. As we look as these two requests, the first is what he wished God to remove from him, and the second is what he wished God to give him. Now knowing Agur (the compiler), we do not know whether he was personally plagued with falsehood and lies and wanted to be delieverd from them or whether he saw so much unfaithfulness in humanity that he personally wanted to be completely free from it himself (let us hope it was the latter). And we too need to be free from such unfaithfulness: Wherefore, putting away falsehood, speak ye truth each one with his neighbor (Eph. 4:25). Agur also wished that in Gods providential dealings with him, he would spare him from the extremes of both poverty and wealth, for he saw dangers in both (see comments on Pro. 30:9). His wish was that he might merely have the provisions that were suitable for him. And observation shows that people are more righteous, happier, and more satisfied when they are found in the great middle class that has to work for what they have, and that appreciate what they get.

Pro. 30:9. What was the danger of riches? Lest I be full, and deny thee, and say, Who is Jehovah? Over and over in the Bible shows this tendency: Lest, when thou hast eaten and art full, and hast built goodly houses, and dwelt therein; and when thy herds and thy flocks multiply, and thy silver and thy gold is multiplied; then thy heart be lifted up, and thou forget Jehovah thy God…and lest thou say in thy heart, My power and the might of my hand hath gotten me this wealth (Deu. 8:12-17); Thou are waxed fat, thou art grown thick, thou art become sleek; Then he forsook God (Deu. 32:15). Also see Deu. 31:20; Neh. 9:25-26; Job. 31:24-25; Job. 31:28; Hos. 13:6. What was the danger of poverty? Lest I be poor, and steal, And use profanely the name of my God. Stealing is wrong whether one is stealing out of want or otherwise, Situation Ethics notwithstanding. But one cannot deny the tendency of the poverty-stricken to steal from others. Under those circumstances one might use profanely the name of God by cursing Him for his circumstances, or he might affirm his innocence by an oath in which he used Gods name (likely the former: When they shall be hungry, they shall fret themselves, and curse by their king and by their GodIsa. 8:21).

Pro. 30:10. Slander is not good: Rom. 3:8; Psa. 101:5; Psa. 50:19-20; I. Tim. Pro. 3:11. Lest he curse theewho is the he? More likely the servant than the masterthe one slandered rather than the one who hears the slander. Since the slanderer would be guilty, the curse would be effective.

TEST QUESTIONS OVER 30:1-10

1.

What four persons are mentioned in Pro. 30:1, and what do we know of each?

2.

What word in Pro. 30:1 shows the contents of the chapter to be inspired?

3.

From what two sources did the author of this chapter not get the material he was about to present (Pro. 30:2-3)?

4.

Discuss the ascending and descending of Pro. 30:4.

5.

How pure is the Word of God said to be (Pro. 30:5)?

6.

Where else besides Pro. 30:6 does God warn about tampering with His Word?

7.

Why did Agur want falsehood and lies removed from him (Pro. 30:8)?

8.

What is meant by Food that is needful for me (Pro. 30:8)?

9.

Where else besides Pro. 30:9 does the Bible warn about the danger of riches?

10.

How might a poverty-stricken person use the name of God profanely (Pro. 30:9)?

11.

Who is the he of Pro. 30:10?

Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series

XXX.

8.

THE PROVERBS OF SOLOMON END HERE. THE REST OF THE BOOK IS COMPOSED OF THREE APPENDICES: (a) THE WORDS OF AGUR; (b) THE WORDS OF KING LEMUEL; AND (C) THE PRAISE OF A GOOD WIFE (Proverbs 30, 31).

APPENDIX (a).

(1) The words of Agur the son of Jakeh, even the prophecy.Jewish interpreters have seen in these titles (but apparently without a shadow of reason) a designation of Solomon himself, the convener and instructor of assemblies (Ecc. 1:1; Ecc. 12:11), son of the obedient man after Gods own heart. But they in all probability belong to some otherwise unknown sage, whose utterances were thought not unworthy of being joined with those of the wise King of Israel himself. In support of this view 1Ki. 4:30 may be adduced as a proof of the estimation in which the wisdom of foreign nations was at this time held. The book of Job also, which possibly now was added to the canon of Scripture, is certainly of foreign, probably of Arabian, origin. Some light may be thrown upon the nationality of Agur by the words translated in the Authorised version the prophecy (mass). This is the term constantly employed to express the utterance, or, more probably, the message which a prophet bore to his hearers, often one of gloomy import (Isa. 13:1, etc.). But the term is not very appropriate to the contents of this chapter, nor to the words of King Lemuel, in Proverbs 31, and the expression, the prophecy, standing quite alone, with no other words to qualify it, is very singular. For these reasons it has been proposed to translate the beginning of the verse thus: The words of Agur the son of Jakeh the Massan, i.e., a descendant of the Massa mentioned in Gen. 25:14 as a son of Ishmael. This would place his home probably in North Arabia, and Lemuel would be king of the same tribe.

The man spake.The word translated spake is most frequently used of the revelation of God to prophets, rarely (Num. 24:3 and 2Sa. 23:1) of the utterances of inspired prophets; never of the words of ordinary men.

Unto Ithiel, even unto Ithiel and Ucal.These most probably were disciples of his. As their names may mean God with me, and I am strong, a fanciful delineation of their characters, in the style of the Pilgrims Progress, has been attempted by some writers. And a mystical interpretation of them, You must have God with you, if you are to be strong, may be found in Bishop Wordsworths Commentary. It has been proposed also, as is possible with a slight change in the pointing, to translate these words thus: I am weary, O God, I am weary, and am weak, or, have made an end, and to make them an introduction to Pro. 30:2, which supplies the reason for this weariness, For I am more brutish, etc. Thus is described, it has been thought, the sinking at heart of one who has sought after God, and the more he has realised the divine excellence, has become the more conscious of his own nothingness. But this rendering is unnecessary, as the Authorised version gives a good sense.

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

1. The prophecy , ( hammassa,) the utterance, the oracle oracular saying or discourse. It may also mean parable or proverb. It is the word occurring so often in the prophets rendered “burden.” Hitzig, followed by others, throwing away the Masoretic points, takes Jakeh out of the category of proper names and puts Massa into it, reading, “the son of her who was obeyed in Massa,” or whose domain is Massa. The name Massa is found among the children of Ishmael, (Gen 25:14,) and as Massa and Dumah are mentioned together, both there and in 1Ch 1:30, his supposed that the country of Massa adjoined that of Dumah, where there was probably a colony of Israelites of the tribe of Simeon. Comp. 1Ch 1:41-43.

Ithiel Separated into two words, , lei thiel, issupposed to make the sense, I have toiled for God, or after God, or, “to God with me.” Miller.

Ucal By a little change of points this word becomes, I have ceased, desisted from, or ended, (my toil,) or, according to Miller, “I am able.” Those who take Ithiel and Ucal to be proper names, believe them to be the pupils of Agur, and it is conjectured that the different parts of Agur’s discourse is in answer to questions proposed by these pupils, after the manner of the ancient schools “hearing them, and asking them questions.” Luk 2:46.

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

“even unto Ithiel and Ucal” – Word Study on “Ithiel” – Strong says the Hebrew name “Ithiel” ( ) (H384) probably comes from two root words: ( ) (H837), which means “happiness,” and ( ) (H410), which means “strength.” As an adjective, it means, “mighty,” or “Almighty.” Therefore, Strong gives the meaning of the name of Ithiel as “God has arrived.” Another meaning of this name suggested is “signs of God,” or “coming of God” ( Hitchcock).

Comments – The only other use of this name in the Scriptures is found in Neh 11:7, where Ithiel is the son of Jeshaiah of the tribe of Benjamin, who was one of the inhabitants of Jerusalem during the time of Nehemiah’s. Thus, the name appears to be Hebrew, and not a foreign name.

Neh 11:7, “And these are the sons of Benjamin; Sallu the son of Meshullam, the son of Joed, the son of Pedaiah, the son of Kolaiah, the son of Maaseiah, the son of Ithiel, the son of Jesaiah.”

Word Study on “Ucal” – Strong says the Hebrew name “Ucal” ( ) (H401) is derived from the verb ( ) (H398), which means “to eat.” Thus, he gives the meaning of the Hebrew name Ucal as “devoured.” Other suggestions for a meaning are “power, prevalency” ( Hitchcock), and “I am strong” ( Smith).

Comments – It is supposed that the Ithiel and Ucal are friends or pupils of Agur. However, PTW suggests that these are not names, but verbs, thus yielding a translation, “The man said, I have wearied myself, O God, I have wearied myself, O God, and am consumed.” Several modern translations support this idea.

BBE, “The words of Agur, the son of Jakeh, from Massa. The man says: I am full of weariness, O God, I am full of weariness; O God, I have come to an end :”

DRC, “The words of Gatherer the son of Vomiter. The vision which the man spoke with whom God is, and who being strengthened by God, abiding with him , said:”

YLT, “Words of a Gatherer, son of an obedient one, the declaration, an affirmation of the man: — I have wearied myself for God, I have wearied myself for God, and am consumed .”

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures

The Proverbs of Agur: An Encounter with God Pro 30:1-33 is a group of proverbs that were written by an unknown person named Agur. It becomes obvious in Pro 30:2-6 that this prophet has had an encounter with God. The proverbs contained within this chapter are a reflection of that divine encounter. At this level of our journey with wisdom, we, too, will have an encounter with God, where we are allowed to have a glimpse of His eternal glory, and with a taste of His glory, the things of this world fade into obscurity. No one can turn loose the cares of this world until he tastes this glory, but once it is tasted, he is never again satisfied with the things of this world.

In the presence of God, Agur responds in broken humility (Pro 30:2-3). After describing his utter weakness in relation to God, he endeavors to describe God’s majesty (Pro 30:4-6). Even His spoken Words are overwhelming (Pro 30:5-6). From this divine perspective, we better understand how to balance our pursuits of this world’s goods (Pro 30:7-9). We see how wicked and proud the heart of man really is in comparison to God’s holiness (Pro 30:10-14). We see God’s wonderful creation as too glorious to comprehend (Pro 30:15-31).

Outline Here is a proposed outline:

1. Introduction Pro 30:1

2. Man’s Response to God’s Presence Pro 30:2-3

3. A Description of God’s Majesty Pro 30:4-6

4. Setting Priorities in Life Pro 30:7-9

5. Man’s Wickedness Compared to God’s Holiness Pro 30:10-14

6. God’s Wonderful Creation Pro 30:15-31

7. Conclusion Pro 30:32-33

Pro 30:1 Introduction Pro 30:1 introduces the distinct passage in Pro 30:1-33.

Pro 30:1  The words of Agur the son of Jakeh, even the prophecy: the man spake unto Ithiel, even unto Ithiel and Ucal,

Pro 30:1 “The words of Agur the son of Jakeh” – Word Study on “Agur” – Strong says the Hebrew name “Agur” ( ) (H94) is a past participle of the Hebrew verb ( ) (H103), which means “to harvest, or to gather.” Strong says the name would mean “gathered,” that is, “received among the sages.” Thus the name could mean, “a gathering together of wise sayings or wise men.” Other suggested meanings are “stranger” ( Hitchcock), and “hireling” ( ISBE).

Comments – Some scholars believe that this is a fancy name for King Solomon. However, this does not explain the title “son of Jakeh.” Others say that he was a public teacher or prophet that lived in the time of King Solomon, or a little later. There is not clear evidence as to the identity of this individual, but it appears that he was a Hebrew or Gentile wise man whom Solomon or a later compiler believed had divine wisdom worth gathering.

Word Study on “Jakeh” – Strong says the Hebrew name “Jakeh” ( ) (H3348) means “obedient,” and comes from an unused verb that probably means “to obey.” Other meanings suggested for this name are “pious” ( Easton, Smith), “carefully religious” ( ISBE).

Pro 30:1 “even the prophecy” – Word Study on “prophecy” – Strong says the Hebrew word “prophecy” ( ) (H4853) means “a burden,” and figuratively, “an utterance.” The Enhanced Strong says it is used 66 times in the Old Testament, being translated in the KJV as, “burden 57, Song of Solomon 3, prophecy 2, set 1, exaction 1, carry away 1, tribute 1.” Note that this Hebrew word is commonly translated “oracle” ( NASB, NIV, RSV). Holladay says, “A burden or pronouncement (a sort of cursing pronouncement).”

Comments – The ISBE suggests the possibility of translating this word as “the Massaite.” The Hebrew word “Massa” ( ) (H4854), reads the same and refers to one of the sons of Ishmael. This word only occurs two times in the Old Testament (Gen 25:13-14, 1Ch 1:29).

Gen 25:13-14, “And these are the names of the sons of Ishmael, by their names, according to their generations: the firstborn of Ishmael, Nebajoth; and Kedar, and Adbeel, and Mibsam, And Mishma, and Dumah, and Massa ,”

1Ch 1:29, “These are their generations: The firstborn of Ishmael, Nebaioth; then Kedar, and Adbeel, and Mibsam, Mishma, and Dumah, Massa , Hadad, and Tema, Jetur, Naphish, and Kedemah. These are the sons of Ishmael.”

Since this word is also used in Pro 31:1, James Crichton suggests that Agur and King Lemuel were two Ishmaelite men who lived in a nearby city or region called Massa during Solomon’s time. [147] This would account for Solomon’s quest for wisdom from all places and sources. One modern translation supports this idea:

[147] James Crichton, “Jakeh,” in International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, ed. James Orr (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., c1915, 1939), in The Sword Project, v. 1.5.11 [CD-ROM] (Temple, AZ: CrossWire Bible Society, 1990-2008).

BBE, “The words of Agur, the son of Jakeh, from Massa . The man says: I am full of weariness, O God, I am full of weariness; O God, I have come to an end:”

Comments – The Hebrew word ( ) (H4853) is used in Pro 30:1; Pro 31:1, suggesting the same authorship.

Pro 31:1, “The words of king Lemuel, the prophecy that his mother taught him.”

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures

God’s Word as the Source and Dispenser of all Wisdom

v. 1. The words of Agur, the son of Jakeh, a wise man, otherwise unknown, some of whose maxims were added to the proverbs of Solomon as the first supplement, even the prophecy, the prophetic utterance: the man spake unto Ithiel, even unto Ithiel and Uchal, literally, according to the best texts: “I have steadfastly endeavored, I have constantly vexed myself, O God,”

v. 2. surely I am more brutish than any man, or, “for a man I am lacking in sense,” for which reason he finds himself unable to fathom the divine nature, and have not the understanding of a man, that which a man should possess in order to have an insight into the attributes of the Lord.

v. 3. I neither learned wisdom nor have the knowledge of the Holy, since to know God is the center of all true wisdom. It is impossible for mere man to fathom the mysteries of the divine essence.

v. 4. Who hath ascended up into heaven or descended? Who hath gathered the wind in his fists? Who hath bound the waters in a garment? Who hath established all the ends of the earth? All these great acts of creation and preservation are fully understood by the Creator alone. What is His name, and what is His Son’s name, if thou canst tell? It is a most emphatic way of saying that no human being is able to uncover the secrets of God’s essence. Instead, therefore, of foolishly and vainly puzzling over the incomprehensible nature of God, the believers should turn to Him in simple trust of faith.

v. 5. Every word of God is pure, purified, rendered free from all impurities of human beings; He is a shield unto them that put their trust in Him, making Him their refuge at all times.

v. 6. Add thou not unto His words, since the revelation of God in the Bible is fully adequate and sufficient for the needs of all men, lest He reprove thee, convicting the intermeddler of his blasphemous conduct, and thou be found a liar, for all precepts and commandments of men become lies when intermingled with the Word of God and placed on a level with it.

v. 7. Two things have I required of Thee, in an earnest prayer; deny me them not before I die, the poet’s entreaty being for a constant enjoyment of these blessings during his whole life:

v. 8. Remove far from me vanity and lies, deceit and lying words, every form of transgression of the Eighth Commandment; give me neither poverty nor riches, both extremes being dangerous for the average human being; feed me with food convenient for me, literally, “of my lot or portion,” as much as God found best to assign to him, as much as he needed,

v. 9. lest I be full, surfeited by an overabundance, and deny Thee, in the notion that he no longer needed the care of Jehovah, and say, Who is the Lord? such being the danger on the one side, or lest I be poor, in the abyss of severe want, and steal, and take the name of my God in vain, such mockery and blasphemy being found in the mouth of such as believe themselves ill-treated in this world or not properly recognized by the Lord.

v. 10. Accuse not a servant unto his master, by slanderous reports, lest he curse thee, for the wrong done to him, and thou be found guilty, obliged to pay the penalty of the transgression.

v. 11. There is a generation, a detestable class of people, that curseth their father and doth not bless their mother, thus becoming guilty of one of the most atrocious forms of ungodliness.

v. 12. There is a generation that are pure in their own eyes, proud in their own estimate of self, puffed up in their own conceit, and yet is not washed from their filthiness, they are blind against their own shortcomings and transgressions, Rev 3:17.

v. 13. There is a generation, O how lofty are their eyes! and their eyelids are lifted up, in haughty contempt of others.

v. 14. There is a generation whose teeth are as swords and their jaw-teeth, specifically the canines, as knives, to devour the poor from off the earth, and the needy from among men, without the slightest show of compassion. This insatiable oppression is now characterized by a hold comparison.

v. 15. The horse-leech hath two daughters, crying, Give, give! never being satisfied with what they have already gotten. There are three things that are never satisfied, yea, four things say not, It is enough:

v. 16. the grave, although the number of dead are placed into it in endless succession, and the barren womb, where conception and birth is not possible, the earth is not filled with water, though tons of rain fall in every shower, and the fire that saith not, It is enough, being known as the most insatiable of the ancient elements.

v. 17. The eye that mocketh at his father, pride and contempt being shown especially in the eye, and despiseth to obey his mother, in deliberate waywardness and disobedient scorn, the ravens of the valley shall pick it out, when the unburied corpse becomes carrion, and the young eagles shall eat it, such being the punishment of the Lord upon those who despise His representatives on earth and therefore set aside His authority.

Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann

EXPOSITION

Pro 30:1-33

Part VII. FIRST APPENDIX TO THE SECOND COLLECTION, containing “the words of Agur.” A short introduction, teaching that the Word of God is the source of wisdom (Pro 30:1-6), is followed by apothegms on different subjects (Pro 30:7-33). Cornelius a Lapide offers the following opinion concerning this appendix, which no one can hesitate to say is well founded, if he attempts to give it a spiritual interpretation, and to discern mysteries under the literal meaning: “Quarta haec pars elegantissima est et pulcherrima, aeque ac difficillima et obscurissima: priores enim tres partes continent Proverbia et Paraemias claras, ac antithesibus et similitudinibus perspicuas et illustres; haec vero continet aenigmata et gryphos insignes, sed arcanos et perdifficiles, turn ex phrasi quae involute est et aenigmatica, tum ex sensu et materia, quae sublimis est et profunda.”

Pro 30:1

The words of Agur the son of Jakeh, even the prophecy. This seems to be the correct rendering of the passage, though it has been made to bear very different interpretations. It is plainly the tide of the treatise which follows Wire Agur and Jakeh were is utterly unknown. The Jewish interpreters considered that “Agur son of Jakeh” was an allegorical designation of SolomonAgur meaning “Gatherer,” or “Convener” (see Ecc 1:1; Ecc 12:11); Jakeh, “Obedient,” or “Pious,” which thus would indicate David. St. Jerome somewhat countenances the alle gorical interpretation by translating, Verba Congregantis, filii Vomentis, “The words of the Collector, son of the Utterer.” But what follows could not apply to Solomon; he could not say, “I have not learned wisdom” (Pro 30:3), or ask blindly after the Creator (Pro 30:4). Many have endeavoured to find Agur’s nationality in the word that follows, translated “the prophecy” (, hamassa). Massa “burden,” is usually applied to a solemn prophetical speech or oracle, a Divine utterance (Isa 13:1; Isa 15:1, etc.), and as this designation was deemed inappropriate to the character of this appendix, it has been thought that allusion is here made to a land of Massa, so called after a son of Ishmael (Gen 25:14), who dwelt in the country of Edom or Seir, and whose inhabitants were among those children of the East whose wisdom had become proverbial (1Ki 4:30). Others find Massa in the Hauran, or on the north of the Persian Gulf. The Venetian Version gives, . But we have no satisfactory account of a country thus called, and its existence is quite problematical; therefore the ingenious explanations founded on the reality of this terra ignota need not be specified. Gratz has suggested that in place of hamassa should be read hammoshel, “the proverb writer;” but this is a mere conjecture, unsupported by any ancient authority. If, as seems necessary, we are compelled to resign the rendering, “of Masse,” or “the Massan,” we must fall back on the Authorized Version, and consider the term “oracle” as applied loosely and abnormally to these utterances of wisdom which follow. That they are not of the nature of Divine communications can be seen at once by consideration of their contents, which are mainly of human, and not of the highest type, and, though capable of spiritual interpretation, do not possess that uniqueness of purpose, that religious character and elevation of subject, which one expects in the enunciations of an inspired prophet. This view does not militate against their claim to be regarded as Holy Scripture; their place in the canon is secured by other considerations, and is not affected by our suspicion of the inappropriateness of the term applied to them; and, indeed, it may be that the very human element in these utterances is meant to be unsatisfying, and to lead one to look for the deep spiritual truths which underlie the secular surroundings. Agur is some poet or moralist, well known in Solomon’s time, probably one of the wise men referred to in Pro 24:23 (see below). The rest of the paragraph is of greater obscurity than the former portion. The man spake unto Ithiel, even unto Ithiel and Ucal. According to this rendering, the man is Agur, who is introduced as uttering what follows in Pro 24:2, etc; to Ithiel and Ucal, two of his sons, pupils, or companions. The name Ucal occurs nowhere else in the Old Testament; Ithiel is found once, in Neh 11:7, as the name of a Benjamite. Wordsworth regards the names as symbolical of the moral character of those whom the author designs to address, explaining the former as equivalent to “God with me,” and the latter as denoting “consumed” with zeal, or “strong,” “perfect.” It is as if the writer said, “You must have God with you; yea, you must have God with you, if you are to be strong. You must be Ithiels, if you are to be Ucals.” He refers to 1Co 15:10; 2Co 3:5; Php 4:13. That the Masorites regarded these words as proper names is evident; , indeed, can have no other application. The Syriac takes this view of the words; to the same opinion lean, more or less, the Jewish translators Aquila and Theodotion, Aben Ezra, Vatablus, Pagninus, and others, and it is the simplest and easiest solution of the difficulties which have been seen in the clause. But many modern commentators have declared against it; e.g. Hitzig, Zockler, Detitzsch, Bottcher, Nowack. The repetition of Ithiel seems unmeaning; one sees no reason why it should be repeated more than Ucal. The second verse begins with , which, as Hebraists agree, cannot stand abruptly at the commencement of a discourse, but rather establishes something that has preceded. But if we take the words in dispute as proper names, no statement to be confirmed has been made. We are, then, constrained to take them in another sense. St. Jerome translates them, writing, Visio quam locutus est vir, cum quo est Deus, et qui Deo secum morante confortatus. The LXX. (which in troduces verses 1-14 of this chapter after Pro 24:23) gives, “Those things saith the man to those who believe God, and I cease;” being the translation of the doubled Ithiel, equivalent to “God with me,” and () being considered to be a formation from the root . Ewald takes the two words to be the name of one man, equivalent to “God with me, so I am strong;” in his own language, Mitmirgottsobinich stark; but his idea of a dialogue between the rich mocker (verses 2-4) and the humble believer (verse 5-14) is not well founded, though a late editor, Strack, agreeing, considers that the only possible interpretation of these verses (verses 2-4) is to make the speaker utter them as the outcome of his unbelief and scoffing, to which Agur answers in verse 5. Under all circumstances, it has seemed to many scholars best to surrender the notion of proper names, and, altering the vocalization, to interpret, “The oracle of the man, ‘I have wearied myself, O God, I have wearied myself, O God,'” or, as others say, “about God.” The utterance commences here, and not at verse 2. The repetition forcibly expresses the laborious and painful investigation of the seeker after truth. The final word, vocalized , is rendered, “And I have withdrawn;” or, as Bickell, quoted by Cheyne, gives, v’lo ukal, “I have not prevailed.” We arrive thus at this interpretation: first comes the superscription, “The words of Agur,” etc; “the oracle of the man;” then begins the utterance, which opens with the melancholy avowal that, though he had longed and striven to know God, his nature, his attributes, his working, he had failed in this object, and expended his labour in vain. Both Agur, and Lemuel who is named in Pro 31:1, seem to have been persons not of Israelitish nationality, but dwelling in the neighbourhood of Palestine, and acquainted with the religion and sacred literature of the chosen people (see Pro 31:5). It is by no means unlikely that they were of the race of Ishmael, from which stock many wise men had risen, and where wisdom was so cultivated as to have become proverbial (see Jer 49:7; Oba 1:8). In what follows Agur shows himself as a philosopher and a critic, but at the same time a firm believer.

Pro 30:2, Pro 30:3

Confirms what is said in Pro 30:1 concerning the fruitlessness of the investigation there mentioned; the more he sought and studied, the more conscious he became of his own ignorance and of God’s incomreprehensibility.

Pro 30:2

Surely I am more brutish than any man “Surely” (ki) should be “for” (see note on verse l). Cheyne, “I am too stupid for a man;” I am a mere irrational beast (comp. Pro 12:1; Psa 73:22). And have not the understanding of a man. I am not worthy to be called a man, as I possess not the intellectual faculty which a man ought to have. This is not ironical, as if he did not desire the statement to be taken in its full sense, and meant to say, “Of course it is my own stupidity that is in fault;” but it is a genuine confession of incompetence to investigate the subject matter, which is too mysterious for his mental powers to penetrate. Thus Solomon acknowledges that he is but a little child, nod prays for an understanding heart (1Ki 3:7, 1Ki 3:9; comp. Wis. 9:5; Mat 11:25).

Pro 30:3

I neither learned wisdom. With all my eager longing and striving I did not attain to such wisdom, that I should have the knowledge of the Holy One; k’doshim, plural of “excellence,” like elohim (Pro 9:10; Hos 12:1 (Hebrew); see note on Pro 1:20; and comp. Ecc 5:8; Ecc 12:1). The knowledge of the all holy God was beyond his grasp (Job 11:7, etc.). Theology is a higher science than metaphysics, and cannot be reached by that ladder. The LXX. gives an affirmative sense to this verse, “God hath taught me wisdom, and I know the knowledge of the holy ().”

Pro 30:4

The questions contained in this verse are such as compelled Agur to acknowledge his ignorance and nothingness before the thought of the glory and power of the great Creator. We may compare Job 38:1-41, etc. Who hath ascended up into heaven, or descended? Who is he that hath his seat in heaven, and doeth works on earth? Who is he whose universal providence is felt and experienced? Where is this mysterious Being who hides himself from human ken? Christ has said something like this, “No man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven” (Joh 3:13); and St. Paul (Eph 4:9). In biblical language God is said to come down from heaven in order to punish, to aid, to reveal his will, etc. (Gen 11:7; Psa 18:9, etc.); and he returns to heaven when this intervention is finished (Gen 17:22; Gen 35:13). Who hath gathered the wind in his fists? Who hath the control of the viewless wind, so as to restrain it or release it at his pleasure? (Psa 135:7; Amo 4:13). Septuagint, “Who hath gathered the winds in his bosom ()?” Who hath bound the waters in a garment? The waters are the clouds which cover the vault of heaven, and are held, as it were, in a garment, so that, in spite of the weight which they contain, they fall not upon the earth. As Job says (Job 26:8), “He bindeth up the waters in his thick clouds; and the cloud is not rent under them.” And again (Job 38:37), “Who can number the clouds by wisdom? or who can pour out the bottles of heaven?” So the psalmist, “Thou coveredst it [the earth] with the deep as with a vesture” (Psa 104:6). (See above, Pro 8:27, etc.) Who hath established all the ends of the earth? Who hath consolidated the foundations, and defined the limits, of the remotest regions of the earth? (comp. Job 38:4, etc.). The answer to these four questions is “Almighty God.” He alone can order and control the forces of nature. What is his name, and what is his son’s name, if thou canst tell? or, if thou knowest. It is not enough to acknowledge the power and operation and providence of this mysterious Being; Agur longs to know more of his nature, his essence. He must have personality; he is not an abstraction, a force, a quality; he is a Person. What, then, is his name, the name which expresses what he is in himself? Men have different appellations for this Supreme Being, according as they regard one or other of his attributes: is there one name that comprehends all, which gives an adequate account of the incomprehensible Creator? The question cannot be answered affirmatively in this life. “We know that if he shall be manifested, we shall be like him; for we shall see him even as he is” (1Jn 3:2). The further question, “What is his son’s name?” has given some difficulty. The LXX. has, “What is the name of his children ( )?” as if there was reference to Israel, the special children of God. But the original does not bear out this interpretation, which is also opposed to the idea of the enigma proposed. The inquiry might meanAre we to apply to the Supreme Being the same notion of natural relationship with which we are familiar in the human family? But this seems a low and unworthy conception. Or the “son” might be primeval man (Job 15:7) or the sage; but the answer would not be satisfactory, and would not tend to solve the great question. There are two replies which can be made to Agur’s interrogation. Looking to the marvellous description of Wisdom in Pro 8:22, etc; we may consider Wisdom to be a denotation of the Son of God, and the inquirer desires to know the name and nature of this personage, of whose existence he was certified. Or he may have arrived at a knowledge of the only begotten Son of God, as the idea of the Logos is more or less developed in the Book of Wisdom, in Philo’s treatises, and in the Alexandrian school; and longs for more perfect knowledge. This, indeed, is hidden: “He hath name written, which no one knoweth but he himself” (Rev 19:12). It is useless to put such question to a fellow man; no human mind can fathom the nature of the Godhead, or trace out its operations (Ec Pro 18:4, etc.).

Pro 30:5, Pro 30:6

The following tetrastich is connected with what has preceded in this way: As the light of nature and metaphysical speculation are of no avail in obtaining the perfect knowledge of God which the seeker craves, he must be all the more thankful for the revealed Word of God, which teaches him as much as he is capable of learning.

Pro 30:5

Every word of God is pure. “Word” is here imrah, which does not occur elsewhere in our book, which is the case also with Eloah, the term used for “God.” Every declaration of God in the inspired record, the Torah, is pure, as if refined in the fire (Psa 18:30). Vulgate, Omnis sermo Dei est ignitus; Septuagint, “All the words of God are tried in the fire ().” God’s words are true, sincere, with no mixture of error, certain of accomplishment (comp. Psa 12:6; Psa 119:140). He is a shield. He is perfect protection to all those who, relying on the word of revelation, fly to him for refuge (see on Pro 2:7). The knowledge of God is obtained in two waysby his revelation in his Word, and by the experience of those who trust in him.

Pro 30:6

Add thou not unto his words. God’s will, as announced in revelation, is to be simply accepted and acted upon, not watered down, not overstrained. This injunction had already been given in the old Law (Deu 4:2; Deu 12:32); it is repeated in the New Testament with awful emphasis (Rev 22:18, Rev 22:19). No human speculations or traditions may be mingled with God’s words; the glosses and explanations and definitions, affixed by rabbinical ingenuity to plain enactments, and proved to be false in morality and fatal to vital religion, are a commentary on the succeeding sentence, Lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar. The reproof is found in the consequences of such additions; the results to which they lead are such as show that no who asserts that these things are contained in the Word of God is a liar.

Pro 30:7-9

A mashal ode, containing two requests, and a rationale of the latter. The matter of the two prayers connects it with Pro 30:6, whether we consider that the limitation of man’s desire follows naturally the limitation of his knowledge (Plumptre). or that the warning against being reproved as a liar is corroborated by the prayer against vanity and lies (but see below, on Pro 30:9). It is the first of Agur’s numerical proverbs.

Pro 30:7

Two things have I required of thee. The personal pronoun applies to God, who, according to our interpretation, has been invoked in Pro 30:1; otherwise it stands without reference to anything preceding. Deny me not before I die; i.e. grant me these two things for the rest of my life. Septuagint, “Take not grace () from me before I die.”

Pro 30:8

Here is the first request: Remove far from me vanity and lies. Shay, “vanity,” is inward hollowness and worthlessness, and “lies” are the expression of this in words. The prayer might indeed be taken as an entreaty against being polluted with the companionship of the evil, like “Lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil;” but it is best taken subjectively, as a supplication for personal truthfulness and sincerity in all relations both towards God and man. Give me neither poverty nor riches. Both extremes are deprecated: the mean is the safest and the happiest, Horace, ‘Carm.,’ 3.16. 424

“Multa petentibus

Desunt multa; bene est, cui deus obtulit
Parca, quod satis est, manu.”

“The ‘ever craving’ is Want’s slave and thrall;
The gods most wisely thus their gifts accord,
Giving ‘enough,’ they amply give to all.”

(Stanley.)

Theognis, ‘Patron.,’ 1155

“I want not wealth; I only ask to live
On frugal means without corroding care.”

Feed me with food convenient for me; literally, give me to eat the bread of my portion; that which by God s providence is determined for me (comp. Gen 47:22, which speaks of the portion assigned for the support of the priests; Job 23:14; and below, Pro 31:15). It is natural to refer to of the Lord’s Prayer (Mat 6:11); but the idea is not the same. In the latter, bread for the needs of the coming day is meant; in our passage it is more indefinite, a casting one’s self on the Divine love, in readiness to take what that love assigns. “Having food and covering,” says St. Paul (1Ti 6:8), “we shall be therewith content.” Septuagint, “Appoint for me what is necessary and what is sufficient ( ).”

Pro 30:9

The reason for the latter prayer follows, unless, as some consider, the prayer is one, as if Agur asked, “Take from me riches which lead to vanity, and poverty which leads to lying and deceit.” In this case the ground of the request would embrace both parts of the petition. Lest I be full, and deny thee, and say, Who is the Lord (Jehovah)? Great wealth and temporal prosperity tempt to forgetfulness of God, to self-confidence and practical unbelief in Divine providence. Like Pharaoh, the haughty rich man asks with scorn, “Who is the Lord, that I should obey his voice?” (Exo 5:2; comp. Deu 8:12, etc.; Job 21:14, etc.; Psa 14:1). Septuagint, “Lest being filled I become false, and say, Who seeth me?” Or lest I be poor, and steal; lest my necessities lead to dishonesty. And take the name of my God in vain. The verb taphas means “to grasp at, seize violently, handle roughly,” and the sin intended may be either false swearing in denial of his theft and to escape punishment, or the arraignment of God’s providence which has allowed him to fall into such distress. Thus Isa 8:21, “They shall pass through it, hardly bestead and hungry; and it shall come to pass that, when they shall be hungry, they shall fret themselves, and curse their king and their God.” In view of the proverbs that follow, the clause seems to be best taken of the blasphemy attending on impatience and want of resignation to God’s will (comp. Pro 19:3).

Pro 30:10

Accuse not a servant unto his master. Calumniate, slander not; , Theodotion; , Symmachus. Do not secretly bring a charge against a man’s slave, and make his master suspicious of him; have a kind feeling for those in lowly condition, and do not render their lot more unbearable by insinuating false or frivolous accusations against them. Ewald and others would render, “Entice not a servant to slander his master;” but there is no need so to take the expression, as the hiph. of the verb is used in post-biblical Hebrew in the sense of “to calumniate.” The Septuagint has, “Deliver not a servant into the hands of his master,” which seems to refer to the treatment of runaway slaves (Deu 23:15). Lest he curse thee, and thou be found guilty, and have to atone for it. The slandered slave imprecates a curse on his slanderer, and, as the latter has incurred vengeance by his word or action, the curse will not fall harmless (Pro 26:2); God’s righteous retribution will overtake him, and he shall suffer for it.

Pro 30:11-31

contain six groups of four sentences each, each quaternion having a certain connection in language and concinnity of idea. First (Pro 30:11-14) come four generations that are evilfour being taken as the symbol of universality. The sins herein specified had become so general that they affected the whole generation.

Pro 30:11

There is a generation that eurseth their father. The words, “there is,” are not found in the Hebrew, and the four subjects are without a predicate. Delitzsch calls the group “a mutilated priamel,” which is explained to be a kind of gnomic poetry containing a series of antecedents or subjects followed by an epigrammatic conclusion applicable to all the antecedents. In the present ease the conclusion is wanting, so that we are left in doubt whether the author meant merely to de. scribe classes of men in his own time or to affirm that such are abominable. Septuagint, “A wicked generation curseth its father ( ),” which expression is repeated at each of the four verses. The first sin is that which offends against the commandment to honour and obey parents. This was judged worthy of death under the old Law (Exo 21:17; see Pro 20:20, and note there). And doth not bless their mother. This is a litotes, “not to bless” being equivalent to “to curse.”

Pro 30:12

A generation that are pure in their own eyes (Pro 20:9). The second characteristic is hypocrisy and Pharisaical self-righteousness (see Luk 18:11). And yet are not washed from their filthiness; have not cleansed their heart by complete repentance, either because they have not examined themselves and know nothing of the real state of their conscience, or because they care nothing about it and will not regard it in its true light. There is a similar expression in Isa 4:4. Septuagint, “A wicked generation judgeth themselves to be just, but have not washed themselves clean ( ).”

Pro 30:13

A generation, oh, how lofty are their eyes! The third sin is pride and arrogance (see on Pro 6:17; Pro 21:4). “Lord,” said the psalmist, “my heart is not haughty, nor mine eyes lofty” (Psa 131:1). The prophet rebukes “the stout heart of the King of Assyria and the glory of his high looks” (Isa 10:12). Their eyelids are lifted up; in supercilious disdain. “Inde Proverbio dicimus,” says Erasmus (‘Adag.’), “attolli supercilium, fastidium indicantes” (s.v. “Arrogantia”).

Pro 30:14

A generation, whose teeth are as swords, and their jaw teeth as knives. The fourth evil is insatiable cupidity, which leads to oppression and injurious treatment of the helpless and poor, which makes men as cruel and remorseless in destroying others and despoiling them of their substance, as the very steel which they use in their operations. Similarly, the psalmist speaks of his enemies as men “whose teeth are spears and arrows, and their tongue a sharp sword” (Psa 57:4; comp. Isa 9:12; Jer 5:17). To devour the poor from off the earth; i.e. so as to be no more seen in the world. Amo 8:4, “Hear this, O ye that would swallow up the needy, and cause the poor of the land to fail” (comp. Psa 14:4).

Pro 30:15, Pro 30:16

Having spoken of insatiate cupidity, the writer now introduces four things which are insatiable. The form of the apothegm is climacteric, mounting from two to three, and thence to four, like the famous passage in Amo 1:3, etc. (comp. Pro 6:16, though there is no special stress there laid on the last member of the climax; Job 5:19; Job 33:29; Ecc 11:2).

Pro 30:15

The horseleach hath two daughters, crying, Give, give. The word “crying” is not in the Hebrew, which says, “The alukah hath two daughters: Give! Give!” The insatiable appetite of this creature is represented by two words, which are personified as daughters, whom the mother has produced and dearly loves. This word alukah is not found again in the Old Testament; but in later Hebrew and in Aramaic it means “leech” or “bloodsucker;” and so it is translated by the Septuagint, , and by St. Jerome sanguisuga. The word is derived from a root which in Arabic means “to adhere.” There are several kinds of leeches common in Palestine, and their bloodthirsty nature is well known; as Horace says, ‘Ars Poet.,’ 476

“Non missura cutem, nisi plena cruoris, hirudo.”

It seems simple and quite satisfactory to accept the word thus, and to see in the voracity of the leech an example of the greed further developed in the following clauses; but commentators have not been contented with this explanation, and have offered various suggestions which are either unnecessary or inadmissible. Thus the Talmud considers alukah to be an appellation of hell, and the two daughters to be the Power of the world, and Heresy. Some of the Fathers regard it as a symbol of the devil and his dominion; others, as a personification of cupidity with its two offshoots avarice and ambition. Some moderns deem it to mean a vampire or blood thirsty demon, a ghoul, in accordance with Eastern myth. But, as we have said, such interpretations are unnecessary and unsupported by sufficient authority. The allusion to the tastes of the leech is found elsewhere. Thus Theocritus, ‘Idyll.,’ 2.55

And Plautus, ‘Epidic.,’ 2.2, 5

“Jam ego me convortam in hirudinem atque

Eorum exsugebo sanguinem,
Senati qui columen cluent.”

Ewald and others find traces of mutilation in this proverb, and endeavour to supply what is lost in various ways; but the text as it stands is intelligible, and needs no addition. The rest of the verse is an application of the truth first stated. The type of cupidity there enunciated is instanced and exemplified in four special cases. There are three things that are never satisfied. And then a corrective climax is addressed. Yea, four things say not, It is enough. The four in the following verse are divided into two plus two. Septuagint, “The leech had three daughters dearly beloved, and these three did not satisfy her, and the fourth was not contented to say, Enough.”

Pro 30:16

The four insatiable things are now named: first, the grave, sheol (Pro 27:20), which can never be filled with its victims. Horace talks of a man as

“Victima nil miserantis Orci.”

(‘Carm.,’ 2.3, 24.)

And Hesiod of Hades as

“A heart possessing that no pity knows.”

The second thing is the barren womb; “the closing of the womb,” as Gen 20:18; Isa 66:9. The burning desire for children, characteristic of an Israelitish wife, is here denoted, like the passionate cry of Rachel to Jacob, “Give me children, or else I die” (Gen 30:1). The barren woman, says Corn. a Lapide, ” concubitus magis est avida quam ceterae tum propter desiderium habendae prolis, tum quod foecundae et gravidae naturaliter non appetant concubitum.” The third insatiable thing is the earth that is not filled (satisfied) with water; the parched and thirsty soil which no amount of water can satisfy, which drinks in all that is poured upon it and is not benefited, what Virgil (‘Georg.,’ 1:114) calls “bibula arena.” The fourth is the fire that saith not, It is enough; the “devouring element,” as the newspapers term it. The more you heap on fire, the more material you supply, the fiercer it rages. Septuagint, “Hades, and the love of woman, and earth not satisfied with water, and water, and fire, will not say, It sufficeth.” Cheyne and others quote from the Sanscrit ‘Hitopadesa,’ “Fire is never satisfied with fuel; nor the ocean with rivers; nor death with all creatures; nor bright-eyed women with men.”

Pro 30:17

This is an independent proverb, only connected with the preceding by being founded on an allusion to an animal. The eye that mocketh at his father. The eye is named as the mind’s instrument for expressing scorn and insubordination; it is the index to the inner feeling; and look may be as sinful as action. And despiseth to obey his mother; i.e. holds obedience to his mother to be a thing of no importance whatever. The word translated “to obey” () is rendered by St. Jerome partum; by others, “weakness,” or “wrinkles,” or “old age,” as Septuagint, . But etymology has led most modem commentators to give the sense of “obedience” (see Gen 49:10). The ravens of the valley shall pick it out. Such an undutiful son shall die a violent death; his corpse shall lie unburied, and the birds of prey shall feed upon him. It is well known that ravens, vultures, and other birds that live on carrion first attack the eyes of their prey; and in our own islands we are told crows and birds of this sort will fix on the eyes of young or sickly animals. Corn. a Lapide quotes Catullus, ‘Carm.,’ 108.5

“Effossos oculos voret atro gutture corvus,

Intestina canes, cetera membra lupi.”

“His eyes, plucked out, let croaking ravens gorge,
His bowels dogs, his limbs the greedy wolves.”

“The valley,” or brook, reminds one of Elijah’s miraculous support (1Ki 17:4). Young eagles. The nesher must here mean one of the vulture tribe, as eagles do not feed on carrion (but see Job 39:30). St. Gregory (‘Moral.,’ 18.49) applies the proverb thus: “‘The eye that sneereth at his father, and despiseth the travail of his mother, lo! the ravens from the torrents shall pick it out.’ For bad men, while they find limit with the judgments of God, do ‘sneer at their Father;’ and heretics of all sorts, whilst in mocking they contemn the preaching of holy Church and her fruitfulness, what else is this but that they ‘despise the travail of their mother’? whom we not unjustly call the mother of them as well, because from the same they come forth, who speak against the same.”

Pro 30:18-20

A proverb concerning four inscrutable things, connected with the last by mention of the eagle.

Pro 30:18

There be three things which are too wonderful for me, yea, four which I know not. The great point is the fourth, to which the three previous things lead up, all of them being alike in this, that they leave no trace. The facts are marvellous; Agur feels like Job, “I have uttered that which I understood not, things too wonderful for me, which I knew not” (Job 42:3).

Pro 30:19

The way of an eagle in the air. You cannot by any outward sign know that an eagle has passed this or that way. Wis. 5:11, “As when a bird hath flown through the air, there is no token of her way to be found,” etc. The way of a serpent upon a rock. The snake’s mode of progression by the lever-like motion of its ribs might well awake surprise, but the point is still the tracklessness of its course. On sand or soft ground its movements might be traced by the impression made. but this could not be done on hard rock; it could push itself along on such a surface without leaving any track. The way of a ship in the midst (heart) of the sea; i.e. in the open sea. You can trace a ship’s course while she is near land or within sight, but when she reaches the open sea, you can follow her furrow no longer. Wis. 5:10, “As a ship that passeth over the waves of the water, which when it is gone by, the trace thereof cannot be found, neither the pathway of the keel in the waves.” The way of a man (geber) with a maid (); Septuagint, “The ways of a man in youth ( ).” So Vulgate, Viam viri in adolescentia. But this is feeble, and almah is without doubt rightly rendered “maid,” “virgin.” The proverb says that the sinful act to which it alludes leaves no outward sign by which it can generally be recognized; it escapes man’s knowledge. This is exemplified and confirmed in the following verse. It is not sufficient to refer the saying to the insidious arts of the seducer, by which he saps the principles and inflames the passions of his victim. The sin of unchastity is signified, which demands secrecy and affords no token of its commission. Two of the above parallels, says Cheyne, are given in a quatrain of a Vedic hymn to Varuna

“The path of ships across the sea,
The soaring eagle’s flight he knows.”

Some of the Fathers and earlier commentators, and among moderns, Bishop Wordsworth, have not been content with the literal sense of this gnonic, but have found in it, as in the others, deep spiritual mysteries. Christ is the great Eagle (Rev 12:14), who ascended beyond human ken; the serpent is the devil, who works his wily way in secret, and who tried to pass into the mind of Christ, who is the Rock; the ship is the Church, which preserves its course amid the waves of this troublesome world, though we cannot mark its strength or whither it is guided; and the fourth mystery is the incarnation of Jesus Christ our Lord, when “the virgin (almah) conceived and bare a son” (Isa 7:14), when “a woman encompassed a man (geber)” (Jer 31:22). We can see the greater or less appropriateness of such accommodation, but the proverb must have been received by contemporaries only in its literal sense, whatever were the inner mysteries which the Holy Spirit wished to communicate thereby.

Pro 30:20

This verse is a kind of gloss or illustration of the last thought of the preceding verse, and seems not to have formed an original part of the numerical proverb. It might well be placed in a parenthesis. Many commentators consider it to be an interpolation. Such is the way of an adulterous woman. What Agur had said of a man above, he now applies to the practised adulteress, whose sin cannot be traced. She eateth. This is a euphemism for the sin which she commits, “Stolen waters are sweet, and bread eaten in secret is pleasant” (Pro 9:17; comp. Pro 5:15). And wipeth her mouth, as if to leave no trace of her illicit repast. And saith, I have done no wickedness. As she has sinned in secret, and there is no outward proof of her guilt, she boldly denies it. Septuagint, “Such is the way of an adulterous woman, who, when she has committed the act, having washed herself, says she has done nothing amiss.” She forgets him who seeth in secret, and is quite content to escape detection at man’s eyes, and to assume the character of a virtuous wife, which popular report assigns to her.

Pro 30:21-23

Then follows a proverb concerning four things which are intolerable, examples of incongruous associations or positionstwo in the case of men, two in the case of women.

Pro 30:21

For three things the earth is disquieted; better, under three things the earth doth tremble, as if oppressed by an overwhelming borden. The form of expression does not allow us to think of an earthquake. “The earth” is equivalent to “the inhabitants thereof.” And for four which it cannot bear; or, under four it cannot stand (comp. Amo 7:10). These four evils destroy the comfort of social life, uproot the bonds of society, and endanger the safety of a nation.

Pro 30:22

For a servant when he reigneth; or, under a slave when he becometh king. This startling vicissitude was not uncommon in Eastern states; and even if the slave was not preferred to regal power, he was often advanced by unwise favouritism to high position, for which he was wholly unfitted, and which he used only to aggrandize himself at the expense and to the injury of others, This incongruity has been already noticed at Pro 19:10 (where see note). And a fool when he is filled with meat. “Fool” is here nabal, a low, profligate fellow, who is rich and without care. When such a one rises to high position, or has power over others, he becomes arrogant, selfish, unbearable (comp. Pro 19:9; Pro 28:12; Pro 29:2).

Pro 30:23

For an odious woman when she is married; or, under an unloved woman when she is married. The sentence does not refer to an unbeloved wife, a Leah, becoming the favourite, a Rachel; the expression, “when she is married,” can hardly have this sense; but the gnome speaks of a woman who has passed much of her life without love, having nothing about her attractive either in looks, attainments, or manner, and is consequently soured and ill-tempered. If such a one does at last win a husband, she uses her new position to vex those who formerly depreciated her, and to make them as miserable as she cam And a handmaid that is heir to her mistress. The maidservant that obtains her mistress’s property, either by supplanting her or by right of inheritance, is supposed to make a bad use of it, to become conceited, arrogant, and odious to all around her. The LXX. transposes the last two members of the comparison, placing the unloved woman in the fourth place as the most intolerable of all: “And if a maidservant should cast out (, Gen 21:10) her own mistress, and a hateful woman should obtain a good husband.”

Pro 30:24-28

Four things small and weak, and yet wise.

Pro 30:24

There be four things which are little upon the earth, in contrast with the intolerable pretensions of the last group. The Vulgate has minima; but the original is not superlative, which would not be true of some of the creatures named. But they are exceeding wise; “quick of wit, wise,” the participle meaning “rendered wise, cunning” (Delitzsch). The Septuagint and Vulgate translate in the comparatives. “These are wiser than the wise,” the instincts of these animals being more marvellous than human wisdom.

Pro 30:25

The ants are a people not strong. The ant is proposed as an example to the sluggard (Pro 6:6, etc.). He calls the ants a people, am, because they live in a community, and have authorities which they obey, and their actions are regulated by certain definite laws. So Joel (Joe 1:6) calls the locusts a nation, and Homer (‘Iliad,’ 2.87) speaks of , “the tribes of thronging bees.” Yet they prepare their meat in the summer. In countries where ants hybernate the object of this commended foresight is mistaken; but the statement, as that in Pro 6:6-8, is in accordance with the popular belief of the day, and serves well to point the moral intended. We know certainly that in Europe these insects fill their nests with heterogeneous articlesgrain, seeds, husks, etc; not as stores to be consumed in the winter, but for warmth and comfort’s sake. Scripture is not intended to teach science; it speaks of such matters phenomenally, with no attempt at a precision which would not have been understood or appreciated by contemporaries. But in the present case more careful observation has confirmed the correctness of the asset. tions in our proverbs. In countries where, ants do not hybernate, they do make granaries for themselves in the summer, and use these supplies as food in the winter months (see note on Pro 6:8).

Pro 30:26

The conies are but a feeble folk. The term “coney” (cuniculus) is applied to the rabbit, but this is not the animal here intended; and indeed rabbits are not found in Palestine. The word shaphan designates the Hyrax Syriacus, called by some the rock badger. The coney, says Dr. Geikie (‘Holy Land and Bible,’ 2.90), “abounds in the gorge of the Kedron, and along the foot of the mountains west of the Dead Sea. It is of the size of the rabbit, but belongs to a very different order of animals, being placed by naturalists between the hippopotamus and rhinoceros. Its soft fur is brownish-grey over the back, with long black hairs rising through this lighter coat, and is almost white on the stomach; the tail is very short. The Jews, who were not scientific, deceived by the motion of its jaws in eating, which is exactly like that of ruminant animals, fancied it chewed the cud, though it did not divide the hoof, and so they put its flesh amidst that which was forbidden. It lives in companies, and chooses a ready-made cleft in the rocks for its home, so that, though the conies are but a ‘feeble folk,’ their refuge in the rocks gives them a security beyond that of stronger creatures. They are, moreover, ‘exceeding wise,’ so that it is very hard to capture one. Indeed, they are said, on high authority, to have sentries regularly placed on the look out while the rest are feeding; a squeak from the watchman sufficing to send the flock scudding to their holes like rabbits. The coney is found in many parts of Palestine, from Lebanon to the Dead Sea.” In the rocks. This fact is noticed in Psa 104:18. The Septuagint calls them here and Psa 104:18, also in Le Psa 11:6 and Deu 14:7. This notion of the animal as a kind of little pig is not more accurate than that of St. Jerome, who renders the term by lepusculus.

Pro 30:27

The locusts have no king (Pro 6:7), yet they show discipline, guidance, and order. They go forth all of them by bands; so that Joel (Joe 2:7, Joe 2:8) speaks of them as a well-ordered army, as it were men of war, marching every one on his ways, not entangling their ranks, walking every one in his path. Septuagint, “The locusts are without a king, yet march at one command in good order.”

Pro 30:28

The spider taketh hold with her hands. Semamith or shemamith is some sort of lizard, probably the gecko. , Septuagint; stellio, Vulgate. The Authorized Version alludes either to its fanlike foot, which enables it to run up walls and to cling to ceilings, or to its power of exuding from its feet a certain poisonous humour by which it catches flies and other insects. But the above translation, as well as that of the Septuagint and the Vulgate manibus nititur, is incorrect, The first line, in accordance with the method pursued in the three cases previously, ought to give some expression denoting weakness or littleness, whereas by the above rendering it is rather strength and activity that are signified. The translation therefore should run, as in the Revised Version margin, “The lizard thou canst seize with thy hand,” and yet it is in king’s palaces. Small as it is, and easy to catch and crush, it is agile and clever enough to make its way into the very palace of the king, and to dwell there. Septuagint, “And the lizard, supporting itself by its hands, and being easy to catch (), dwelleth in kings’ strongholds.” This combines the two interpretations given above. St. Gregory takes the lizard as the type of the simple, earnest man, who often succeeds better than the clever. “Many that are quick-witted, while they grow slack from carelessness, continue in bad practices, and the simple folk, which have no wing of ability to stand them in stead, the excellency of their practice bears up to attain to the walls of the eternal kingdom. Whereas, then, ‘the lizard climbeth with his hands,’ he ‘is in kings’ palaces;’ in that the plain man, by earnestness of right practice, reaches that point whereunto the man of ability never mounts” (‘Moral.,’ 6.12, Oxford transl.). The ancient expositors see in these verses a presentation of the Church of God, weak on its human side and despised by men, yet exceeding wise (1Co 1:27)like the ant, laying up treasure in heaven, providing for death and eternity; like the coney, making the Rock her refuge; like the locusts, moving forward a mighty army in battle array; like the lizard, active in movement, holding the truth tenaciously, and dwelling in the palace of the great King.

Pro 30:29-31

Four things of stately presence.

Pro 30:29

There be three things which go well (rob); are of stately and majestic carriage. Comely in going; “stately in going.”

Pro 30:30

A lion which is strongest among beasts. The word here used for “lion,” laish, occurs elsewhere only in Job 4:11 and Isa 30:6. The LXX. renders it, “a lion’s whelp.” “Strongest” is gibbor, a mighty one, a hero. Turneth not away for any; Septuagint, “turneth not away, nor feareth any beast.” So Job describes the war horse, “He mocketh at fear, and is not dismayed, neither turneth he back from the sword” (Job 39:22).

Pro 30:31

A greyhound; (zarzir mothnayim), “girt in the loins” ( , Symmachus), an expression very vague, and, as the name of an animal, occurring nowhere else in the Old Testament. In post-biblical Hebrew zarzir is found as the name of some pugnacious bird, and the Septuagint, Vulgate, and Syriac call it here the cock. So also Aquila and Theodotion. But if the word is onomatopoetic, it would seem to apply with more propriety to one of the raven tribe; and then what is to be made of the allusion to the loins? And how comes it that amid the quadrupeds in the gnome a bird should suddenly be introduced, as one stately in going? It seems certain that some quadruped is here meant, but what? What animal has as characteristic tight-girded loins or slender or active loins? There are, indeed, many that might be so designated, but none that, as far as we know, appropriated this unique appellation. Hence various opinions are held by commentators concerning the identification. The zebra, say some, with its stripes, which may be thus denoted; the war horse, say others, comparing Job 39:19, Job 39:25, and considering the trappings with which, as we see in ancient sculptures, he was adorned; others, again, fix upon the leopard as the beast intended. But that of the Authorized Version seems, on the whole, to be the most likely rendering, the slender, agile make of the greyhound having given cause for the appropriation of the term used in the text. Delitzsch compares the German word windspiel, which designates the greyhound without the necessity of using the full term, wiadspielhund. The only points which may be considered adverse to this view are these two, viz. the ill repute in which dogs were held by the Hebrews, Scripture consistently disparaging and despising them; and the fact that, as far as we have information, the Jews did not use dogs for hunting purposes, though nowadays the Arabs keep a kind of Persian greyhound for sporting, and Assyrian monuments have familiarized us with the appearance of hounds employed in the chase of the lion and the wild ox. Agur may be referring to what he has seen elsewhere, but what was well known to these for whom he wrote. Gesenius suggests (253), “a warrior girt in the loins,” which is adopted by Wordsworth, and gives a suitable idea. This would correspond with the king in the last line; but the interpretation is quite arbitrary, and supported by no ancient authority, resting on the fact that girding the loins is always spoken of human beings. The cock strutting among his hens is, as we have hinted, the idea which approves itself to many ancient translators. Thus the Septuagint, . We are not disposed to adept this identification, more especially as common poultry were unknown in Palestine till long after Solomon’s time. Certainly what we call cocks and hens, or barn door fowls, are never mentioned in the Old Testament. and seem to have been introduced from Persia after the rise of the Persian empire. The latest editors decide for the war horse; but the conflicting claims cannot be reconciled, and the matter must be left undetermined. An he goat also. This is a very natural comparison, as the stately manner in which the he goat (tay-ish, “the butter”) heads the flock has been always observed. The LXX. expresses this, paraphrasing, “and the he goat leading the herd.” “Flocks of goats are very numerous in Palestine at this day, as they were in former ages. We see them everywhere on the mountains, in smaller or larger numbers; at times also along with sheep, as one flock, in which ease it is usually a he goat that is the special leader of the whole, walking before it as gravely as a sexton before the white flock of a church choir” (Geikie, ‘Holy Land,’ 1:232). A king, against whom there is no rising up; Vulgate, nec est rex qui resistat ei, which ought to mean “and a king whom nothing resists,” but can scarcely be compelled to produce this meaning without violence. The difficulty in the sentence arises from the word , which in the above rendering is regarded as composed of the negative al, and kum, the infinitive, “to rise against, oppose.” But this is contrary to grammatical usage, and would be a solecism. To some it has seemed that a proper name was intended, and they have invented a King Alkum or Alkimos, whom they suppose to have been celebrated in or after Solomon’s time. Many modern commentators take the word to be an Arabic expression, consisting of al, the definite article, and kum, “people,” and consider the meaning to be “a king with whom is the people,” i.e. surrounded by his people or army. This is certainly a stately sight, and may well stand parallel to the hero lion among beasts, and the bold he goat at the head of the flock. Other Arabic expressions may probably be found elsewhere in this chapter; e.g. Job 39:15, Job 39:16, Job 39:17, aluka, etc. Septuagint, “a king haranguing before a nation ( ).” This passage, again, has been taken in a spiritual sense as referring to Christ, the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Warrior girt with the sword, the Leader of the flock, the King of kings.

Pro 30:32, Pro 30:33

Agur’s last proverb, exhorting to discreet demeanour.

Pro 30:32

If thou hast done foolishly in lifting up thyself (Num 16:3). If thou hast had the folly to be arrogant, proud, and overbearing in conduct. Or if thou hast thought evil, lay thine hand upon thy mouth. The verb zamam, though possibly used in a bad sense, “to devise evil,” is more suitably rendered “to meditate,” “purpose;” so here it is the thought of lifting up one’s self that is censured, the act and the thought being contrasted. Hast thou acted arrogantly, or even only meditated doing so, restrain yourself, keep silence (Job 21:5; Job 40:4). St. Jerome gives a different rendering, enforcing another lesson, “There is one who shows himself a fool after he is raised to high position; if he had had understanding, he would have laid his hand on his mouth.” Septuagint, “If thou give thyself up to mirth, and stretch forth thy hand in a quarrel, thou wilt be dishonoured.” Insensate mirth and a quarrelsome disposition alike lead to disgrace. St. Gregory (‘Moral.,’ 30.10) applies the Vulgate rendering to antichrist, “For he in truth will be lifted up on high, when he will feign that he is God. But he will appear a fool when lifted up on high, because he will fail in his very loftiness through the coming of the true Judge. But if he had understood this, he would have laid his hand on his mouth; that is, if he had foreseen his punishment, when he began to be proud, having been once fashioned aright, he would not have been raised up to the boastfulness of such great pride” (Oxford transl.).

Pro 30:33

Surely the churning of milk bringeth forth butter. The same word, mits, is used for “churning,” “wringing,” and “forcing;” it means “pressure” in all the cases, though with a different application. At the present day milk is churned in the East by enclosing it in a leathern bottle, which is then suspended in the air and jerked to and fro till the butter is produced. This process could scarcely be called “pressure,” though, possibly, the squeezing of the udder is meant, as the Septuagint and Vulgate take it. But most probably the reference is to cheese, the term used, chemah, being applied indifferently to curdled milk and cheese. To produce this substance, the curdled milk is put into little baskets of rush or palm leaves, tied closely, and then pressed under heavy stones. What the proverb says is that, as the pressure applied to milk produces cheese, and as pressure applied to the nose brings blood, so the pressure of wrath bringeth forth strife; the irritation and provocation of anger occasion quarrels and contentions. They say in Malabar, remarks Lane, “Anger is a stone cast into a wasp’s nest.” Septuagint, “Press out milk, and there shall be butter; and if thou violently squeeze the nostrils, blood will come forth; and if thou draw forth words, there will come forth quarrels and strifes.” It is the third clause which is important, and to which the others lead up; and the verse must be taken in connection with the preceding, as enforcing the duty of self-restraint and silence under certain circumstances. Some of the Fathers, commenting on the Vulgate rendering (Qui fortiter premit ubera ad eliciendum lac, exprimit butyrum; et qui vehementer emungit, elicit sanguinem), apply the passage to the handling of the Word of God. Thus St Gregory (‘Moral.,’ 21.3), “Divine sentences require sometimes to be viewed externally, sometimes to be explored internally. For we ‘press the udder strongly’ when we weigh with minute understanding the word of sacred revelation, by which way of pressing whilst we seek milk, we find butter, because, whilst we seek to be fed with but a little insight, we are anointed with the abundance of interior richness. Which, nevertheless, we ought neither to do too much, nor at all times, lest, while milk is sought for from the udder, there should follow blood. For very often, persons, whilst they sift the words of sacred revelation more than they ought, fall into a carnal apprehension. For ‘he draws forth blood who wringeth violently.’ Since that is rendered carnal which is perceived by an overgreat sifting of the spirit” (Oxford transl.).

HOMILETICS

Pro 30:1-4

The weary search for God

If we read Pro 30:1 thus: “Words of Agur the son of the Princess of Masse. The man’s saying, I have wearied myself about God, wearied myself about Godthen did I withdraw!” we are led to the contemplation of one who has grown tired and despairing in a hopeless search for God.

I. IT IS NATURAL FOR MAN TO SEEK GOD. Agur appears to have lived far away from the borders of the favoured land of Israel. If he was a Jew, he was one in exile, separated from the home of his people. If he was an Ishmaelite, he was even outside the covenant of Israel, and in that case we have the striking picture of an Arab of antiquity anticipating Mahomet in breaking from the idolatry of his fathers. Like Balsam, like Job, this resident in a heathen land looks up to the true God. St. Paul spoke to the Athenians of those who could “seek God, if haply they might feel after him, and find him” (Act 17:27); and St. Peter could acknowledge God’s acceptance of all who look to him truly, no matter what race they might belong to (Act 10:35). The natural search of the soul for God springs from certain great fundamental facts, viz.:

1. God is the Father of all men.

2. All men need God.

3. All men are separated from God by sin, and therefore must feel naturally at a distance.

The world needs God. But the world has lost God. Hence the natural search for God.

II. THE NATURAL SEARCH FOR GOD RESULTS IN WEARINESS. This is not the weariness of protracted thinking, the reaction from high mental tension. It is worse than that; it is the weariness of a long and apparently fruitless search. Man cannot by searching find out God. God does not appear to respond to the inquiry of the seeking mind. Even to the wisest of the Greeks he was “an Unknown God” (Act 17:23). For God is not visible to the natural reason, nor is he ever seen excepting when he reveals himself. Now, there is no weariness like that of a long and hopeless search. The sickness of despair then begins to tire the soul. Such weariness drives men at last to abandon the vain pursuit. Agur said, “Then did I withdraw!” He gave up the inquiry. This is the refuge of agnosticism.

III. THE GREATNESS OF GOD‘S WORKS MAKES THE SEARCH FOR HIM A WEARINESS. How vast is his created universe! No man can reach up to the starry altitudes of heaven, or dive into the deep mysteries of antiquity, to find the scope and range of the Divine activity. The tremendous energy of nature overwhelms us. Science can investigate its laws, and in a measure make use of its forces; but they come out of a terrible darkness, and they transcend the control of so feeble a creature as man. Agur did not simply distress himself with his own fruitless thinking. He knew something of the history of philosophy, and yet he had not been able to find one inquirer who had solved the terrible enigma over which his own heart was breaking.

IV. THE SEARCH FOR GOD Is SATISFIED IN THE REVELATION OF CHRIST. St. Paul said to the Athenians, “Whom therefore ye ignorantly worship, him declare I unto you” (Act 17:23). This is not an authoritative declaration of a dogma of Divinity.

1. The revelation of Christ is such that we can see it and understand it for ourselves. We can see that God is in Christ by observing the stamp of the Divine on his countenancethe signs of God in his life and work. Then in knowing Christ we know God (Joh 14:9).

2. Moreover, this revelation of God in Christ flashes a light on the huge mystery of the universe, and helps us to find God in nature.

3. The reconciliation between man and God, effected by the cross of Christ, removes the dark barrier of sin, which is the greatest hindrance to the soul in its search for God, and brings us into the presence of God, where we can behold “the beatific vision.”

Pro 30:5, Pro 30:6

The purity of God’s words

I. THE REFUGE FROM VAIN SPECULATION IS PRACTICAL REVELATION. The search for God in thought and nature has ended in weariness. But Agur does not subside into agnosticism, much less does he renounce all higher thinking as “vanity of vanities,” and plunge into Sadducean worldliness and Epicurean materialism. On the contrary, though he gives up his ambitious quest with a sigh of disappointment, he learns to take a humbler path, on which he finds that God has shed light. The mysteries of pure theology are wrapped in clouds, but the path of man’s duty and the way of practical religion are illumined by the light of God’s revealed truth. This truth consists in more than those “regulative ideas,” which are all that Mansel would have us expect to know, for it corresponds to the actual; it is fact and law of God’s real spiritual world. The Word of God is with us in the Bible and in Christ. In this Word the weary seeker after light may not find a star-spangled heaven, but he will see “a lamp to his feet” (Psa 119:105).

II. THE REVELATION OF GOD IS PURE.

1. It is free from error. This is not a matter of the language of the Bible, which is but the case that enshrines the holy revelation. The frame is not the picture. When we crack the nut we find that the kernel is sound and flawless. The spiritual contents of revelation are infallible.

2. It is free from moral corruption. Prurient minds have affected to be shocked at immoral stories in the Bible. But what is most wonderful about the Scripture writers in respect to such matters is that, though they are bold enough to touch the most repulsive subjects, they never soil their fingers, nor do they ever soil the minds of their readers. Only impure minds draw impure suggestions from the Bible, and such minds may find them anywhere. The Bible reveals man to himself, and declares God’s estimate of sin. It cannot cover over the foulest evil with a cloak of social propriety. The horrible things must be exposed in the interest of purity, that they may be denounced, and the doers of them put to shame.

III. THE PURITY OF GOD‘S WORD SHOULD INSPIRE TRUST AND REVERENCE.

1. It should inspire trust. For “he is a Shield to them that put their trust in him.” We cannot understand all mysteries; the deep counsels of God must ever lie beneath our most searching inquiry; but we have light in God’s words for our help and guidance. The purity of this light is a security against danger. It will not allure us into error, and it will not permit us to live in sin unrebuked and unwarned. Therefore the light is guiding, healing, saving. With such a revelation we can afford to endure the insoluble character of great mysteries of theology. When vexed, perplexed, and wearied out, we can turn to the God who has thus made himself known to us, and quietly rest in his sheltering care.

2. It should also inspire reverere. “And not thou unto his words.” The truth of God is too sacred for man to be permitted to tamper with it. This is a great warning that men have rarely heeded. We may think and utter our thoughts. But the fatal mistake is when we put forth our speculations as though they were a part of God’s revelation. This is a common sin of authoritative theology. Men’s opinionsharmless enough in themselves, perhapshave been added to the Scripture truths, and set before the world as unquestionable and Divine. The interpretation of Scripture has been made as sacred as the text. Church dogma has claimed Divine authority. This is adding to God’s words, and the danger of it is

(1) Divine disapproval”lest he reprove thee;” and

(2) human disloyalty to truth”and thou be found a liar.”

Pro 30:8, Pro 30:9

Neither poverty nor riches.

A wise man here points out the danger of the two extremes of poverty and riches, and seeks for himself the happier middle position. In the present day the enormous wealth of one class and the hard penury of another suggest serious social questions, and raise alarms as to great possible dangers unless the terrible anomaly of this artificial condition is not remedied.

I. THE EVIL OF POVERTY. The thought is of extreme poverty, of absolute destitution, or. at least, of that precarious livelihood that is always on the verge of want, and is therefore oppressed with an ever-haunting fear of the distress which can never be quire out of sight. Now, what is to be remarked here is that the great evil of excessive poverty pointed out in the passage before us is moral in character. The sufferings of perjury are sad to contemplate. Those of us who have never known what it is to be really hungry cannot understand the pangs of the starving. More tearful must be the trouble of parents who see their children crying for bread and cannot satisfy them. Yet the worst evil is not this suffering; it is the moral degradation that follows it. Wolf-like hunger assimilates its victims to the nature of the wolf. It is hard to be honest when in want of food. The temptations of the poor are frightful to contemplate. It is wonderful that there is so little crime, seeing that there is so much poverty. The grinding cares of poverty tend to wear the soul out, and blind its vision to spiritual truth. The patience and good behaviour of the dumb, suffering multitudes of the distressed is indeed a sight to move our sympathy and excite our admiration.

II. THE EVIL OF WEALTH. The temptation of riches is not very unlike that of poverty in its character, but more deadly. Both extremes tempt to worldlinesspoverty to worldly care, riches to worldly satisfaction. The “care of this world” and “the deceitfulness of riches” stand together as the thorns that choke the good seed (Mat 12:22). But riches goes further. It tempts a man to dispense with God. Poverty tempts to theft, often, indeed, with extenuating circumstances. But riches tempts to scornful atheism. Christ saw this danger when he said, “How hardly shall they that have riches enter into the kingdom of Grail” (Mar 10:23). On the other hand, when we see rich men who have conquered the exceptional temptations of their position, and who live a humble and useful Christian life, devoting their talents to the service of Christ, we should acknowledge that such victors over the world are deserving of especial honour.

III. THE CHOICE OF A MIDDLE COURSE. We are here reminded of Aristotle’s doctrine of “the mean.” There are circumstances in which the true mean is not just the middle way between two diverse policies. The lowering of the standard of right and wrong that comes from the peace-loving tendency to accept a compromise is disastrous to all conscientious conduct. But now we have to do with a middle course between two external states, both of which are dangerous. If Christian people understood their mission in the world aright, in its breath and humanity, they would know that the call to preach the gospel of the kingdom includes the inculcation of those social principles which tens to blot out the present ugly picture of extreme poverty set off by extreme wealth. A life that is neither crushed by care nor intoxicated by riches is the life in which it is least difficult to serve God and do right. Therefore we should labour to help on a state of society in which more of such lives will be possible.

Pro 30:12, Pro 30:13

Self-deception

Self-deception in regard to the guilt of sin is the most common delusion of minds that have not been spiritually enlightened. However much men may know and acknowledge about themselves in other respects, on this vital point they are most tempted to go astray.

I. LET US CONSIDER THE TEMPTATION TO SELF–DECEPTION. People have strong motives to think well of themselves.

1. Conscience is so powerful and urgent that few men are able to brave a confession of sin before its awful bar, and yet continue in the practice of sin with equanimity. For the sake of the peace of his mind, everybody naturally desires to stand well with his own conscience. Therefore there is a strong motive to lie to it, hoodwink it, cajole it; or, if these measures fail, to gag it, drown it, brand, or crush, or stamp it outif possible to murder it.

2. Pride also makes a man desire his own self-approval. The “lofty eyes” are disinclined to see any evil within. It is inwardly humbling to hear, amidst the plaudits of a bamboozled world, a keen inner voice exclaiming, “Thou art a hypocrite, a liar, a knave!”

3. Fear of coming judgment drives a man into a refuge of lies rather than to remain out in the open, exposed to the pitiless storm. It is absurd, ostrich-like to hide one’s head in the sand; but men are not always logical in their conduct. The feeling of danger disappears when a man persuades himself that he is innocent.

II. LET US INQUIRE INTO THE CAUSES OF THIS SELF–DECEPTION.

1. It springs from inclination. The temptation to flatter one’s self helps to produce the delusion. Thus “the wish is father to the thought.”

2. It is aided by a low standard of morals. Only when such a standard is prevalent and accepted will any sinful generation be capable of appearing pure in its own eyes. The higher the standard, the greater the feeling of guilt. Therefore the most holy men, being also the most spiritually enlightened, have the deepest consciousness of sin.

3. It is further encouraged by the example of others. There is a whole “generation” of these self-deluded people. Each man finds his neighbour as bad as himself. A single black sheep in the fold is marked by contrast with its fellows, and cannot but acknowledge its abnormal colour, but a whole flock of black sheep may readily forget that it is not white.

III. LET US OBSERVE THE EVIL OF THIS SELF–DECEPTION. The generation is pure in its own eyes, but it is not washed from its filthiness.

1. Self-deception does not cleanse. It only asserts what is false; it goes no way to make its assertion true. It rather tends the other way, because there can be no effectual cleansing of the soul without confession and repentance.

2. It does not hide sin. It is not even a cloak thrown over what remains as foul as ever, though no longer visible. The generation may walk with lofty eyes, but its pride only deludes itself. Others can see the shame in spite of all the guilty people’s loud protestations. Self-deception does not lead to a deluding of God.

3. Self-deception must be exposed and punished. It is itself sinful. For the sinner to walk with a lofty gait is for him to court his doom. The safer course is to follow the example of the publican, who would not so much as lift up his eyes to heaven while he smote his breast and cried, “God be merciful to me a sinner!” (Luk 18:13).

Pro 30:18, Pro 30:19

The mystery of love

Agur sees four things that cannot be traced out.

1. “The way of an eagle in the air.” No track is followed by the king of birds as it cleaves the invisible fluid and takes its own wild course from crag to crag.

2. “The way of a serpent upon a rock.” Creeping out of a dark cranny, the reptile lies and basks on the hot stone, and then at the approach of an intruder darts into another crannyits course unknown.

3. “The way of a ship in the midst of the sea.” We talk of the ocean highway, but there is no beaten track, no worn course. The ship cuts the surface for a moment, and then the waves roll over its path, and in a short time every trace of its passage is lost in the wash of the waters. So it is with the fourth mystery. The course of human love cannot be predicted or explained. It cannot be made to follow rule and precedent or to correspond to fond parental wishes. Love will go its own way free as the eagle in the air, unsuspected as the serpent on the rock, untracked as the ship in the sea. The three earlier wonders lead on to the fourth, and help to give colour and weight to it. The whole sentence thus gathers up its force into a climax. Nothing is so wonderful in the natural world as the great mystery of love. This may take three forms

I. THE WILD FREEDOM OF THE EAGLE‘S FLIGHT. Love can never be coerced. A forced marriage cannot be a love match. It is natural that man and maid should learn to love one another of their own accord, by the drawing of mutual sympathy. Friends may guide, warn, encourage, or hinder. But a matter which concerns the lifelong happiness of two souls cannot be well arranged by worldly contrivances. Nevertheless, love that is untamed and utterly uncontrolled may lead to frightful mistakes, to folly and sin and shame. The eagle is a wild and dangerous birda terror to the helpless lamb. Love becomes a cursed thing, near to hatred, when it is no better than a wild, unfettered passion.

II. THE SUBTLE SECRET OF THE SERPENT‘S TRAIL. This is a very ugly picture, from which we start back shuddering and in horror. There is a snake-like cunning in selfish lust that wickedly usurps the sacred name of love, when it is really the very incarnation of hellish venom, seeking to allure its prey to destruction. All low, carnal lust is of the type of the serpent. The wild passion that follows the eagle’s flight may be dangerous, but the cold, loveless course of deliberate vice is deadly as that of a viper.

III. THE UNCERTAIN VOYAGE OF THE SHIP. The ship is a home on the waters. She carries freight and passengerswealth and life. She sails from one port and she seeks another in a far-off land. But she cannot see her distant haven; she knows not what fierce tempests she may have to encounter; her way is uncertain and dangerous. Married life is a voyage over unknown waters. But where there is true love the vessel is well ballasted; she carries a cargo richer than untold ingots of gold; her crew work peacefully without fear of mutiny. Under such circumstances, though there is mystery, hearts that trust in God need fear no shipwreck of love and happiness.

Pro 30:24-28

Four weak things, and the greatness of them

The four little creatures that are here mentioned all illustrate the wonderful way in which the disadvantages of weakness may be overcome by some countervailing quality. In the spiritual world Christianity teaches us to look for the triumph of weaknessthe weak things of the world confounding the things which are mighty (1Co 1:27). Now, we have illustrations from nature for the same principle. Each of the four creatures teaches us its own special lesson, as each conquers its weakness by some separate and distinctive quality. The ant succeeds by foresight, the coney by finding shelter, the locust by organization, and the lizard by quiet persistency.

I. THE ACHIEVEMENTS OF FORESIGHT.

1. This is a triumph of wind. The ant is in some respects the most wonderful creature in the world; for it seems to be about equal in intelligence to the elephant, which is not only the greatest, but also the most intelligent of the larger animals. A bull, so immensely greater than an ant in body, is far smaller in mind. Similarly, man’s lordship over the animal world is a triumph of mental power. The driver is weaker in body than the horse he drives, but he has a stronger mind. We shall triumph in the world just in proportion as we develop our inner life.

2. This is a triumph of industry. The ant rebukes the sluggard (Pro 6:6).

3. It is a triumph of patience. The ant toils for the future. Herein is its true strength. Men who care only for the passing moment are shallow and weak. We are strong in proportion as we live in the future.

II. THE SAFETY OF A SOUND SHELTER. “The conies are but a feeble folk,” and they have not the compensating intelligence of the ants. But their instinct leads them to live among the rocks, and hide themselves in dark caves and inaccessible crevices. Thus the strength of the hills is theirs. When there is no hope of holding our ground in the open field, we may find shelter in the Rock of Ages. If souls have their instincts in a healthy condition, these will drive them to the true shelter, and there weakness will be safe.

III. THE TRIUMPH OF ORGANIZATION. Though the locusts have no king, they are able to make successful marches over miles of country, and to completely devastate the lands they visit. They do not waste their time by flying hither and thither, and by opposing one another. They all move on in solid phalanx. This instinctive order secures success. It teaches us that the welfare of the individual must be subordinate to that of the community. If a small stream has to be crossed, the myriads of locusts who are so unfortunate as to be in the van of the mighty army fall in and fill up the bed till they make a causeway that can be used by their fellows. The victory of man is got through the suffering and death of many self-sacrificing heroes. In the Church the cause of Christ will best triumph when all Christians move together in harmony, all seeking to win the world for the kingdom of heaven.

IV. THE SUCCESS OF PERSISTENCY. The little lizard is found in king’s palaces because he can stick to the walls, and so run into unlooked for places out of the way of men. It is a great thing to be able to hold on. Quiet perseverance wins many a victory. Patient endurance is crowned in the end with glorious success. In the highest things, “he that endureth unto the end, the same shall be saved” (Mar 13:13).

Pro 30:29-31

Fourfold triumph

Each of the four here brought before us excites admiration for a successful course. As in former illustrations, the images rise up to a climax, and what is exhibited separately in the earlier ones is united and completed in the final image.

I. A TRIUMPHANT COURSE EXCITES EMULATION.

1. True success is good. There are various forms of success. Some are more disgraceful than failure. A low end easily won, or a desirable goal reached by foul means, gives a worthless and even a detestable victory. But when both means and end are good, there is something admirable in success.

2. This success is continuous. The most worthy triumph is not that of a sudden victory snatched at the end of a long, doubtful contest, but the carrying out of a course that is good throughouta constant series of small daily victories over danger. Thus the lion is admired, not merely because he can bring down his prey by means of a long chase, or after patiently waiting for it in ambush, but because “he turneth not away for any,” and of all four the excellence is that they “go well.” With every man the true note of triumph is that he “goes well” day by day along the path of duty.

3. This success is measured by the difficulties overcome. We gauge strength by what it can do, and the best standard may not give visible results in acquisition. The proof may be seen more in triumph over obstacles. He who persists through all hardship and danger enduring to the end, and faithful unto death, is the true soldier of Christ.

II. A TRIUMPHANT COURSE MAY BE VARIOUSLY RUN. The good and admirable may be of different forms. Success of the highest kind will be got by each using his own talents, not by any vainly imitating those of another. The lion cannot copy the goat’s agility, nor the greyhound the lion’s strength. Four methods of success are here suggested.

1. Success may be won by indomitable energy. This is the characteristic of the lion. He is strong, and he “turneth not away for any.”

2. It may be got by swiftness. The greyhound is a feeble creature compared to the lion. Its glory is in its speed. There is a victory for nimbleness of mind as well as of body.

3. It may be reached by agility, The hound can fly like the wind over the plain; and the he goat can pick its way among the crags of the precipice and climb to dizzy heights. They are not like the eagle that soars on its wings, for the quadruped must always have some foothold, but with this it can stand without fear in the most precarious positions. Skilful agility will enable one to triumph over difficulties, escape snares and pitfalls, and rise to daring heights.

4. It may be attained by human qualities. Man is feeble as a coney compared to the lion, slow as a tortoise in the presence of the greyhound, lame and timorous beside that audacious mountaineer the goat. But he can master and outdo all these creatures by the use of mental and spiritual powers.

III. A TRIUMPHANT COURSE WILL DEVELOP UNIQUE CHARACTERISTICS. Each of the four is known by its success, as none would be known if the animals were caged in a menagerie, and the king left to enjoy empty pageantry. The kingly faculty is not only recognized on a throne. As the power to govern, it is witnessed in business, in society, and in intellectual regions. There are born kings. We see how stirring times bring such men to the front as the Civil Wars revealed Cromwell. The noblest earthly career is to be a true leader of men. He who stands at the head of the great human family was and is a Divine King, and his triumph is in his ruling even through shame and death.

Pro 30:32

Self-suppression

I. WHEN SELF–SUPPRESSION IS NEEDED. It is not always equally demanded of us. There are times for expression, times when we should break reserve and give forth freely the thoughts and purposes of our souls. But other times demand peculiar self-suppression.

1. In rebuke of foolish vanity. “If thou hast done foolishly in lifting up thyself.” A magnified image of self needs to be reduced. Too much pretension must be humbled. Selfish ambition must be cast down.

2. In restraint of evil thinking. “Or if thou hast thought evil.” Jesus Christ has taught us that evil thinking is sin (Mat 5:28). But the sooner the sin is checked the better, and it can be best checked before it has emerged in word or deed. Expression emphasizes an evil thought. A publication of it makes it hurtful to others. The viper brood should be scotched in the nest.

II. WHAT SELF–SUPPRESSION WILL EFFECT.

1. It will prevent future evil. We cannot undo the past; we cannot deny our inner self. But at least we may seek for grace that the sin may proceed no further.

2. It will prepare for better conduct. In itself it is but negative. It has the merit of silence, it is a “masterly inactivity.” We must stop before we can turn back. There is therefore a moment of silence, cessation, even death, in the act of conversion. We cannot proceed at once from evil living to good service. St. Paul had his period of silence in Arabia. It would be an immense gain in this noisy age if we could practise more of the golden virtue.

III. HOW SELF–SUPPRESSION MAY BE ATTAINED. “Lay thine hand upon thy mouth.” To the noisy and expressive this is no more easy than it is for the glutton to “put a knife to” his “throat” when he is eating “with a ruler” (Pro 23:1, Pro 23:2). Frank and open natures are not able readily to recognize the merits of reticence, while, on the other hand, reserved and secretive natures shrink from a requisite confession.

1. There must be a perception of the evil of giving unrestrained went to one‘s thoughts and desires. Many people do not perceive the dangers of speech. They blurt out the most unseemly things where the sensitive shrink into silence. But a horror of the harm that may be done by heedless words will assist in the cultivation of a habit of self-restraint.

2. There must be energy of will. The unrestrained nature that is a victim to every rousing impression is no better than an unwalled city open to the invasion of the first chance foe (Pro 25:28). Now, it is a work of Divine grace to strengthen the will so that the weak may acquire more control over themselves. At the first blush of it there seems to be more energy in noisy, bustling restlessness, while quiet self-restraint appears inert. But this results from a very superficial view of life. Nothing less than Heaven-sent grace can make us strong enough to keep silent under great provocation or to be still when the heart is boiling over with passion.

HOMILIES BY E. JOHNSON

Pro 30:1-6

Agur’s sayings: God’s Word the fountain of all wisdom

These are the words, probably, of a believer in Jehovah who was a stranger in a foreign land. Among the sworn foes of Israel and her faith, we have in him an example of Puritan rectitude, of unflinching fidelity to conscience, that is highly instructive. The purity of God’s eternal truth, and the safety of all believers in him (Pro 30:5),this is his simple and sublime leading theme.

I. THE BEING OF GOD AN UNUTTERABLE MYSTERY. (Pro 30:1.) In vain had he sought to explore the unfathomable secret of his essence, by searching to find out the Almighty unto perfection. It was higher than heavenwhat could he do? deeper than Hadeswhat could he know? This was substantially the confession, expressed in different forms, of all the great prophets. Compare the accounts of Isaiah’s consecration, Jeremiah’s and Ezekiel’s. True religion is rooted in this sense of the Divine mystery. All piety is shallow without it. In every conscious feeling, thought, aspiration, we are but travelling on the edge of a great abyss, moving towards an horizon which still recedes. In our deeper moments we are all mystics, and there are times when all talk about God seems babble, and we would fain take refuge in the “sacred silence of the mind.”

II. THE INTELLIGENCE OF MAN DULL AND INADEQUATE IN RELATION TO DIVINE THINGS. (Verses 2, 3.) No words are too self-contemptuous to express the sense of the immense gulf which separates our thought from God. Applied to definable objects, our intelligence scents bright and piercing; applied to the Infinite Might and Wisdom and Purity, no better than the vacant gaze of the ox in the pasture. Look into those beautiful brown eyes; there is a depth of pathos in them, but no “speculation,” no power to grasp the unity and law of things that print themselves in pictures on the retina. And what are we, though raised above the “creatures that lead a blind life within the brain,” but helpless gazers into infinity? Well did Sir Isaac Newton and all the great seers of science realize this feeling. Their consummate knowledge was, viewed on another side, consummate ignorance. They had not thereby attained absolute wisdom, nor “won the knowledge of the Holy.” There have been, indeed, modern philosophers who have proposed an “absolute philosophy;” but time has discovered the idleness of their “o’er-vaulting ambition,” and made a fable of their folly.

III. THE INACCESSIBLE IN NATURE RECOGNIZED. (Verse 4.) One of the first principles laid down by the great Goethe wasLearn to distinguish between the accessible and the inaccessible in nature to your thought. For want of this, theologians on the one hand, scientists on the other, have rushed into presumption in seeking to wrest the inscrutable secrets of nature from the hand of God. The unknowableness of the first beginnings of things was recognized by the ancient thinker. The height of heaven, the movements of winds and waves, the changes of the earth’s surface,all may be brought under law; but the word “law” conceals the greater mysterythe nature of the Lawgiver himself. God is not identical with law, any more than we are identical with speech. Law is but the partially understood speech of God to our intelligence. Examine all the sublime names which have been given to God in the course of revelation, in the process of religious thought; behind them all ties the unutterable and unthinkable Somewhat.

IV. THE SELF–REVELATION OF GOD RECOGNIZED. (Verse 5.)

1. To say that God is utterly unknowable is as great an error as to say that he is perfectly knowable by the human understanding: Such an admission must cut at the root of religion. On the contrary, religion implies revelation. Because God has spoken to us, we may speak to him; because he has stooped to us, we may rise towards him. In manifold waysthrough nature, through inspired men, through the Son, through the conscienceGod “has spoken to the world.” If this be denied, religion is an entire illusion.

2. The quality of his oral revelation. The writer is thinking of the oral and written Law. Because definite, articulate, it may be spoken of as the Word of God par excellence; but by no means are the indefinable and inarticulate revelations through nature to our spirit excluded. From every sight of beauty and every sound of music in the world we may derive unspoken messages of him “whose nature and whose name is Love.” And God’s Word is pure. The refined silver of the furnace is a favourite image of this, its quality. From the alloy of duplicity, flattery, hypocrisy, it is free. God deals sincerely with us. And, therefore, it is purifying. We behold the true life of the soul in its mirror.

3. The practical blessing of trust in him. He who speaks to us is to be trusted. And in this trust in One who is eternal and infallible, pure arid true, we have security. The Law or Word which declares his will is like a broad hand stretched above us to command, and, in commanding, to protect, reward, and bless.

4. The duty of strict reverence and loyalty towards his words. (Verse 6.) Much they leave unsaid, which it is not for us to supply. The general lesson seems to be respect for that element of reserve and mystery which lies behind all that is or may be known. We may “lie” against God by saying more than he has actually said to us by any channel of knowledge. To exceed or exaggerate seems ever a readier temptation than to keep within the modest bounds of positive declaration. And certain penalties await all distortions of the truth of every kind; they work themselves out in the conscience and the course of history.J.

Pro 30:7-9

The golden mean

I. THE WAY OF LIFE: TRUTH IS THE MEAN BETWEEN TWO EXTREMES. (Pro 30:8.) Extremes exist in logic; life shows that extremes meet, and that the path of sense in opinion and of safety in conduct lies intermediate between them.

II. GREAT INCHES ARE NOT IN THEMSELVES DESIRABLE. Not by the wise and religious man. They bring perils to the soul. Full of his gifts, it is tempted to deny the Giver. The deepest atheism springs from self-sufficiency. Prospering in the flesh, men are often impoverished in the spirit. “How deep a knowledge of the heart is implied in the petition of the Litany, ‘In all time of our wealth, good Lord deliver us’!” (Bridges).

III. EXTREME POVERTY MAY BE EQUALLY INJURIOUS TO THE SPIRITUAL LIFE. It tempts to dishonesty, even to perjury. “Too poor to be honest” is a cynical saying which points out a real danger. The old proverb, “It is hard for an empty sack to stand on end,” points the same way. More stinging still is the word, “Poor men have no souls.”

IV. THE GOLDEN MEAN IS THEREFORE TO BE DESIRED AND SOUGHT. (Comp. Php 4:11, Php 4:12; 1Ti 6:6-10.) Horace says, “Whoever loves the golden mediocrity is safe, free from the sordid misery of the tumble down dwelling, free from the envied hall in his sobriety” (‘Carm.,’ Pro 2:10). But let us be careful to note that the true state is to be found in the spirit itselfthe inward, not the outward sufficiency. “I have learned in whatsoever state I am, therewith to be content.” Rich in estate, yet poor in spirit; poor in estate, yet rich in grace;this is the true solution of the problem, the true object of pious prayers.J.

Pro 30:10

Caution in the use of the tongue

I. THE THOUGHTS ONE FEARS EXPRESS HIMSELF ONE MAY BE TEMPTED TO ELICIT FROM ANOTHER.

II. IT IS BASE TO TEMPT AN HONEST HEART TO THOUGHTS AND WORDS OF DISCONTENT. One of the most active forms of evil consists in the “putting into the head” of others feelings towards their employers or superiors which would not otherwise have arisen.

III. THE BITER MAY THUS BE BIT; THE TEMPTER THUS BRING A RECOIL UPON HIMSELF. (Comp. Pro 26:2)J.

Pro 30:11-14

Detestable phases of human character

I. THOSE UNGRATEFUL TO PARENTS. (Pro 30:11.) “Without natural affection.” Solon, asked why he had made no law against parricides, said that he could not conceive of any one so impious and cruel. In the Law of Moses the cursing of a parent was visited with the same punishment as the blaspheming of God (Le Pro 20:9; Pro 24:11-16; comp. Isa 45:9, Isa 45:10; 2Ti 3:2).

II. CRASS SELF–CONCEIT AND PRIDE. (Pro 30:12, Pro 30:13.) The Pharisees in the gospel (Mat 23:25-27), the Laodicean Church (Rev 3:17, Rev 3:18), are examples. But the character is a constant one, and reappears in every age as a foil to genuine Christianity. Compare Mozley’s powerful sermon on the Pharisees. But it was a noble Pharisee who learned, in the humility of Christ, to “have no confidence in the flesh” (Php 3:3).

III. PITILESS CRUELTY AND OPPRESSION. (Pro 30:14.) Wolves in human guise or in sheep’s clothing. Similar pictures are to be found in Psa 57:5; Psa 58:7; Isa 9:12; Jer 5:17; Jer 30:16, Jer 30:17. These pictures of the heart, its exceeding deceitfulness and desperate wickedness, should lead us to examine our own. The germs of all the world’s evil are to be found in these microcosmithese “little worlds.” When we know ourselves truly, the prayer will the more sincerely arise to him to whom all hearts are open, that he will cleanse the thoughts of our hearts by the inspiration of his Holy Spirit.J.

Pro 30:15, Pro 30:16

Reflections on the insatiable

I. THE EXTERNAL LIFE IS THE MIRROR OF THE INTERNAL. Our spirit finds analogies to itself in the objects of nature, of history, and in the general course of human life. And all that we observe there, in the great world, may serve as a light to reveal to us what passes here, in the world of each man’s heart.

II. IMAGES OF INSATIABLE APPETITE. Hades; the barren womb; the thirsty earth; the all-devouring fire. The vampire, or bloodsucker, seems to be intended in the first example; it is supposed to suck the blood of the sleeping by night.

III. THE SPIRIT OF MAN IS INSATIABLE. And whether this appetite is rightly or wrongly directed, upon this depends his weal or woe. It may be directed to what is perishable or perniciousto gold, power, pleasure, etc. Drunkenness is the commonest illustration of the insatiety of man’s nature. Or it may be directed to righteousness, to the. knowledge of the truth, to the enjoyment of the good; and then it carries the power and promise of the “endless life”J.

Pro 30:17

The punishment of unfilial conduct

I. THE DENUNCIATION IS IN FIGURATIVE FORM.

II. ITS FULFILMENT LITERALLY HAD BEEN A MATTER OF ACTUAL OBSERVATION.

III. THE GENERAL TRUTH MUST BE CARRIED INTO THE LIGHT OF CONSCIENCE. On the whole, as Bishop Butler soundly taught, the constitution of things tends to punish evil and reward good conduct.J.

Pro 30:18-20

The mystery of actions

I. THERE ARE ACTIONS WHICH, LIKE THE FLIGHT OF THE EAGLE, OR THE PASSAGE OF THE SHIP, LEAVE NO VISIBLE TRACE BEHIND. What seems to strike the mind of the simple-hearted Agur is the fact that criminal deeds may be committed and, seemingly, leave as little trace behind.

II. BUT THE MYSTERY AND SECRECY OF ALL ACTIONS ARE KNOWN TO GOD. We are naked and open to the eyes of him with whom we have to do. And God shall bring every secret work into judgment. Every act leaves its trace in the world of spirit.J.

Pro 30:21-23

Intolerable things

I. THE EXAMPLES.

1. The slave in authority. (Pro 30:22.) The inversion of objects is intolerable to the trained eye; things standing upside down, etc. So in social relations and in political Government belongs to the wise and the strong; the feeble in mind and the narrow in heart are emphatically the wrong men in the wrong place, in seats of power.

2. The self-satisfied fool. His fatuous smile is a satire upon himself and upon the condition of things which permits him to bask in so fantastic a paradise. Those are sights to make the “angels weep.”

3. The ill-tempered wife. (Pro 30:23.) She, again, is emphatically “out of place.” For home, in any sweet sense, is the place which woman’s presence makes a delight.

4. The ambitious maidservant. The effort to supplant, to grasp a place beyond one’s rights and deserts, hurts our intuitive perceptions of what is right. An Oriental proverb says, “Sit in your place, and none shall make you rise,” on which we have a pointed commentary from Christ in Luk 14:11, “He that humbleth himself shall be exalted.”

II. THE GENERAL LESSONS. Order and rank are Divine institutions. To overturn this is no work of the true reformer or friend of the social weal. Rule rests ultimately upon ability to rule; government, upon power; authority, upon wisdom. When these relations are actually reversed, society is disturbed, matters are unhappy. When they only seem to be reversed, there will be distress and discomfort in right minds, until the just order and the nominal state of things shall be restored.J.

Pro 30:24-28

The significance of little things

I. EXAMPLES.

1. The ant (Pro 30:25); tiny in frame, yet full of providence, making wise provision against the rainy day.

2. The hedgehog (“coney,” Pro 30:26); though feeble, finds compensation in the strength of the dwelling it selects.

3. The locust (Pro 30:27); a creature, as an individual, easily crushed, yet gaining immense force by union with others. Joel

(2) gives a splendid description of the raid of locusts under the figure of an invading army, with which the accounts of travellers in tropical lands may be closely compared.

4. The lizard (verse 28); another tender and feeble creature, nevertheless penetrates human dwellings, and makes itself at home in the palaces of kings.

II. LESSONS. The lower creatures show unconscious mind. What they do, apparently with blind mechanical impulse, is exemplary in many respects to us who have reason and will. The profoundest lessons may be derived from the lowliest things. Mr. Darwin’s work on ‘Worms’ shows how the most despised of creatures, by the very law of its being, labours for others and blesses a world. It is folly to seek to explore the heights of wisdom until we are familiar with what it teaches us in the little and he low. The “little flower in the crannied wall” contains in its life the secret and mystery of all existence.J.

Pro 30:29-31

Grandeur in natural objects

Our aesthetic as well as our teleological perceptions are appealed to in the objects of nature. Certain creatures express grandeur, sublimity, or beauty in their form and carriage.

I. EXAMPLES.

1. The lion. (Pro 30:30.) He is in nature and for art the very symbol of strength and prowess. Literally, he is the “hero among beasts,” and turns his magnificent front from the face of no foe.

2. The greyhound (Pro 30:31), with its slender form, is the very type of swiftness, which is another idea lying close to the sublime. His name (in German, Windspiel, or Windhund) compares him with the wind.

3. The goat; in its active capability, its nimble movement, and secure footing in dangerous places, gives another variety of the same idea.

II. A PARALLEL IN HUMAN LIFE. The king in his majesty should combine in his person and bearing the fearless brow of the lion, the swiftness of decision and action of the other animals. The ideal majesty of man includes in itself all lower perfections in the thought of the Creator. And every man should be taught to realize the royal dignity of his being in Christ. He is made a “little lower than the angels;” and God’s purpose cannot be fulfilled until we men rise to claim the glorious heritage of the ideal manhood.J.

Pro 30:32, Pro 30:33

Moral prudence

I. IT TEACHES THE CONTROL OF THE TONGUE. The folly and pride of the heart may be choked, if expression is denied them on the tongue. No evil or foolish thought is full born till it is clothed in words. Give no formula to the momentary impulse of wrath or other passion, and the soul of evil will perish if it find no body to inhabit.

II. IT POINTS TO CONSEQUENCES. The quaint illustrations of Agur exhibit the certainty of evil consequences to evil thoughts and desires. As certain as any of the physical sequences mentioned, is the metaphysical sequence, the moral or immoral consequences of passion. Therefore, obsta principiis, resist the beginnings, “seal up the avenues of ill.”J.

HOMILIES BY W. CLARKSON

Pro 30:1-6

Reverence and docility

Whoever Agur may have been, it is certain that he was a sage who could express his thoughts in strong and trenchant language. If, as seems probable, these opening words had reference to the compliments or the questions of his disciples, we may glean, before we proceed further, three lessons by the way.

1. That rightful acknowledgment too easily passes into adulation.

2. That it is a very easy thing for the uninstructed to ask questions which the most enlightened cannot answer.

3. That true genius is modest, and knows well the hounds of its capacity. The main lessons are

I. OUR DUTY TO DISCLAIM WHAT IS NOT TRUE CONCERNING US. Agur, using the language of hyperbole, energetically disclaims any such elevation as he was imagined to have attained (Pro 30:2, Pro 30:3). Men will sometimes deny us the virtue or the wisdom which we may claim; but they will often offer us an honour which is not our due. We may be taken to be wealthier, or wiser, or stronger, or more generous, or more devout than we know ourselves to be. We should then distinctly and determinately decline to receive what does not belong to us. To accept it

(1) is dishonest, and any kind of dishonesty is sinful;

(2) is likely to inflate our minds with fond and vain conceptions, hurtful if not fatal to our humility;

(3) will sooner or later end in exposure and humiliation.

II. THE GREAT OBLIGATION TO REVERENCE. (Pro 30:4.) We may know many things, but, when it is all told, what an infinitesimal fraction is this when compared with all that is unknown! What vast, what inexhaustible treasures of truth and wisdom are hidden, and must remain hidden, in the air, in the earth, in the sea! How little, then, can we understand of him, the Eternal and Infinite One, who reigns in the heavens! How unfathomable the depth of the riches, both of the wisdom and knowledge of God” (Rom 11:33)!

1. How foolish to expect to understand his purpose, whilst he is outworking it, either concerning our individual life or the destiny of our race!

2. How prepared we should be to accept what God has taught us respecting our nature, or our duty, or our prospects, or respecting his own nature and his will!

3. How unwise to attempt to add to his teaching by any inventions of our own! Not, indeed, that we are not to make new applications, and find out truer interpretations of his Word; but that we are not to think and speak as if we had sources of wisdom apart from his Divine communication.

III. THE REWARD OF DOCILITY. (Pro 30:5.) To learn of God is:

1. To repair to the fountain of purity. Everything God has said to us tends to purity, to Freedom from a degrading selfishness, from a corrupting worldliness, and from an enslaving and a shameful sensuality. To fill our minds and hearts with his holy truth lifts us up into an atmosphere where our whole nature is elevated and refined, where we are capacitated for the vision and fitted for the presence and the home of God (Mat 5:8; Heb 12:14).

2. To learn of God and to connect ourselves with him by faith in Jesus Christ is to be well shielded in the battle of our life. For it is to have

(1) strong, sustaining principles within us, and

(2) the active and efficient guardianship of God around us as we pass through the sorrows of our life, and mingle in its many conflicts, and discharge its varied and weighty duties.C.

Pro 30:7-9

A new year’s prayer

We have in these most instructive words a wise and good man

I. CALMLY CONFRONTING THE FUTURE. Whether we read “before I die” or “until I die” (Wardlaw), we have a good man deliberately facing the future of his life. He realizes that before him stretches out a tract of time which he has to cross; he knows that he must keep steadily, incessantly, moving forward; that he will meet with difficulties and dangers on his way; that he will want all and more than all the power and the wisdom he has at his command; and he is sobered and solemnized by the thought. In view of this serious aspect of things, we find him

II. EARNESTLY ADDRESSING HIMSELF TO GOD. “Two things have I required of thee.” To whom, thus situated, should we go? Surely unto him who is:

1. The Lord of the future, who holds all time in his sovereign hand, who alone “can set new time upon our score.”

2. The Father of our spirits, who is deeply interested in our highest welfare, and cares more about our well-being than does any human relative or friend.

3. The Lord of our life, who traces the path our feet will tread, who can and will hedge that path with his protecting care, who can and will lead us along the road we travel. And what better “requirement” or request could he prefer than that of

III. ASKING FOR DELIVERANCE FROM DELUSION? From “vanity and lies.” Whatever may have been the form which this evil took in the land and time of Agur, we know what withering and wasting delusions we need to be preserved from now.

1. From under-estimating the value of our life. There are manyare there not many more than there once were?that say, “Who will show us any good?” Their name is legion who are discussing and even denying the worth of human life. Indifference, ennui, weariness and dreariness of spirit, disgustleading down to a pessimistic philosophy in theory, and to suicide in actionthis is the strain and spirit, and this is the current of our time. It is a delusion, both sorrowful and sinful. For it is a virtual abandonment of a noble heritage, and it is a rejection of a good and a great gift from the hand of God. A life of holy service, of unselfish devotion, of spiritual growth, of filial gratitude and joy, of Christian hopefulness, is a blessing of simply inestimable value.

2. From over-estimating the value of the sensuous and the material. Always and everywhere men have been in the gravest danger of supposing that “a man’s life does consist in the abundance of the things which he possesses,” or the number and sweetness of his bodily gratifications. This also is vanity; it is a falsehood which sin sows freely and which quickly takes root in the minds of men. What we need to know, what we may well ask God to teach us so that we shall not only accept but realize it, is that all the rivers of earthly good and of sensuous satisfaction may run into the sea of an immortal spirit, made for God and for goodness, and they will not fill it.

IV. PRAYING TO BE EXEMPT FROM THE EXTREMES OF CIRCUMSTANTIAL TRIAL. Give me neither poverty nor riches.”

1. The trial of poverty. This we can all understand, and it takes but little wisdom or sanctity to pray for exemption from its evil.

2. The trial of wealth. We think we could endure this without, suffering. Nearly all those who have not experienced it are inclined to slight the danger of being rich. Those who have never walked on the ice imagine that they could do so without slipping; those who have never gambled indulge the idea that they could stop at the moment of prudential retirement. We do not know ourselves. He who “knew what was in man” knew how great is the peril of worldly wealth: We do well to strive and to toil for an honourable maintenance; but we do not well to sacrifice health or usefulnesshow much less our self-respect and the love of Christ!in order to be rich We do wisely to ask God to save us from the temptationthe real, the strong, the frequently whelming temptationof great worldly success.

V. ASKING FOR THE GOOD WHICH WILL PROVE TO BE A BLESSING. “Feed me with food convenient for me;” i.e. which thou knowest to be suited to my need. God only knows what we wantwhat we want; what will be really and abidingly food for us, considered in all our relations. God knows what will nourish our spiritual nature, what will supply us as citizens of this life, what is our bodily need for those few years which he is about to give us here before he translates us to a heavenly sphere. Let us ask him to grant us what he knows is best, surely believing that what he gives in answer to our prayer is the best for us to receivethat, whatever the measure be, and not something sweeter, or finer, or more enduring. But let us, understanding what it is we askas they who first used the words did notsay continually, “Lord, evermore give us this bread.”C.

Pro 30:14

From cruelty to kindness

To those who are even ordinarily humane, the accounts which are sometimes given of horrible cruelty seem to be barely credible; it is difficult to understand how a heart that is anywise human can hold such fearful feelings as are thus expressed. On the other hand, to those who have been brutalized by the long practice of cruelty, it is often found almost incredible that men and women can be capable of great generosity either of heart or hand. From the lowest depth of cruelty to the noblest height of kindness there is a very large ascent.

I. THE MORAL SCALE. At the very bottom of this scale is:

1. An absolute and even a keen delight in inflicting and in witnessing pain: this is nothing short of fiendish. Then comes, perhaps:

2. A hard indifference; an utter unconcern when suffering is beheld; a perfect readiness that it should be inflicted and endured. Less iniquitous, perhaps, than this is:

3. The steeling of the heart against the appeal which is made by suffering, and which is not altogether unfelt; the presence of some sensibility, but the endeavour, for some reason, to suppress the emotion that is excited.

4. The inward acknowledgment that interposition is due and should be rendered, but the careful and ingenious avoidance of the duty; the passing by on the other side.

5. The compounding of a felt obligation to help by tendering some almost worthless contribution. Then, moving upward, we arrive at:

6. The act of practical kindness to the sorrowful or the needy.

7. The act of generous succour, wherein that which is given is really felt.

8. The summit of self-sacrificing love, on which we “lay down our lives for the brethren,” even as our Lord laid down his life for us all.

II. OUR PLACE IN THIS SCALE. The question for us to answer isWhere do we stand? How far from the height? how near to the depth? Must we stand condemned? or may we hope that it is well with us in this most serious feature of human character?

III. THE WAY UPWARD. We shall probably conclude that, although our spirit is far from that of the “generation whose teeth are as swords,” etc; it is not as truly and as thoroughly the spirit of Christ, the pitiful, the merciful, the magnanimous One, as we would that it were. And we want to know what we can do to leave all cruelty, all unkindness, and even all inconsiderateness, far below us, and to rise to the exalted altitude of pure and noble beneficence. Our best plan will be to make an earnest endeavour:

1. To realize the essential brotherhood of man as being based upon that great fact of the Fatherhood of God.

2. To dwell upon the great and almost boundless capacities of mankind, on the extent to which we can suffer both in body and in spirit, and the degree of joy and excellency to which we may be raised.

3. To study with devout diligence the life and the language, the spirit and the will, of Jesus Christ.

4. To move freely and frequently, both in actual life and in the paths of literature, amongst the gracious and the generous, the kind-hearted and the noble-minded.

5. To address ourselves seriously to the work of showing kindness in every open way to those whom we can reach. Whom we help we pity, whom we serve we love.C.

Pro 30:15, Pro 30:16

The unsatisfied human heart

There are many things in nature which are not satisfied; but there is one thing in that which is above nature which is much less easily satisfiedan intelligent, responsible, immortal spirit.

I. THE INSATIABLE IN NATURE. Agur specifies four things; in these we find three features which supply a contrast to the craving of the human soul. The insatiable:

1. Limited by consciousness. The grave never says, “It is enough;” though millions have descended into its dark void, and though many ages have witnessed its consumption, it is as recipient as ever; it is, and it will remain, unfilled. But it is unconscious of its reception; it is only in iron, nation that it can be said to crave or to cry, “Give! give!”

2. Limited by time. Childless womanhood is not unconscious; its craving is real and keen enough; but it is not lasting; it only extends over a few years of life; there is a large proportion of life, before and after, when no such longing is cherished.

3. Limited by quantity. The parched earth drinks in the rain hour after hour, and even day after day, as if it would not be satisfied with any quantity; but there is a measure of moisture which saturates and suffices; beyond that, anything that falls or flows is redundant.

II. THE UNSATISFIED HUMAN HEART. Here there are practically no limitations. The human heart:

1. Is painfully conscious of its deep craving. Unlike the grave, unlike the fire, which seems animated indeed, but is actually unconscious, the human soul is profoundly moved as it yearns for something more and better than anything it holds; down to its depths it is disturbed, troubled, agitated. Its voice, crying, “Give! Give!” is not merely poetical, it is pathetic and even passionate.

2. Is unlimited by time. Unlike childless womanhood, its yearning for what it has not is not confined to a few years of its existence; it extends through life; it reaches on to old age, to the very hour of departure. It does not grow, thrive, fade, and die; it lasts; it is often found to be as keen and vigorous at the end as at the beginning, in the near neighbourhood of death as in the prime of life.

3. Is unlimited by quantity. Nothing that is human or earthly does satisfy the human heart. All affection, all honour, all power, all occupation, all pleasures, run into it, but they do not fill it (see Ecc 1:7; Ecc 2:1-11). The heart of man, created for that which is highest and best, is not satisfied with anything that falls short of that. It is profoundly conscious that something is wanting of which it is not possessed. It says, blindly perhaps, but earnestly and sometimes passionately, “Give! give! I have not enough. I eat, but am still an hungered; I drink, but am still athirst.”

III. THE SATISFIED HUMAN SOUL. There is one source of satisfaction; it is found in God himself. “O Lord, thou hast made us for thyself, and our heart findeth no rest until it resteth in thee;” but in him, “who is our home,” we do find rest and peace. To us to whom the Son of God and Saviour of mankind has spoken, the voice of cheer and hope is ever calling, “Come unto me I will give you rest.” In

(1) the friendship,

(2) the service,

(3) the likeness, of Jesus Christ, and in

(4) the good hope through his grace of eternal life, we find the supreme and the lasting satisfaction of the soul.

He is the Bread of life, and eating of him we do not hunger more.C.

Pro 30:24-28

Success within success

Many things go to make a man successful, in a true and large sense of that word. A man may have many elements of success, and yet, for want of one more, he may fail. The best part of our succeeding is thisthat if we are labouring for some present and visible reward, we are, whilst so doing and in the very act, securing a deeper and a larger good, as the schoolboy seeking the prize is really storing up knowledge and power. We may learn from some of the least and humblest of God’s creatures what are the elements of success in the ordering of our life and, at the same time, in the construction of our character.

I. THE ORDERING OF OUR LIFE. If we would live such a life before men as is most honourable and gratifying, we must show the qualities which are manifested by those little creatures of our text.

1. Forethought. (Pro 30:25.) The man who does not look forward and prepare for the day and the hour when some special demand will be made upon him, must go down. A wise provision made in the time of leisure or abundance is essential to outward and visible success. We must “buy up the opportunity [‘redeem the time’]” (Col 4:5); otherwise, “when the occasion comes, we shall not be equal to the occasion;” e.g. the apprentice, the student, etc.

2. Securing a retreat, or having a reserve (Pro 30:26). To be able to run to the rocks or fastnesses is necessary for the feeble. And in the ordering of our life it is necessary to count on our being sometimes defeated. He is but a poor captain who conducts his campaign without “securing his base;” and he does not know the practical wisdom of life who does not provide for himself a retreat, a reserve, when fortune goes against him, as it sometimes will, in “the battle of life.”

3. Cooperation. (Pro 30:27.) It is an essential part of personal equipment that a man be able to cooperate with others. And in the great majority of cases this means readiness to take an inferior place, to obey instructions, to fall in with the suggestions of other people, to forego our own preference and adopt another man’s method. It means listening and learning, conciliation and concession, punctuality and politeness.

4. Aspiration and patient. (Pro 30:28.) For the little and unwelcome spider (or lizard) to establish itself in king’s palaces there is demanded this twofold virtue. And for our success we need this alsoambition to attempt and assiduity to win our way, in spite of all the obstacles that may intervene. He that has no heart for enterprise will certainly achieve nothing; and he who lacks patience to wait his time, perseverance to renew his efforts as often as he is fooled, or as often as one success opens the way to another, will reach no king’s palace, no place of honour or of influence.

II. THE CONSTRUCTION OF OUR CHARACTER. God has so ordered all things with us and for us that. as we are striving for one thing, we do gain another. As we seek an honourable position in life, we are building up our character. All these elements of success are features of human character, so that while we are “making our way,” we are making ourselves also. Much that is most valuable in our moral and spiritual constitution is constructed by us in ways and at times when we think not of it; it is like the seed that grows secretly, night and day, the farmer “knoweth not how” (Mar 4:27). Hence the very great importance that we should be always and everywhere acting on sound, Christian principles; for it is not so much by the direct endeavours we put forth for the purpose, as it is by the constantly and silently operating influence of our daily and hourly actions, that we become what we do become in the sight of God. Beyond and within the success of which men take notice, and on which they congratulate us, is a success which is deeper and truer, for which we may well give to God our heartier thanksgiving.C.

Pro 30:29-31

Spiritual comeliness

Agur mentions four things which are “comely” (Authorized Version) or are “stately” (Revised Version) in their going; their movement is regarded with pleasure, with admiration, by those who observe it. Such demeanour on their part is suggestive of moral and spiritual attractiveness on ours.

I. WE MUST SECURE THAT WHICH IS NECESSARY. We cannot truly live without the favour of God, without entering his service, without possessing something of his likeness, without cherishing a hope of future blessedness. To miss all this is to forfeit the heritage of our manhood. We can by no means do without it. This we must gain or be undone. But we should go beyond that.

II. WE SHOULD AIM AT THE ADMIRABLE. We ought not to be at all satisfied with ourselves unless our “walk” (1Th 4:1; 1Jn 2:6), the manner of “our going,” is such as to please God, and is such also as to win men. Our daily lives should not only be consistent enough to save us from self-reproach and from condemnation; they should be excellent enough, admirable enough, to attract, to call favourable attention to the Divine source of all that we are and have. We should not only worship, but live and work in “the beauty of holiness;” we should aim to add the things that are “lovely” to those which are true, honest, just, and pure; we should endeavour to “adorn the doctrine of Christ our Saviour in all things“ (see Php 4:8; Tit 2:10).

III. THREE ELEMENTS OF THE SPIRITUALLY ADMIRABLE. Beginning with that illustration with which Agur ends, which may come first as the most honorable, we have:

1. The power of command. “A king against whom is no rising up” (Authorized Version); “a king when his army is with him”; or, a king “at the head of his army.” Either way, the idea is that of a man in command. There is something very attractive and even fascinating in this exercise of authority; it elicits not only notice, but admiration. There is one sphere in which it is open to all of us to exercise and to exhibit commandover our own spirit. There is nothing more worth our admiring regard than the sight of a man maintaining a perfect control of his spirit under circumstances of great trial or provocation (Pro 16:32). To exercise a sovereign control over our fear, or our anger, or our affection, or our curiosity, or our sorrow; of our impulses, or our emotions;this is excellent and admirable indeed: then are we “comely [or, ‘stately’] in our going.”

2. The possession of strength. “A lion which is strongest among beasts.” It is the conscious possession of power which gives such dignity to the “king of beasts.” To this also we should attain:

(1) intrinsic power, by the devout and diligent cultivation of all our God-given faculties;

(2) communicated power, by the indwelling of the Spirit of God, being of those who are “strong, in the Lord, and in the power of his might.” Self-sufficiency and conceit are indeed ugly enough; but conscious power, associated, as it may be and. should be, with humility and kindness, is admirable and attractive. It is well to walk on our way as those who know that they have no need to fear, because God is for us and with us and in us.

3. Moral symmetry. The greyhound and the he goat are pleasing because they are well proportioned throughout their frame. To be spiritually beautiful, our character must be symmetrical. Each quality must be balanced by its opposite virtuefirmness by gentleness, thoughtfulness by readiness for action, courage by caution, generosity by conscientiousness, etc. Thus will our character and (consequently) our demeanour be comely in the view of man as well as acceptable in the sight of God.C.

Fuente: The Complete Pulpit Commentary

Pro 30:1. The words of Agur, &c. According to the signification of the original terms, this might be rendered, The words of him who has recollected himself, the son of obedience. The generality of the fathers and ancient commentators will have it that Solomon describes himself under the name of Agur, the son of Jakeh; others conjecture that Agur, as well as Lemuel, in the next chapter, were wise men who lived in the time of Solomon, and were his interlocutors in the book of Proverbs; an opinion without the least show of probability. This book is nothing like a dialogue. It is most probable that Agur was an inspired author, different from Solomon, whose moral and proverbial sentences (for such is the import of the word rendered prophesy) it was thought most convenient to join with those of this prince, because of the conformity of their matter; for what could ever have obliged Solomon to disguise his name in this place? For what reason could he have changed his style and manner of writing in this chapter only? for it is certain, that this chapter is penned in a way very different from the rest of the book. Besides, could it become Solomon to speak as this author does in the second verse, or to address himself to God as he does in the eighth? Certainly these words are not consistent with the situation of a king like Solomon. But who then was this Agur? When and where did he live? This is what no one yet has ever been able to tell us. See Calmet, and Bishop Lowth’s 18th Prelection.

Even the prophecy, &c. This may be rendered, The man spake a prophesy or sententious discourse to Ithiel, and Ithiel to Ucal. These two persons are supposed to have been scholars and friends of Agur, who came to him to be instructed in the principles of true wisdom. He begins with modestly declaring his own insufficiency for so great an undertaking (I am more dull than the rest of men, and void of human prudence); and recommends, as the foundation of all useful knowledge, an humble temper of mind, sensible of all the natural weakness of human understanding, and of the imperfection of its highest improvements; which he argues, Pro 30:4 from our ignorance of the works of nature. (See the parallel passages in the Book of Job:) And therefore in the two following verses he advises his two pupils to make it their principal study to understand the will of God, which is of all knowledge the most important, and of the greatest use in human life; and in all their inquiries of this kind, to confine themselves to what God has revealed. See Foster’s Sermons, vol. 1 serm. 8: and Deu 30:11-14.

Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke

V. THE SUPPLEMENTS

Chaps. 30 and 31

First Supplement: The words of Agur

Chap. 30

a) Introduction: Of Gods word as the source of all wisdom

Pro 30:1-6

1Words of Agur, the son of the princess of Massa.

The mans saying: I have wearied myself about God,
wearied myself about Godthen did I withdraw!

2For I am a beast and not a man,

and the understanding of a man I have not;

3neither have I acquired wisdom,

nor gained knowledge of the Holy.

4Who hath ascended to the heavens and descended?

who hath grasped the wind in his fists?
who hath wrapped the waters in a garment?
who hath fixed all the ends of the earth?
what is his name and what is his sons name, if thou knowest?

5Every word of God is pure;

a shield is He to them that trust in Him.

6Add thou not to His words,

lest He rebuke thee and thou be made a liar.

b) Various expressive numerical proverbs, relating to the golden mean between rich and poor, to recklessness, an insatiable disposition, pride and arrogance, etc

7Two things have I entreated of thee,

refuse me not, before I die:

8Deceit and lies keep far from me;

poverty and riches give me not;
cause me to eat the food allotted me;

9lest I, being full, deny (God)

and say: Who is Jehovah?
and lest I, having become poor, steal
and take the name of my God in vain.

10Cause not the servant to slander his master,

lest he curse thee and thou suffer (be destroyed).

11(There is) a generation that curseth their father,

and doth not bless their mother;

12(there is) a generation that are pure in their own eyes,

and are not washed from their filthiness;

13(there is) a generation, how haughty are their eyes,

and their eyelids are lifted up;

14(there is) a generation whose teeth are swords, and their jaw-teeth knives,

to devour the poor from the earth, and the needy from among men!

15The leech hath two daughters: give, give!

there are three (things) that are not to be satisfied;
four say not: enough!

16The world of the dead, the barren womb;

the earth (which) is not satisfied with water,
and the fire that saith not: enough!

17An eye that mocketh at its father,

and despiseth obedience to its mother,
the ravens of the valley shall pluck it out,
and the young eagles shall eat it.

18Three things are too wonderful for me,

and four I do not comprehend;

19the way of the eagle in the heavens,

the way of a serpent upon a rock,
the way of a ship in the midst of the sea,
and the way of a man with a maid.

20Thus is the way of the adulterous woman:

she eateth, and wipeth her mouth, and saith:
I have done no iniquity!

21Under three things doth the earth tremble,

and under four can it not stand:

22under a servant when he ruleth,

and a fool when he is satisfied with bread;

23under a hated (rejected) woman when she is married,

and a maid when she succeedeth her mistress.

24Four are the little things of earth,

and yet are they wise, quick of wit:

25the ants, a people not strong,

that prepare in summer their food;

26conies, a people not mighty,

that set their dwelling among rocks;

27no king have the locusts,

and yet they go forth organized all of them;

28the lizard layeth hold with her hands,

and dwelleth in kings palaces.

29There are three that make stately their walk,

and four that are comely in going:

30the lion, mighty among beasts,

and that turneth not before any:

31the greyhound, slender in its loins, or the goat,

and a king with whom there is no resistance (possible).

32If thou art foolish in exalting thyself,

and if thou devisest evil(put) thy hand on thy mouth!

33For the pressing of milk giveth forth cheese,

and pressing the nose giveth blood,
and pressing wrath giveth strife.

GRAMMATICAL AND CRITICAL

Pro 30:6.[In we have the single instance in which daghesh lene is omitted after a silent sheva. See Green, 22 b; 66 (2), a; Btt., 325.A.]

Pro 30:10.[In the suffix is of the form appropriate to the singular, as is not uncommon with pluralia tantum; Btt., 886, 1, . In the verb has the sense of a subj. pres. in a negative or final clause; Btt., 981, 2.A.]

Pro 30:15.[The noun , as a sort of independent accusative, becomes virtually an Interjection. Bttcher, 510, 5, d.A.]

Pro 30:17.[ for has a daghesh dirimens in the , the long Hhiriq being shortened; Green, 14, a; 24, b; 57, 2, (3) a; Btt., 399, b, 3; 458, 1, d.A.]

Pro 30:25.[, a fem. noun construed as masculine; Green, 200, e; Btt., 715, e.A.]

Pro 30:29.[, where it occurs the second time, drops the characteristic as superfluous; Btt., 171.A.]

Pro 30:31.[For Btt. would read , the wild goat or antelope.]

EXEGETICAL

1. Preliminary Remark. If our reading and explanation of the superscription in Pro 30:1 is correct (see what is said immediately below, under No. 2), the contents of this Supplement, like that of the one following (Pro 31:1-9), can be accepted neither as from Solomon, nor from Hezekiah. For aside from the fact that it is quite as impossible that Agur as that Lemuel in Pro 31:1 is some allegorical substitute for the name of Solomon, as many of the olden commentators claim (e.g., Stcker, J. Lange, etc., [so Jerome, Rashi, etc., earlier, and Wordsw., etc., more recently]), the name Massa clearly points to a land beyond the bounds of Palestine as the dwelling-place of the author or collector. The name must belong to the Massa mentioned in Gen 25:14; 1Ch 1:30 with Duma, as the name of a district or tribe in northern Arabia,which from the direction of Jerusalem (according to Isa 21:11) was beyond Seir, and therefore in any case south-easterly from Palestine, and which we shall be obliged to regard as an Ishmaelitish kingdom, or an Israelitish founded by members of the covenant people of the Old Testament who had wandered from home. Delitzsch holds the former view (Article Sprche Salomos in Herzogs Real-Encyclopdie). His reasons are, that both sections, the words of Agur and the words of Lemuel contain numerous traces of an origin outside the Hebrew while yet Semitic (e.g., the insatiable Aluka or blood-sucker, Pro 30:15; the Divine name , Pro 30:15; the expressions , Pro 30:1; Pro 30:17; enough, Pro 30:15-16; (), Pro 31:2; =, Pro 31:4; , Pro 31:5, etc.); and because the reception into the canon of the prophecies of Balaam, and yet more that of the discourses of Job, a dweller in the land of Uz, which notoriously was never inhabited by Israelites, furnish proofs sufficiently weighty of the possibility of a transplanting into the soil of the sacred national literature of Israel, of the products of a religious literature originating beyond the bounds of Israel. The second of the views above mentioned Hitzig has endeavored to present as probable in his treatise on the kingdom of Massa (1844), already cited in 12 of our Introduction, and likewise in pp. 310 sq. of his Commentary; and he has done it with arguments which we must deem more weighty than those adduced by Delitzsch, and whose decisive weight is admitted by Bertheau also. These arguments for the Israelitish character of the land of Massa, and of its rulers Agur and Lemuel, whose wise maxims are before us in our two Supplements, are briefly the following. 1) Agur confesses expressly in Pro 30:9 his faith in Jehovah the God of Israel. 2) The introductory words in Pro 30:1-6, as well as the utterances in Pro 30:7-8; Pro 30:14; Pro 30:22; Pro 30:32 of the same chapter, and in Pro 31:8-9, breathe forth that sense of justice and that humble subjection to the hand of God, which are peculiar to the theocratic reverer of the law who is of Israel, and such as appear in numerous other passages of our Book of Proverbs, of the Book of Psalms, the Prophets, etc. 3) The Massa of Gen 25:14; 1Ch 1:30, is indeed in these passages numbered among the sons of Ishmael, and therefore characterized as a district inhabited mainly by Ishmaelites; but later Arabian and Jewish authors (especially Benjamin of Tudela in his accounts of the city of Telms see Ritters Arabia, II. 406) describe the region of Massa and the Duma which is its near neighbor, as occupied by numerous Jews,and already among the prophecies of Isaiah from the time of Hezekiah there is found a prophecy which relates to Duma (Isa 21:11-12), a burden of Duma which with great probability presents Hebrews as dwelling in this region. 4) The passage (1Ch 4:38-43) expressly records a migration that occurred in the days of Hezekiah to Mount Seir, and so quite into the neighborhood of Massa and Duma,a migration of Israelites of the tribe of Simeon who had settled in the region of the remnant of the Amalekites, and therefore in northern Arabia; and moreover from Mic 1:15; Mic 2:8-10; Isa 28:12 there may be inferred as probable a considerable advanced movement of certain roving Israelites toward the South, as having occurred about that time. Therefore Agur and Lemuel might very probably be regarded as Arabian-Israelitish shepherd princes, or as kings (Emirs, Captains) of a colony of Israelites of the tribes of Simeon that had emigrated to northern Arabia,and this Simeonite colony Massa, quite like Jobs land of Uz, should be conceived of as a district to a great extent if not chiefly occupied by kinsmen of the Old Testament people of God, who were believers in Jehovah. [Btt. in his Lehrb., has of course no occasion to enter into the details of this discussion. He does, however, 29, 36, 37, refer to these chapters as probably largely of Simeonitish origin, and cites various words and constructions as plainly showing affinity with and the influence of the cognate Arabic and Aramaic dialects. Stuart (Comm. pp. 401407) enters very elaborately into the examination of the arguments for and against the generally received conception and construction, and decides strongly in favor of Hitzigs view, which our author adopts. Nearly every other English and American interpreter dismisses the subject with a few lines, quietly retaining the rendering of the E. V. possibly with slight modifications. Kamph. rejects this part of Hitzigs theory while agreeing with it in many other points. Bleek admits its possible correctness.A.]

2. The superscription to the discourses of Agur, Pro 30:1, according to the Masoretic punctuation is literally rendered: Words of Agur, the son of Jakeh, the divine utterance (prophetic utterance), the saying of the man to Ithiel, to Ithiel and Ucal. Inasmuch as of the four proper names which these words include, according to this conception of them, one at least, Ithiel, appears also in Neh 11:7 as an Israelitish name of a man, and since Agur is not to be at all suspected as a Hebrew personal name, whether we interpret the word (with Herder and the majority) by collector, and so regard it a collateral form of (Pro 10:5),or whether with Hitzig, following the Arabic, we claim for it the signification exile, the man living in a strange land, this interpretation of this difficult passage, which was already given in the Chaldee version, and partially in the Syriac, and has been retained by most moderns, seems to excite no suspicion, if it be assumed that we are to regard Ithiel and Ucal as sons or pupils of Agur, and are to conceive of the whole as the communication, not indeed of a dialogue of the teacher Agur with these pupils (so e.g., Dderlein), but of a didactic address, or a fatherly counsel given to them. But this conception is lexically impossible. And 1) because neither Jakeh nor Ucal occurs elsewhere as a Hebrew proper name, nor can they even be satisfactorily explained as such (see Hitzig on this passage); [Fuerst taking Jakeh as an irregular participial form interprets it symbolically one holding to the assembly of the wise;Gesen. more concisely pious]. 2) Because the remarkable doubling of can in no way be brought into harmony with the laws of the Hebrew modes of expression,not even by the assumption of Herder and Umbreit that this is a solemn repetition produced by the vehemence of parallelism. 3) Because, finally, in the sense of prophetic utterance, prophetic burden would in connection with the following give a combination unknown in the whole prophetical literature of the Old Testament,one to the justification of which neither Zec 9:1; Zec 12:1, nor any other passage whatsoever can be brought. [Kamph. while admitting that only a greater or less degree of probability can at the best be reached, meets this difficulty by separating the two nouns whose combination is pronounced unexampled. The first he connects with Agur, while admitting the term is elsewhere used only in strict prophecy. The second he regards as describing the utterance of the man, some friend or stranger, whose words are given in Pro 30:1-4, while Agur himself begins to speak in Pro 30:5. He fails to find any sufficient reason for taking as a proper rather than a common noun. Stuart argues that in.Pro 31:1 must be a genitive limiting , no other construction being grammatical; the noun must therefore be a proper noun, the name of the kingdom, and the noun must be presumed to be the same here.A.]

The allegorizing interpretations are however likewise untenable, which have been attempted in various forms, taking the four proper names as either wholly or partially appellative. This was early done by the LXX and Vulg., the former of which appears to have regulated the text in a way wholly arbitrary, while the latter follows the text more closely, and renders Agur by congregans, Jakeh by vomens, Ithiel by cum quo est Deus, and Jucal by confortatus. Of modern expositors Ewald has taken at least the last half of the ver. in a similar way: Thus does the man speak to God-with-me, to God-with-me and I-am-strong. The according to this view stands for , and in combination with the appellative Ithiel composes a single name. Instead of however we should need to read . Since the objections expressed above, especially those which relate to the name Jakeh, and the doubling of the name Ithiel are not removed, and still others are added to them, there is nothing left but to alter the reading of the verse thoroughly. Of the various emendations which are possible and have been in part already attempted, that of Hitzig commends itself most strongly, which we have made the basis of the version given above.

According to this we should in the first place read Son of her whom Massa obeys, or again (which is equivalent to ) Son of her whose dominion is Massa, which in any case gives as the result son of the ruler, the princess of Massa (comp. No. 1.)

Furthermore we must then read twice , I have labored, have wearied myself upon, about, with God, i.e., have sought with difficulty and effort to conceive and comprehend Him in His nature (comp. in Isa 26:12; and also passages like Job 9:7; Act 17:27, etc.) Finally the concluding word must either be pointed , and have become dull, am wearied, i.e., in seeking after God (thus Hitzig); or, which seems to be lexically easier, (from , evanuit) and have withdrawn, have become faint (comp. Psa 69:4; Psa 84:3; Job 19:27, etc.), which latter reading is the one followed by Bertheau [Kamph., S., etc.]. It is, indeed, true that even by these emendations the difficulties of the passage are not removed; and yet the meaning thus resulting for the second half of the Verse agrees admirably with the further utterances of the Introduction, especially with Pro 30:3-4. Moreover the of the LXX which corresponds with the at the end confirms on the whole the interpretation given to that obscure expression (and that of Hitzig as well as that of Bertheau, which besides are not essentially different). And as respects the expression, which is, it is true, somewhat harsh, , an indirect confirmation of this appears in the fact that the rare word obedience (comp. Gen 49:10) occurs again immediately below in Pro 30:17.

3. Pro 30:2-6. Continuation and conclusion of the Introduction.For I am a beast and not a man, etc. To the confession given at the outset, that he has wearied himself in vain in fathoming the divine nature, there is here appropriately added the admission of the authors ignorance, and his natural incapacity for higher spiritual knowledge. His vexation in view of the fact that his wisdom has come to shame in connection with God and things divine, finds vent for itself in strong expressions, which remind us of Psa 73:22; comp. also remarks above on Pro 12:1. is probably not more stupid than any man (as is commonly rendered, Ewald, Bertheau [E. V., De W., H., N., S., M., W., K.] etc.), but brutishly stupid, unlike (away from) a man, and so a beast and not a man (Hitzig). [We see no reason for preferring this to the common comparative rendering of . A].

Pro 30:3. Nor gained knowledge of the Holy. For this last clause comp. remarks on Pro 9:10.

Pro 30:4. Who hath ascended to the heavens and descended? For the form of words here employed comp. Gen 28:12; also Joh 3:13; Rom 10:6-7. The ascending to heaven and descending thence, is like the grasping the wind in the fists, the wrapping up the waters, etc, an activity belonging exclusively to God, and characteristic of Him in His supermundane nature. That there is an activity of this sort, ruling the world and upholding the world, on the part of the invisible God, he knows; but who the in visible divine Ruler of all is, and how constituted, this has hitherto remained hidden from his view, and it is to this that his amazed inquiries relate, reminding us of Job 26:14; Isa 40:12, etc.Who gathereth the wind in his fists?so that he can at his pleasure restrain it and let it blow. , lit. in his two fists; an expression employed probably because there are always two opposing currents of wind, of which now the one and again the other blows (comp. Ecc 1:6.) [There seems to be no occasion for going beyond the fact that fists usually exist in pairs, to find in the remoter facts of nature an explanation for a very natural phrase.A.]Who wrappeth the waters in a garment? The water is the upper mass of waters, wrapped in the clouds of heaven as in a capacious garment, and so kept back from pouring down upon the earth. Comp. Job 26:8; Psa 104:6 : and above, notes on Pro 8:28.Who fixeth all the ends of the earth? By this is probably intended the bounds of the continents against the sea (Jer 5:22; Job 33:10-11.)What is his name, and his sons name, if thou knowest? In this question is contained the idea: No one knows God adequately in His inmost nature; none is able to attain a genealogical knowledge of Him and His family, in such way as may be done among men; especially is the question, what is true of His son, veiled in inscrutable mystery. That God has no son at all is plainly not implied in this remarkable question, which is left unanswered (in reply to Hitzig); but only this, that no one knows the name of this son,that his nature and his relation to the other manifestations of Gods nature, e.g., to His hypostatic wisdom (Pro 8:22 sq.) is known to none. Agur therefore confesses here with sufficient distinctness the defectiveness of his knowledge of God the Son,a fact which serves to confirm in the most welcome way our remarks on the passage Pro 8:22 sq. concerning the incompleteness, the embryonic imperfection of the doctrine of the Logos (or the Christology) of the proverbs in general. Both Geier who identifies the Son of our passage without qualification with Gods hypostatic wisdom, and J. D. Michaelis, who finds here ascribed to God with the clearness and precision of the New Testament an only Son, go too far and intermingle foreign ideas. [So Stuart: To think of the Logos here, under the name of would be travelling very far out of the record. And yet we may well go as far as J. Pye Smith (Scripture Testimony, etc., I. 469) when he says: The concluding clauses of this energetic passage are rationally and easily interpreted, if we admit that the ancient Jews had some obscure ideas of a plurality in the divine nature. The objections to as much of an inference as this are forced and feeble. It is possible that the meaning may be only this: We know neither himself nor his,while in human relations the man and his genealogy are objects of eager inquiry and extensive knowledge. But I the Messianic Psalms had already spoken of the Son, mysteriously, perhaps, and yet enough to supply germs of knowledge as well as of faith. See Holden, etc.A.]Strangely insipid and rationalizing is Umbreits view [held by Noyes, etc.], that by the Son is here intended the pupil of the philosopher who understands all the mysteries of the world and the worlds government!Furthermore the LXX instead of must have read for they render .

Pro 30:5-6. Instead of unprofitable puzzling about God and divine mysteries there is recommended the humble reception in faith of the only true divine revelation which affords light and peace, and needs no supplementing or perfecting on the part of man.With 5 a comp. Psa 19:9; Psa 119:140; with a and b, Psa 18:31, where however takes the place of the divine name which is characteristic of our passage. In regard to this comp. above, remarks under No. 1.Add thou nothing to His words. A similar warning with respect to the law as a revelation of the divine will fully sufficient in itself and adequate occurs in Deu 4:2; Deu 12:32; comp. also Rev 22:18.

4. Pro 30:7-10. Prayer of the poet to Jehovah for preservation from all that is false, and from the two extremes of poverty and riches (Pro 30:7-9), together with a warning against the vice of slander. This last forms with Pro 30:17 the sole exception to that mode of constructing the proverbs which elsewhere in the section, Pro 30:7-33, is consistently carried through, viz., the numerical. Comp. on these peculiar numerical proverbs or Middoth, the Introd., 14, and remarks on Pro 6:16.Two things have I entreated of thee. This double prayer is, as the 2d clause shows, a prayer not merely once offered, but the abiding utterance to God of the desire of the poets heart, his importunate request from Him continued to his death.

Pro 30:8. Deceit and lies keep far from me. Deceit () and lying words stand in the mutual relation of the devising of inward untruth and deceitful wickedness, and the false, lying utterance which springs forth from this as its necessary expression. No further justification is added for this first half of the prayer; the second, however, which relates to the golden mean between rich and poor, is more minutely explained and justified in Pro 30:8, c and Pro 30:9. [The idea vanity given in the E. V. and retained by H., M., W., etc., is a secondary meaning of the noun whose primary meaning according to Gesen. is evil, according to Fuerst insecurity, or slipperiness. It seems to be more than the unsubstantial, it is the positively deceitful that is here intended.A.]Cause me to eat the food allotted me, lit. the food of my lot or portion, i.e., the part or assignment that falls to me, so much as is intended and is needful for me, no more and no less. Comp. Pro 31:15; Gen 47:22; and also the , the daily bread of the Lords prayer, Mat 6:11, which is equivalent at least in a general way.

Pro 30:9. Lest I being full deny, etc. Bold denial of the Holy One, and the mocking question who is the Lord, or what can He do? (comp. Psa 73:11; Job 21:14) appears in other passages likewise as the indication of pride developed by surfeiting and luxurious enjoyment in life; see Deu 8:12-15; Deu 32:15 sq.And lest I be poor and steal (comp. Pro 6:30) and take the name of my God in vain. to lay hands upon or seize hold of something here denotes the wicked profanation of the divine name which consists in mockery, cursing and contumely with respect to it. For such offences as these the bitter necessities of hunger and poverty may according to Isa 8:21 produce (comp. Pro 19:3), and not merely false swearing by the name of God in denying the guilt of theft, which alone is usually thought of here.

Pro 30:10. Cause not the servant to slander his master. Usually rendered: betray (or slander) not the servant to his master (Vulg., Luther, Umbreit [E. V., De W., H., N., M.], etc.). But the Hiphil cannot have the same meaning as the Poel, Psa 101:5; it must mean to cause one to slander, to excite one to calumny against another. The warning is not against slander in itself, but against incitement to slander, and more specifically betraying servants into tattling and accusations against their masters (thus correctly Ewald, Bertheau, Hitzig, Elster [Kamph., S.], etc.).Lest he curse thee, and thou be destroyed. The instigator to slander might easily hit upon the wrong person, a faithful, diligent servant, who instead of allowing himself to be misled, might rather curse the betrayer, and so bring merited calamity upon his head (comp. remarks on Pro 26:2).

5. Pro 30:11-14. An utterance expressive of execration, vehement abhorrence, concerning a people or a generation characterized by four forms of ungodliness (not quatuor genera detestabilia hominum, as J. D. Michaelis and others hold). The which is four times repeated, may be taken either as a vocative, Oh generation! (Ewald, Elster), or as a nominative, which then expresses simply the existence of a generation of the kind described, and is used in a certain sense for (Luther, E. V., etc. There is a generation).A generation that curseth their father, etc. Comp. Pro 20:20; Exo 21:17; and then with respect to Pro 30:12; Isa 4:4; with reference to Pro 30:13, Isa 10:12; Psa 131:2; Pro 6:17.And their eyelids are lifted up! Hitzig finds in this exclamation, which appears at first to be only a rhetorically expanded parallel to the loftiness of the eyes in clause a, an allusion to the name Amalek, which in the Arabic signifies one looking with wide open eyes, a man with eyelids, lifted up or painted. He therefore conjectures that the entire delineation of a reckless generation here before us refers to the people of the-Amalekites, whose deadly national hatred toward, the children of Israel (the needy or poor, Pro 30:14 b) and whose warlike love of plunder are described in Pro 30:14 especially. With the assumption that Agur is the prince of a colony of Simeonites, Massa, founded in the Amalekite territory (see remarks above, No. 1), this hypothesis would admirably agree, on account of 1 Chron. 4:53. And yet the conjecture is in itself too uncertain, and particularly too little established on the linguistic side.With Pro 30:14 a comp. Psa 57:5; Psa 58:7; with b, Jer 5:17; Jer 30:16; Jer 50:17; Isa 9:12, etc. [Wordsw. with his fondness for allegorizing finds in these four evil generations an undoubted reference to spiritual mysteries, e.g., various offences within and. against the church.A.].

6. Pro 30:15-16. Of four kinds of insatiable things.The leech hath two daughters; Give, give! The rare name Aluka () the old versions (the LXX, Syimi., the Venet., Vulg.) render by , sanguisuga, with which, there should undoubtedly be taken into account the fact that galulk or galok in the Indian is; the name of the blood-sucker, and that essentially the same word ( ) is in Arabic the designation of a ghostly demon (or according to Camus, possibly of a ravenous wolf). And this is the more confirmed by the fact that the Targ. on Ps. 12:9 speaks of an Aluka going about in a circle, and sucking from men their blood, and by this is undoubtedly meant a vampyre-like spirit, a ghostly monster of the nature of the ghouls of the Arabs and Persians, or the Indian dakini (which congregate in graveyards, and live on the flesh and bones of the corpses). An Indian origin of the conception described by Aluka is indicated also by the occurrence of a proverb closely related to our own, with reference to the insatiableness of four things, in the Hitopadesa (ed. Lassen, p. 66): The fire is not sated with wood, nor the great sea with the streams; nor the god of death with all the living, nor the beautiful-eyed with men. The similarity of this Indian maxim to our passage is clearly much more significant, than that of the Arabic proverb in Meidani, III. 64, where only death not to be satisfied with creatures, and fire not to be satisfied with wood make up the objects compared. The assumption of a derivation both of the name Aluka, and of the entire proverb in its essential substance from the old Indian literature need the less excite any well-founded suspicion, since Agurs residence, Massa, doubtless lay quite near to the old highway of caravans leading from India and Persia to Petra and Teima, and on this Saban and other merchants will have brought, not only Indian articles of traffic, but Indian ideas and literary productions to the lands of South Western Asia (comp. Hitzig, p. 313). But the name Aluka and the proverb as a whole is conceived with substantial correctness by Dderlein and Zeigler, whom afterward Gesen., Umbreit, Hitzig, Bertheau, Delitzsch, and in general most of the recent interpreters have followed. [For illustration supplied by travellers in Palestine, see Thomsons Land and Book, I. 368, and Woods Bible Animals, p. 646.A.]

We must reject as untenable both Jarchis interpretation of Aluka by Sheol, hell (so rendered in alleged accordance with the Arabic), and Bocharts assertion, that the word signifies fate, , insatiable destiny. In this latter view there is only so much of truth, that Aluka does indeed appear generalized to a conception of quite a comprehensive sort, so far forth, plainly, as personified insatiableness, craving in its highest intensity (Bertheau) is denoted by it. Therefore, it appears also as a female spirit, and has two daughters ascribed to it. These two daughters of the blood-sucker are in the first instance designated by a double give, in accordance with their character as craving, insatiable natures, and these are also expressly mentioned by name. For it is plainly these that are meant by the first two of the four insatiable things, which are named in vs. 16 a as Sheol and the barren womb. Hell, or the kingdom of the dead, is also in Isa 5:14, as well as above in Pro 27:20, personified as a spiritual power that with insatiable greediness gathers men to itself. The closing of the womb (for comp. Gen 16:2; Gen 20:18), i.e., the unfruitful womb of woman, in connection with which there is no conception and bearing of children, gives indications of itself, according to what is said in Gen 30:1 sq. of Jacobs wives, likewise in an insatiable craving, in constant desire for sexual enjoyments. On this second example of insatiableness the most weight seems to be laid by the author of the proverb (comp. Pro 27:20). He does not, however, externally distinguish it specially, and assigns it a prominent place in the series of his enumerations only by making it together with hell emphatically the daughter of the blood-sucker, while the earth as a third, and the fire as fourth example he simply allows to follow in a subordinate place. The whole sentence evidently lacks the symmetrical, simply and clearly organized structure, which distinguishes the analogous Indian proverb above cited. Yet in this fact that just that which is the main thought, or the truth in the moral world among men which is to be illustrated by the associated similes from nature, the insatiableness of the craving of the barren woman, is pushed on to the second place, and so in a sense hidden (unlike the order in that Sanscrit proverb where the never satisfied beautiful-eyed are emphatically placed at the end), there is with the greatest probability involved a fully conscious intention of the author of the proverb, who wished by this artifice to give to his maxim the heightened charm of ingenuity, and to form, instead of a mere numerical proverb; a sharp enigmatical proverb (a , comp. Introd., 11, note 2). Of these numerical proverbs which are at the same time enigmas, our chapter contains several besides, especially Pro 30:18-20; Pro 30:24-28; and Pro 30:29-31. [As compared with the numerical proverbs that follow, the complexity and the more artificial character of the one before us at once arrests attention. They all have this in common, that whatever moral lesson they have to convey is less obvious, being hinted rather than stated, and in this view they may merit the name enigmas. In the one now under consideration insatiable desire and the importance of its regulation seem to be the remote object. In the development, instead of the three things and four things which repeatedly appear afterward, we have the leech, its two daughters, the three and the four. Some have regarded the two daughters as representing physical characteristics of the blood-sucker,others as expressing by an Orientalism a doubly intense craving. Parallelism suggests making the first two of the four the two daughters apart from other considerations; other allusions of the Scriptures to the greediness of the world of the dead, justify the first, while the second alone belongs to human nature. We can see no other reason than this for making the second the most emphatic of the four as Z. is disposed to do.Only the most unnatural theory of inspiration can take exception to the suggestion of a possible Indian origin for the substance and the external form of this proverb, its place and form here being secured by an appropriate and adequate influence of the Holy Spirit. The Book of Proverbs applies a very severe test to some theories of inspiration.A.]

7. Pro 30:17. The punishment of him who sins against his parents;an ethical maxim introduced without any close connection into the series of the Middoth in our section, as Pro 30:10 is above. Ewald would have the insatiableness of the birds of prey, which are to execute the judgment on the wicked man, regarded as the main idea of the proverb, connecting it with Pro 30:15-16. This element, however, is plainly too far in the background, and the main thought is rather his desert of curse and penalty who daringly tramples under foot the fifth commandment; and from this there is a sort of connection with Pro 30:11-14.An eye.the ravens of the valley (lit., brook) (comp. 1Ki 17:4-6) shall pluck it out, etc. [The , the Arabic Wady, is, sometimes the torrent, sometimes the valley through which it flows. See full illustrations and citations in Stanleys Palestine, p. 496.A.]The raven and the eagle (i. e., vulture) are named here as birds that feed upon carrion; the sons of the eagle, i.e., the young eagles, are named because it is especially upon sons, wayward sons, it is true, that the penalty is to be inflicted. The punishment itself, however, consists in strangling and leaving the bodies unburied, so that they become food for the fowls of heaven; comp. 1Sa 17:44; 1Ki 14:11; 1Ki 16:4, etc.[With reference to the raven consult Woods Bible Animals, p. 445; and to the eagle or griffin vulture, p. 346.A.]

8. Pro 30:18-20. Four incomprehensible things.The way of the eagle in the heavens, etc.Besides the ease with which the eagle, a large and heavy bird, soars high above in the air (comp. Job 39:27), this circumstance is also surely an object of the poets amazement, that it leaves behind no trace of its course; for the same thing is also true of the progress of the smoothly gliding serpent over the slippery rock, and also of that of the ship that swiftly ploughs the waves of the sea. Of the fourth of the ways here compared, the way of the man with the maid (or in the maid), i.e., of the mysterious way in which the man in sexual intercourse has fruitful connection with the maid, this failure to leave any trace behind seems indeed to be less true. And yet the author in this connection doubtless thinks not of pregnancy and the womans child-bearing as later results of sexual connection, but as Pro 30:20 shows, at first only of this, that the intercourse leaves behind it no traces immediately and directly apparent; man and wife, adulterer and adulteress, can the night following the accomplishment of the mysterious process be convicted of it by no one; the act is as little to be detected in them both as eating in him who after table has wiped his mouth (Pro 30:20, b, c). Moreover, the woman in Pro 30:19 is designated as i.e., as virgo pubescens, as a young woman capable of sexual intercourse (comp. Gen 24:43; Isa 7:14; Song Son 6:8), undoubtedly for this reason, that she is to be put in contrast with the adulterous woman in Pro 30:20; in other words, the sexual intercourse between man and woman is to be described first in its pure and normal type (the first love of the bridegroom and the bride, comp. Gen 2:24; Eph 5:31-32; Joh 3:29), and only afterwards in its degenerate form as adultery. Furthermore, the Alma of our passage has been in many ways interpreted also of the Virgin Mary, e.g., by Ambrose, Lyra, Corn, a Lapide, and Fr. Grisenius (in Lschers Unsch. Nachrichten, Vol. 13, p. 503) [and also by Wordsw. in loco].Dathe has very unnecessarily been disposed to regard Pro 30:20 as a spurious addition by a later hand. It is not even necessary (with Hitzig) to regard the Verse as a later addition coming from Agur himself, which he had not originally had in view.

9. Pro 30:21-23. Four intolerable things under which the earth trembles (not the land, as Luther, Umbreit, Bertheau, etc., render, weakening the sense). With Pro 30:21 comp. Amo 2:13; Amo 7:10.Under a servant when he becometh ruler.This is the first and most familiar example, by which the moral danger, and even the ruinous consequences of a sudden elevation of men from a depressed condition to an influential station and unwonted prosperity, are illustrated.And a fool when he is satisfied with bread.The becoming surfeited is usually attended by a becoming insolent (see Pro 30:9), especially in the case of a fool to whom not satiety but hunger is properly becoming (Pro 13:25; Job 27:14).

Pro 30:23. Under a hated woman when she is married. By the hated woman is meant, not one who is odious, worthy of hate (Rosenm., [E. V., H., N., S., M.,]), nor again a woman already married and only neglected and disparaged by her husband (Dathe, Umbreit,), but, as appears from the when she is married, when she obtains a husband, one who has remained waiting, the maiden (old maid) who at first could obtain no husband, but afterward when she has been married triumphs insolently, and deals harshly and contemptuously with her sisters or companions who are single (comp. Gen 29:31; Gen 29:33; Deu 21:15-17.) The same will be the conduct, according to clause b of a maid when she becomes heir to her mistress, i.e., undoubtedly, when she supplants her mistress in the favor of her husband, and so becomes his all-powerful favorite.

10. Pro 30:24-28. The four things that are small and yet wise (with respect to , made wise or quick of wit, comp. Psa 58:6; Psa 64:7). Four species of small animals are thus described, which in spite of their comparatively diminutive size and strength of body, yet by virtue of their diligence (Pro 30:25), shrewdness (Pro 30:26), harmony (Pro 30:27), and flexibility (Pro 30:28) serve as instructive emblems for the domestic, social and political life of men.With Pro 30:25 comp. Pro 6:7-8.For the conies (Z. cliff-badgers) in Pro 30:26, i.e., the hyrax Syriacus which live in companies in Syria, Palestine and Arabia Petra (not the marmot, the mus sive dipus jaculus, comp. Linnus, or the rabbit, as Luther renders the word, following the Chald. and the Rabbins), see Psa 104:18; Lev 11:5; Deu 14:7. [See Thomsons Land and Book, I. 459, and also Woods Bible Animals, pp. 31218; and for his illustration of the nature and habits of the ant of Palestine, pp. 61622; for the locusts see pp. 596604; and for the gecko, a species of lizard which he understands to be referred to in Pro 30:28 instead of the spider, see pp. 643, 534 sq. A.].For the organized going forth of the locusts, in Pro 30:27, comp. especially Joe 2:2 sq., [and Thomson, Land and Book, II. 109]. Finally the lizard in Pro 30:28 is as its name signifies the poisonous spotted lizard (stellio, Vulg.) in regard to which the thing here made prominent is its sly entering into the interior of houses, and even into the palaces of the great. For this characteristic of the animal Bochart brings forward various testimonies, Hieroz., I. Pro 4:7, p. 1090, Frankfort Ed. [Gesenius, Fuerst, etc., favor this rendering, and Wood (ubi supra) describes and depicts the peculiar form of the feet by which the lizard, the Gecko, layeth hold even upon flat surfaces like the walls of apartments.A.]

11. Pro 30:29-31. The four creatures that have a stately movement; three animals, and the king in his all-ruling dignity and power. The whole description really turns upon the last.

Pro 30:31. The greyhound, slender in its loins. This is the probable meaning of the difficult phrase (according to the Jewish interpreters, Ewald, Bertheau, [E. V., S., M.,] etc.). For is plainly derived from the root to compress, and therefore denotes a compact, slender animal; and the neighboring term seems to indicate the intention not to bring together exclusively examples of animal majesty of the high rank of the lion, but to give to the enumeration as a whole in a certain sense a ludicrous variety and an air of wit. The old versions (LXX, Vulg., Targ., etc.,) suggest the cock; with this meaning of the main noun the modifying term, however, does not at all agree, even though one were disposed to transform it into a Hithp. Part. . Others, like Schultens, Gesen. (?), Umbreit, Elster, Hitzig [De W., K., Muffet, N.] take the in the sense of that which is girded about the loins, or panoplied, and therefore the war-horse,a meaning however which is not surely demonstrable. [Starting with the same idea Wordsw. understands a warrior, and Wood an athlete. Fuersts rendering is stag].And a king with whom no resistance (occurs). In this way (with the Vulg., the Rabbins, Geier, Michaelis, Bertheau, Ewald, [K., E. V., H., S., M.], etc.), we must interpret the words , although the of Pro 12:28 is a very doubtful parallel for this way of regarding as a compound of and . For the identification of this noun with the Arabic the people (Castellio, Pococke, Umbreit, [De W., N.], etc.), an argument might seem to lie in the fact that the meaning so reached, the king at the head of his people, agrees almost literally with the of the LXX, and the similar version of the Syriac. But to bring in an Arabic word, especially one compounded with the article al is here quite too unnatural. Hitzigs emendation might better recommend itself, instead of , and all the more because it gives a very pertinent sense: A king with whom God is.

12. Pro 30:32-33. Warning against pride, haughtiness and love of strife, with an indication of three forms of evil resulting from these vices.If thou art foolish in exalting thy self(comp. 1Ki 1:5) and if thou devisest evil. To these two hypothetical antecedent clauses, which do not present an antithesis (the foolish and rationalas Hitzig explains) but two different forms of human error: foolish self-exaltation and wicked plotting, the sentence the hand on the mouth, forms the conclusion, interjectional and imperative (comp. Job 20:5).

Pro 30:33 then justifies the warning by a significant intimation of three cases in which the foolish act of pressing () brings forth undesirable results,strong cheese, flowing blood, sharp strife.And pressing (forcing) wrath produceth strife. The last word supplies plainly the object of the whole discourse from Pro 30:32 onward. The dual stands doubtless intentionally (comp. Dan 11:20) to indicate that it is the wrath of two whose sharp pressing upon each other leads to the development of strife. [Thomson, Land and Book, I. 398, describing the Oriental mode of churning by squeezing and wringing a leathern bag or bottle that contains the milk, makes more apparent and vivid the meaning of this comparison. The dual is employed probably because nostrils usually exist in pairs, and the transition is easy from the physical organ, through the heavy breathing of passion, to the metaphorical sense wrath. Whether two or many are concerned in strife is not material.A.]

DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL

As the confession of an Israelite, a believer in Jehovah in a strange land, one separated from his people of the ten tribes, who among Arabs and the sworn and mortal enemies of Israel, adheres firmly to the faith of his nation, this discourse of Agur is one of great doctrinal importance, and of no slight interest to the history of redemption. Its fundamental idea, which is put forward as a sort of programme, is contained in the six Verses of the introduction, and comes out most clearly in Pro 30:5 : Every word of God is pure; a shield is He to them that trust in Him. It is the truth, purity and saving power of the word of God alone, in contrast with the nullity and inadequacy of all human wisdom (Pro 30:2-5), that forms the starting point in the instructive discourse of this poet of wisdom, and to which all the manifold apothegms, numerical proverbs and enigmas which he combines in a varied series in Pro 30:7-33, sustain a closer or more remote relation.

While it appears at the first view that the flowers and fruits from the cornucopia of Agurs wisdom, original and in part so rarely fashioned, are heaped up wholly without order, yet they all agree in this, that they depict the glory and all-sufficiency of the word of God, dissuade from adding to it by any human supplements (see in particular Pro 30:7), and most urgently commend the fulfilling and following it by a pious life. There is hardly a single commandment of the Decalogue that is not directly or indirectly repeated and emphasized in these maxims. Observe the relation of the prayer for the hallowing of Gods name (Pro 30:7-9), to the first and third commandments; the reference contained in Pro 30:11 and again in Pro 30:17 to the fifth commandment; the warnings against the transgression of the sixth commandment in Pro 30:14 as well as in Pro 30:32-33; the reproving and warning aim of Pro 30:18-20; Pro 30:23, in their bearing upon the seventh; the allusion to the eighth in Pro 30:9, and to the ninth in Pro 30:10; and finally the reference, reminding us of the tenth, in Pro 30:15-16, as bearing on the unsatiableness of evil desire (this daughter of the blood-sucker and sister of hell!). No one of these proverbs is wholly without an ethical value, not even the two numerical proverbs, Pro 30:24-31, which at the first view stand apart as incidental reflections on merely natural truths, but in reality hide under their ingenious physical drapery decided moral aims. For in Pro 30:24-28 four chief virtues of ones social and political avocation are specified through an allusion to a like number of examples from the animal world (comp. exeg. notes, No. 10), and Pro 30:29-31 run into a delineation of the high dignity and glory of a king by the grace of God (in contrast with the insufferable tyranny of base upstarts, Pro 30:21-23).

It is true that the point of view taken in the authors doctrinal and ethical knowledge nowhere rises above the level of the pure religion of the law. The laws doctrine of retribution he holds with inexorable strictness and severity, as is indicated particularly in the fearful threatening prediction in Pro 30:17 against children who are disobebedient to their parents (, Rom 1:30). Against those who do not belong to the people of God of the Old Testament he appears to cherish prevailingly dispositions of hate and abhorrence, as the utterance in Pro 30:11-14, which is probably directed against such non-Israelitish people, shows (see remarks above on this passage). With respect to knowledge in the department of theology and Christology his point of view seems in no respect more elevated than that of the author of chaps. 19; for in Pro 30:4 he confesses that he knows nothing of the name of the Son of God, and he nowhere makes reference to the existence and efficiency of the hypostatic wisdom of God, not even where this would have been natural enough (e.g. in Pro 30:4-6). He need not be charged in addition with the intermingling of impure and superstitious notions from polytheistic religions, for the Aluka with its two daughters, in Pro 30:15, is evidently mentioned by him only with a symbolical design, as a personification of insatiableness (an evil lust that nothing can quell), and is by no means represented as an actually existing spectre, or demoniacal nature.1

HOMILETIC AND PRACTICAL

Homily on the entire chapter:The all-sufficient power and the fullness of blessing in the divine word in contrast with the weakness of mere human wisdom: a) in general (Pro 30:1-6); b) with special reference to the glory and indispensable necessity of the Decalogue (Pro 30:7-33); comp. Doctrinal and Ethical notes.Or again: To Gods word and law man is to add nothing (Pro 30:1-6), but he is also to take nothing away, not even one of its least commandments (Pro 30:7-33).Stcker: All true wisdom comes from God alone (17), not from human nature, which is rather exceedingly corrupt (1117), and whose understanding is greatly weakened (1824).

Pro 30:1-6. Melanchthon: Human wisdom is able to devise no means of preservation from the ignorance and spiritual weakness which naturally belong to us. But the Church in its divine revelation possesses a light which not only reveals to it the causes of its spiritual destitution, but also points out the means for its elevation and healing. Therefore this divinely revealed truth must be listened to by us, must be received in faith as well in its threatenings of punishment as in its consolatory contents, and be guarded from all corruption and perversion.Luther (marginal comment on ver.2): Wise people know that their wisdom is nothing; fools know everything and cannot err.Geier (on Pro 30:2-3): With the knowledge of himself and of the deep corruption that dwells in him the Christian must make the beginning in the contemplation of divine things.[Arnot: It is a precious practical rule to look toward heaven while we measure ourselves.Trapp: Godliness as it begins in right knowledge of ourselves, so it ends in a right knowledge of God.Edwards: All true spiritual knowledge is of that nature that the more a person has of it the more is he sensible of his own ignorance].Starke (on Pro 30:4-6): Whoever is engaged in the investigation and exposition of Gods word, let him take his reason captive to the obedience of faith, and not curiously scrutinize, that he may make divine mysteries comprehensible.Stcker (on Pro 30:5-6): On the glory of the divine word, especially its clearness, utility and perfectness.Berleburg Bible (on Pro 30:6); How many counterfeiters there are who from their poor copper make additions to the royal gold currency of Gods word, and thereby debase it![Lawson: Our trust must be in the name of the Lord, as it is represented to us in the word of God; the seed and the ground of our faith in Him.Muffet: It is treason to corrupt or falsify the princes coin; what high treason must it needs be then to counterfeit or corrupt the pure word of God!]

Pro 30:7-17. Comp. P. Gerhards poetical reproduction of Pro 30:7-9 : Zweierlei bitt ich von dir, etc. (Gesamm. geistliche Lieder, No. 41).[Trapp: God heaps mercies on His suppliants, and blames them for their modesty in asking.Arnot: Agurs requests are specific and precise; the temporal interests are absolutely subordinated to the spiritual prosperity of the suppliant; and a watch is set against the danger to a soul which lies in extremes either of position or of character.Bp. Hopkins: There is a seeking of worldly advantages which is not to be branded with the black mark of self-seeking; e.g. when we seek them with a due subordination to the higher and more noble ends of piety and holiness, such as that we may escape those temptations which possibly the want of them might expose us unto.Flavel: How much better were it for thee to endure the pains of hunger than those of a guilty conscience.Bates: To receive no hurtful impressions by great changes of condition discovers a habit of excellent grace and virtue in the soul].Geier: Although poverty and riches of themselves can neither make us blessed nor damn us, yet both are wont incidentally and through the fault of men not rarely to bring after them consequences injurious to our spiritual welfare.(On Pro 30:10): Keep thy tongue bridled, especially when it is disposed to rage against the needy and helpless; for though it is not right to curse thy neighbor, yet such curses when they have been uttered do not remain without effect, particularly if he who utters them is one who has been unjustly oppressed.Starke (on Pro 30:11-14): The natural corruption of men is great; yet it is possible that they be purged from it by the blood of Jesus Christ; 1Co 4:11; 1Jn 1:7.Unthankfulness (Pro 30:11), self-righteousness (Pro 30:12), pride (Pro 30:13), and unmercifulness (Pro 30:14) are usually associated as an unblessed quartette of sisters.Wohlfarth (on Pro 30:15-16): Many are the evil spirits that go about among men to spread misfortune and ruin, the cruel spectre of avarice is one of the most formidable enemies of our race. Like the vampyre which in the night attacks sleepers and sucks their blood, this demon rages in palaces and cottages, etc.(On Pro 30:17): What Agur here says by way of warning of ravens and vultures, etc., has already gone a thousandfold into literal fulfilment in a horrible way on children who are wayward and in consequence of their disobedience to parents sunk in the deepest spiritual need; who were either driven to self-murder, or died on the scaffold.

Pro 30:18-31. Luther (marginal, on Pro 30:19).: Love (the mystery of love, Eph 5:31-32) is not to be thought out or expressed.Geier (on Pro 30:18-20); As it is with adulterers so it is with flatterers; they will never allow their vicious nature to be called by the right name.(On Pro 30:21-23): It always causes manifold disquiet and misfortune, when they rule over others whom it would better befit to be subject to others.(On Pro 30:24-28): Despise not things that at the first glance appear small and contemptible. Under a poor garment there is often a wise man hid; Dan 1:18-20.(On Pro 30:29-31): In matters belonging to ones office and public calling it is important to be courageous and firm, especially in times of need. It is not well then if one forsakes those over whom one is set; Sir 10:31.[Lawson (on Pro 30:20): Do not imagine that the secrecy of sin is your security from punishment: it is the snare of your souls].

Pro 30:32-33. Luther (marginal, on Pro 30:32): Be not ashamed if thou hast chanced to err, and do not defend it. For to err is human, but to defend it is devilish.Lange: Strut not with lust of the eyes, fleshly lust and insolence. Thereby thou only provokest the wrath of God, that will come down too heavily for thee; Sir 5:2 sq.Berleburg Bible: He that would gladly shun strife must seek to avoid obstinacy and self-will. How many useless disputes in matters of religion might not in this way be escaped[Edwards: Silence attends humility.Muffet: He which falleth through pride should rise again to repentance].

Footnotes:

[1]The case appears to be otherwise with the spectre of the night mentioned in Isa 34:14; comp. Delitzsch on this passage.

Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange

DISCOURSE: 823
A SAINTS VIEWS OF HIMSELF

Pro 30:1-2. The words of Agur the son of Jakeh, even the prophecy: the man spake unto Ithiel, even unto Ithiel and Ucal, Surely I am more brutish than any man, and have not the understanding of a man.

THE sayings of the wise and good have in all ages been regarded with veneration, and been treasured up in the minds of men as a kind of sacred deposit, for the enriching and instructing of future generations. We have here a very remarkable saying of Agur the son of Jakeh; to which I would now call your attention. It does indeed, we must confess, appear, at first sight, a rash expression, savouring rather of intemperance than of sound discretion. But as it was delivered to Ithiel and Ucal, who were probably his disciples; and as it was introduced with the word, Surely, which marks it as the result of his deliberate judgment; and, above all, it being called a prophecy, which determines it to have been inspired of God; we should calmly inquire into it, and examine its import. That such an expression may be uttered by persons widely differing from each other in their moral and religious habits, I readily admit: and therefore, in order to prevent any misapprehension, I shall consider the text,

I.

As the language of passion

Sin, however fondly cherished in the heart of fallen man, is no other than folly and madness. So it is described by Solomon, in the Book of Ecclesiastes: I applied mine heart to know and to search, and to seek out wisdom and the reason of things; and to know the wickedness of folly, even of foolishness and madness [Note: Ecc 7:25.]. And again: The heart of the sons of men is full of evil; madness is in their heart while they live; and after that they go to the dead [Note: Ecc 9:3.]. When a person, who has been led captive by it, comes to discern somewhat of its true character, he is apt to feel indignation against himself, and to reproach himself in strong terms for the folly he has committed. We may well conceive of him as saying, in the language of our text, Surely I am more brutish than any man, and have not the understanding of a man. But this indignation against himself may be the mere language of passion, and not of genuine humiliation: and it may be distinguished from that which is the fruit of piety,

1.

In its object

[An ungodly man may feel strongly, whilst he has no real humility: he may hate his actions and himself on account of them. But it is not sin that he hates, so much as the consequences of his sin. Nor does he hate all its consequences: he hates it not as defiling to his soul, as offensive to his God, as injurious to his eternal interests; but as destructive of his peace, as degrading him in the eyes of his fellow-men, and as ruinous to his present welfare. A gamester, who has staked his all upon the cast of a die, and has thereby reduced himself and his family from affluence to want, curses his folly with the most indignant feelings; and so hates himself for it, that he can scarcely endure his very existence. But, if his money were restored, he would do the same again: or, if taught wisdom by experience, he would not refrain from his former habits on account of any regard for God or his own soul, but only on account of the injury that was likely to accrue from them in a temporal view. The same may be said respecting the votaries of dissipation. When their fortune is wasted by extravagance, and their constitution ruined by excess, they may be strongly impressed with the folly and madness of their past ways; whilst, if they could be restored to their former affluence and vigour, they would run the very same career again. Under all the painful consequences of his licentious habits, the libertine can scarcely avoid those reflections which Solomon represents as arising in his mind: Thou wilt mourn at the last, when thy flesh and thy body are consumed, and say, How have I hated instruction, and my heart despised reproof; and have not obeyed the voice of my teachers, nor inclined mine ear to them that instructed me! I was almost in all evil in the midst of the congregation and assembly [Note: Pro 5:11-14.]. Nor can we doubt, but that in hell those reflections will be both universal and exceeding bitter: for the wailing and gnashing of teeth which will be there experienced, will arise, in no small degree, from the consideration of the opportunities once enjoyed, but now irrecoverably and for ever lost [Note: Mat 13:42.].]

2.

In its operation

[The indignation of an ungodly man is sudden and transient; and is always accompanied with a crimination of those who have been in any measure accessary to the evils that have come upon him. But, in a man of piety, they are the fruit of deep reflection, dwelling habitually in the mind, and always attended with self-reproach. We may see in the Prodigal Son a just exhibition of that which arises from genuine repentance. He does not, under the pressure of his distress, cry out with vehement exclamations, designating his conduct by every term that an embittered spirit can suggest; but he adopts a resolution to return to his fathers house, and there, in measured and contrite language, confesses, I have sinned against heaven and before thee; and am no more worthy to be called thy son. Generally speaking, the more violent the expressions are, the less genuine is the contrition from which they flow. The exercise of deep and just feeling is rather in a way of temperate meiosis, than of vehement and fluent exaggeration. The two kinds of indignation may be easily distinguished by their attendant feelings: the one is the fruit of wounded pride, and the root of every thing that is unhallowed, whether in word or deed; the other is the offspring of deep contrition; and either the parent or the child of genuine conversion to God.]
Having discriminated, we hope, sufficiently between the expressions of our text as used by persons of opposite characters, and shewn how to distinguish them when uttered as the language of passion, we proceed to notice them,

II.

As the language of piety

We know assuredly that indignation is a fruit of godly sorrow: for St. Paul says to the Corinthians, Behold this self-same thing, that ye sorrowed after a godly sort, what carefulness it wrought in you, yea, what clearing of yourselves, yea, what indignation, yea, what fear, yea, what vehement desire, yea, what zeal, yea, what revenge [Note: 2Co 7:11.]! And we have seen it operate precisely as in the text, when, according to common apprehension, there would appear to be but little occasion for it. David, seeing the prosperity of the wicked, and not duly adverting to their end, had envied them: and in the review of his conduct he exclaims, So foolish was I, and ignorant; I was even as a beast before thee [Note: Psa 73:3; Psa 73:17; Psa 73:22.]. Nor are such views uncommon to the saints: or rather, I should say, there is no true saint who does not on some occasions apply them to himself.

If it be asked, How can such expressions fall from the lips of a real saint? I answer, they necessarily spring,

1.

From a view of the law under which we live

[Whilst ignorant of the spirituality and extent of Gods Law, we take credit to ourselves for our external conformity to its precepts; and are ready to imagine, that, touching the righteousness of the Law we are blameless [Note: Php 3:6.]. But when we come to see how broad the commandment is [Note: Psa 119:96.], that it reaches to the inmost thoughts of the soul, prohibiting even so much as an inordinate desire, and requiring us to love and serve our God with all our heart, and mind, and soul, and strength, we are struck dumb; our towering imaginations are cast down; and, like the Apostle Paul, we feel the sentence of death gone forth against us [Note: Rom 7:9.], and attaching to us no less for our best deeds, than for the most sinful action of our lives [Note: Job 9:2-3.]. Then we become observant of our defects: and, O! how lothesome are we then in our own eyes [Note: Eze 36:31.], in the view of that very obedience of which we once thought so highly! It is no wonder, if, with this augmented new of his own deformity, the saint speak of himself in very humiliating and degrading terms. A person coming into a room at night with a lighted taper, would see but little: if he returned at the dawn of day, he would have a clearer view of all the objects that before were scarcely visible: but, if he entered when the sun was shining forth in its strength, he would discern the smallest specks of dirt, and even the very motes in the air. But would he then conclude that all the dust and dirt which he now beheld had been cast in since his first entrance? No: he would know to what he must ascribe the change in his views, even to the increased light by which he was enabled to take the survey. And so a clearer view of Gods holy Law will give us a deeper insight into our own deformity, and turn the gloryings of self-esteem into the mournings of humiliation and contrition.]

2.

From a view of that God against whom we have sinned

[The least knowledge of God is sufficient to abase us before him: but the more we behold his glorious perfections, the more shall we stand amazed at the coldness of our love to him, and our want of zeal in his service. Job, previous to his troubles, was considered as a perfect man even by God himself. But when God had revealed himself more fully to his soul, how base did this holy man appear in his own eyes! Behold, I am vile! says he. I have heard of thee by the hearing of the ear; but now mine eye seeth thee. Wherefore I abhor myself, and repent in dust and ashes [Note: Job 40:4; Job 42:5-6.]. This will be the effect of all Gods manifestations of himself, whether in a way of providence or of grace. It is impossible to behold his goodness, his patience, his forbearance, and not stand amazed at our own insensibility. The ox and the ass do not appear so brutish as we [Note: Isa 1:3.]; nor the stork or crane or swallow so unobservant of the things which we are most concerned to notice [Note: Jer 8:7.]: and our only wonder is, that it should be possible for God to endure with such long-suffering our great and multiplied iniquities.]

3.

From a view of the obligations we lie under

[Our Lord has said, that our love to God will bear proportion to the sense we have of the extent of his mercy towards us in forgiveness [Note: Luk 7:47.]. But, when we reflect on the means he has used, in order to open a way for the exercise of his mercy towards us, what shall we not account his due? When we consider that he has not spared even his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, what bounds will there be to our gratitude; or rather, what bounds will there be to our humiliation for the want of gratitude? It will be impossible for us then ever to satisfy our own desires: if we had a thousand lives, we would devote them all to him, and at his call be ready to sacrifice them all for him. The services which we once thought sufficient will then appear little better than a solemn mockery; so entirely will our souls be absorbed in wonder at the thought of an incarnate God, a crucified Redeemer.]

4.

From a view of the interests we have at stake

[If only the life or death of our bodies were at stake, we should feel deeply interested in the event: but, when heaven end all its glory, or hell and all its misery, are the alternatives before us, one would suppose that every temporal consideration should be swallowed up, and vanish as the light of a star before the meridian sun. But the saint is not always so indifferent to the things of time and sense as he would wish to be. There are times, when every thing below the sun is in his eyes lighter than vanity itself: but there are, also, times when he finds his heart yet cleaving to the dust, and when his progress heavenward is slow and imperceptible. On such occasions he he is amazed at himself: he can scarcely conceive it possible that, with such prospects before him, he should be so stupid and brutish as he feels himself to be. Truly, at these seasons the language of our text will be often in his heart, and in his mouth too, especially if he find an Ithiel, or an Ucal, that is capable of understanding it.]

After viewing this subject, we shall be at no loss to understand,
1.

Whence it is that saints are often dejected in their minds

[None are at all times alike joyful. St. Paul says, that they who have the first-fruits of the Spirit, no less than others, sometimes groan within themselves, being burthened [Note: Rom 8:23. 2Co 5:4.]. And so it ought to be. In the review of their past lives they should be humbled, even as Paul was, when he designated himself as a blasphemer, and injurious, and a persecutor, and the very chief of sinners [Note: 1Ti 1:13; 1Ti 1:15.]. And under a sense of their remaining infirmities, it becomes them to lie low before God. Behold St. Paul, when he had preached the Gospel above twenty years, yet felt so much corruption within him, that he cried out, O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me [Note: Rom 7:24.]? The image which he here uses is that which has often been realized. He refers to a punishment sometimes inflicted on criminals, by chaining them to a dead corpse, and constraining them to bear it about with them, till they died through the offensiveness of its noxious odours. Such was his in-dwelling corruption to him, even at that advanced period of his life: and such it should be felt by every saint on earth. In truth, there should not enter so much as a ray of comfort into the soul, but from a view of the Sun of Righteousness. It is He alone that can, or ought, to arise upon us with healing in his wings. And therefore the Apostle, after the lamentation just mentioned, adds, I thank God, through Jesus Christ our Lord [Note: Rom 7:25.]. Let not this, then, prove a stumbling-block to any: nor let it be supposed, that, because a pious person uses, in reference to himself, terms which a worldly person would not deign to use, he must of necessity have committed any greater sin than others. His humiliation, as we have seen, arises out of the views which he has obtained of holy things: and the nearer his intercourse with heaven is, the move ready will he be to exclaim with the Prophet, Woe is me, I am undone! I am a man of unclean lips, dwelling in the midst of a people of unclean lips; that is, a leper, in the midst of a leprous and ungodly world [Note: Isa 6:5.].]

2.

How far they are from piety who are filled with self-complacent thoughts

[Persons who have been exemplary in their conduct, and punctual in their religious observances, are, for the most part, filled with a conceit of their own goodness, and confident of their acceptance with God on account of it. But little do they know how odious they are in the sight of God, whilst they are righteous in their own eyes. It is the Publican, and not the Pharisee, that will be justified before God: and the sick, not the whole, that will experience the Physicians aid. Christianity is not a remedial law, lowered to the standard of our weakness; but a remedy, by which the soul that is sick unto death may be effectually healed. Christ is a Saviour; but he is so to those only who feel themselves lost, and renounce every other hope but him. Bear this, then, in remembrance. Bear in remembrance, that there are no terms too humiliating to express the real state of your souls before God. You have lived as without God in the world, unconscious of his eye upon you; and his address to you is, Understand ye brutish among the people; and ye fools, when will ye be wise [Note: Psa 94:8.]? This may be offensive to our proud hearts; but it is such an address as we merit, and such a one as it becomes an holy God to deliver. The particular ground of Agurs self-abasement was, that he had not learned wisdom, or attained the knowledge of the Holy One [Note: ver. 3.]. And have not many amongst you the same ground for self-abasement? Yes, There are many amongst you who have not the knowledge of God. I speak this to your shame [Note: 1Co 15:34.]. Many amongst you have never yet walked in the ways of true wisdom. Humble yourselves, therefore, for your more than brutish stupidity: and now, as the Psalmist says, Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put their trust in him [Note: Psa 2:12.].]

Fuente: Charles Simeon’s Horae Homileticae (Old and New Testaments)

CONTENTS.

Here are mingled, with other divine things, a collection of Proverbs, as before: but it should seem to be not of the writings of Solomon. Their tendency is, however, the same; and, no doubt, they are of divine inspiration, being a part of the sacred canon of scripture.

Pro 30:1 The words of Agur the son of Jakeh, even the prophecy: the man spake unto Ithiel, even unto Ithiel and Ucal,

The Author, or writer, makes this first verse a preface to the subject. His name is Agur Ben Jakeh. And it is called a prophecy, what he here delivers. He seems to have addressed it to two persons, Ithiel and Ucal. But this is not certain. Indeed, from the names themselves of those persons, if they may be supposed to have any signification more to the doctrine herein contained, than to their own character, it should seem to be important. Ithiel means in the compound, God with me: and Ucal means mighty. So that it hath been supposed, that what is here delivered by Agur, is not to Ithiel, and Ucal, but concerning Christ, to whom those names are applicable. And this seems to be the more probable, because Agur means; in its original, a gatherer. So that if this be the intention, then the preface will be the word’s which are gathered by Agur, in prophecy of Ithiel, even of God the mighty one with me. And this seems yet more probable from the similar prophecy in Isa 7:14 and again in Isa 9:6 . But if there be the least authority for this interpretation of Agur’s preface, we shall be sure to find somewhat corresponding in the prophecy itself, in relation to Christ. I pray the Reader to be very diligent in looking out on this ground. And I yet pray more earnestly for that gracious God, whose office-character it is to take of the things of Jesus, and shew to us, to be with us in our going through this chapter!

Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

God’s Riddle

Pro 30:4

‘What is His name? and what is His Son’s name? Canst thou tell?’ It is God Almighty’s great conundrum spoken out of eternity into time; it is the riddle propounded by the Supreme Intelligence to the heart and reason of every man born into the world.

I. ‘Canst thou tell?’ The history of humanity is little else than one long wrestle with God’s infinite conundrum. And there are noble souls and able thinkers who never guess the riddle here, though who can dare to doubt that the solution comes to them hereafter? Never be a giver-up of God’s riddles; work at them till you die. The position of a giver-up of God’s riddle is dreary and paralysing; it declares that the riddle is unanswerable, and that the name of Him ‘who holds the wind in His fists’ is unknowable.

Is it unknowable? I believe that every man born into the world possessed once the solution of the riddle, when, ‘trailing clouds of glory,’ the immortal part ‘came from God who is its home’ into the prison-house of human birth.

It is a sweet legend of the Talmud that the indentation upon the upper lip of every man born into the world is a mark of the finger of God touching the mouth at birth and saying, ‘Child, thou knowest, but thou shalt not be able to reveal that which thou knowest till thou hast learnt it by the things which thou shalt suffer in the infant school of human life’.

II. ‘O our God, what is Thy name?’ Canst thou tell? There are tens of thousands who can tell. The Divine Man of Nazareth is the Sacrament of God, He is the outward and visible sign of the heart of universal Fatherhood; and to know it with an intense spiritual conviction that is beyond expression is to know the answer to God’s riddle about Himself. It is to give Him back the answer: ‘We have found out Thy secret’.

No man can force another man to believe it, there is cooperation necessary between his volition and the power of the Holy Spirit; but to believe it is to view the world and its problems from that moment with new eyes. And, moreover, it is to learn a new motive for purity, watchfulness, self-control.

III. But this is not all the riddle. ‘What is His name? and what is His Son’s name? Canst thou tell?’ Thy son’s name, O God, is Man; the human family itself, in all ages and in all conditions, the sum total of human flesh and blood, illumined by its heroism, its nobility, its victories, weighted with its crimes, its brutalities, its degradations. O God, alienated humanity may be, but it is Thy son.

And do you not see that here, and here only, is the impregnable foundation of the eternal hope for the race? The inexhaustible and ultimately effectual remedy for human depravity is the central, indwelling, immortal, Divine sonship in man. The Divine spark is inextinguishable. The Jew of old would keep his feet from treading upon a morsel of paper, however soiled, lest the name of Yahveh might be written thereon. Keep thy foot when thou art tempted to trample on thy brother man! The name of thy Father is written on his heart.

But how intensely does this magnificent truth emphasize the obligations of human brotherhood! The ‘solidarity of the race’ which we talk about so glibly is not a German epigram, but a Divine truth. It is a truth that, in spite of all our glorious assurance, will cause yearning anguish to the heart that realizes it most. Upon such a heart ‘the Lord lays the iniquity of all’. Only One so realized the unity of the race of which He was the Archetypal Representative, that every sin and God-defiance in the world thrilled through Him, and it broke His heart far more surely than the soldier’s spear.

Archdeacon Wilbeefoece, Sermons Preached in Westminster Abbey, p. 15.

References. XXX. 8. E. H. Eland, Christian World Pulpit, vol. lx. 1901, p. 397. XXX. 8, 9. H. Rix, Sermons, Addresses, and Essays, p. 135. J. J. Ingram, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xxxix. 1891, p. 101. J. M. E. Ross, ibid. vol. lxii. 1902, p. 34. XXX. 24-28. J. M. Neale, Sermons on the Apocalypse, etc., p. 324. XXXI. Stopford A. Brooke, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xliii. 1893, p. 241. XXXI. 1 . W. Arnot, Laws from Heaven for Life on Earth, p. 568. XXXI. 10. R. Glover, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xl. 1891, p. 379. F. Temple, ibid. vol. lvii. 1900, p. 232. XXXI. 10-31. W. Arnot, Laws from Heaven for Life on Earth, p. 571. J. Vickery, Ideals of Life, p. 239. A. Maclaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture Esther, Job, Proverbs, etc., p. 288. XXXI. 11. J. M. Neale, Sermons on the Apocalypse, etc., p. 191. XXXI. 11, 12. G. Bainton, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xxxviii. 1890, p. 234. XXXI. 12. J. M. Neale, Sermons on the Apocalypse, etc., p. 201. XXXI. 13. Ibid. p. 211. XXXI. 14 . Ibid. p.. 220. XXXI. 15. Ibid. p. 228. XXXI. 16. Ibid. p. 237. XXXI. 17. Ibid. p. 245. XXXI. 18. Ibid. pp. 252, 258; see also Sermons Preached in a Religious House, vol ii. p. 401. XXXI. 20. J. M. Neale, Sermons on the Apocalypse, etc., p. 275. XXXI. 21. Ibid. p. 281. XXXI. 22. Ibid. p. 287. XXXI. 23. Ibid. p. 294. XXXI. 24. Ibid. p. 303. XXXI. 26. Ibid. p. 309. XXXI. 25, 26. C. Gore, Christian World Pulpit, vol. lix. 1901, p. 72. XXXI. 26. A. F. Winnington Ingrain, The After-glow of a Great Reign, p. 48. XXXI. 26. J. M. Neale, Sermons on the Apocalypse, etc., p. 317. XXXI. 28. H. C. G. Moule, My Brethren and Companions, p. 81. XXXI. 29. J. H. Hitchins, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xxxvii. 1890, p. 109. H. P. Hughes, ibid. vol. lix. 1901, p. 82. XXXI. 30. G. Bainton, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xxxviii. 1890, p. 122. XXXI. 30, 31. H. Broughton Barnes, Christian World Pulpit, vol. lxvii. 1905, p. 83. W. Arnot, Laws from Heaven for Life on Earth, p. 578. XXXI. 31. G. Bainton, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xxxviii. 1890, p. 410.

Fuente: Expositor’s Dictionary of Text by Robertson

The Prayer of Agur

Pro 30

With the twenty-ninth chapter the Proverbs of Solomon come to a conclusion. The remaining portion of the book may be regarded as an appendix divisible into three parts: (1) The words of Agur the son of Jakeh; (2) The words of King Lemuel, giving the prophecy which his mother taught him; and, lastly, the praise of a good wife. The words of Agur are, according to the best authorities, to be traced to some unknown sage whose utterances were of a kindred quality with those of Solomon himself. The wisdom of foreign nations was held in high estimation by the Jews, in proof of which refer to 1Ki 4:30-31 : “And Solomon’s wisdom excelled the wisdom of all the children of the east country, and all the wisdom of Egypt. For he was wiser than all men;… and his fame was in all nations round about” Although he was wiser, yet his wisdom may have been of the same quality. One mountain is higher than another, but both are mountains. The Book of Job is considered to be of an undoubted foreign origin, being probably the work of some Arabian author. It is a mistake to suppose that the Bible ignores wisdom that is not within its own limits. The Bible looks upon all men as divine creations, and upon every man as probably possessing some portion of the secret of the Almighty. The excellence of the Bible is found in the fact that whilst it contains, either in germ or in explicit statement, all the wisdom of the ages, it adds to that wisdom some revelation of its own, or a peculiar accent of delivery, or a special charm, or a unique expression; for a long time it may be on the same level with other sacred writings, but suddenly it separates itself from them and assumes a lofty and unapproachable dignity of thought and expression. It has been charged upon the Bible that it contains many things which are to be found in other sacred books. As well charge it with being printed in the same type as the Koran, or the works of Confucius. The alphabets may be the same, the type may be identical, many of the words may be mere repetitions, and yet there may be a speciality which gives unique distinctiveness to Bible words and Bible thoughts. The right reader of human history will find that the nations are made of one blood, and that the voice of humanity, when undisturbed by unreasoning passion, or perverted by unholy prejudice, is in reality one and the same. The unity of human nature is everywhere attested when life comes to critical points and is called upon to express its most urgent and poignant necessities. The word “prophecy,” in the first verse, is a term which is constantly employed to express the action of “utterance”: the prophecy is the message which a prophet bore or carried to his hearers, and is often one of gloom rather than of joyous import. By prophecy we are not always to understand prediction, but teaching, exposition, the highest and deepest philosophy. Probably Agur belonged to North Arabia, and it is supposed that Lemuel might be king of the same Arab tribe. Ithiel and Ucal were probably disciples of Agur: the one name means “God with me”; the other name means “I am strong.” There have been not a few mystical and fanciful interpretations of these terms. We should beware of all such interpretations, for they minister to vanity rather than to instruction. When Agur says in the second verse, “Surely I am more brutish than any man, and have not the understanding of a man,” he feels so contemptible in his own estimation as to realise that he can scarcely be the handiwork of God. He feels as if he were unworthy of a Creator so lofty and wise. Self-contempt may be the beginning of true wisdom. Here is a rebuke to that pride which brings destruction, and to that haughtiness which precedes a fall. Every man should know exactly how little he is, how frail, in some aspects and senses how worthless, and out of this self-abasement will come a correct conception of the possibilities of life and destiny of the soul. We must not begin too high. Children of the dust should begin where God himself began them: they did not begin as divine, and then proceed to incarnation; they began as dust, and then received the divine breath. The contrary was the process with our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ: he was in the form of God, and thought it not robbery to be equal with God; yet he took upon him the form of a servant. The first Adam is of the earth earthy; the second Adam is of the Lord from heaven. Notice the contrastive point of origin: men began as dust and grew up into divinity: Jesus Christ began as Lord of life and took upon him the seed of Abraham. Yet there was a meeting-point, and that meeting point is at once a mystery and a revelation: great is the mystery of godliness, God manifest in the flesh; yet we behold his glory, the glory as of the Only-begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth. We understand him though he came from above and we ourselves came from beneath. We have all one Father.

From this low and proper self-estimation Agur sends forth certain great questions which have troubled and divided the intellect of men in all ages.

“Who hath ascended up into heaven, or descended? who hath gathered the wind in his fists? who hath bound the waters in a garment? who hath established all the ends of the earth? what is his name, and what is his son’s name, if thou canst tell?” ( Pro 30:4 ).

Agur cannot grasp the grand idea of the divine existence: he sees partial glories; sections and phases of truth gleam upon him with sudden and startling brightness; but the totality of things is beyond him: he cries out mightily after that which is lacking, if haply he may discover it and rejoice in its personal possession. The questions bring out the littleness of the creature as compared with the majesty of the Creator. Agur wants to hear of some one who has been through all the sanctuary of God, who has taken the dimensions of the Lord’s temple, and comprehended all the reason and poetry of the divine administration. Is he not here unconsciously crying out for the living Christ? It would be fanciful on our part to say that he was doing so, yet who can tell exactly all the meaning of his own prayer? Is not God behind every prayer as well as above it? Is he not the author of prayer as well as of the answers to prayer? Hitherto we have been too much inclined to think of God only as the answerer of prayer, and not as its inspirer: we should place God at both ends of the prayer; at the end which expresses necessity, and at the end which expresses fulness and gratitude. Agur still feels that the universe is to be comprehended; at present it is to his mind an infinite and unknown quantity, yet he is persuaded that there must be someone who holds the key of the infinite dominion. We have said that in all ages religious questions have troubled men. We read in another book, “Canst thou by searching find out God? canst thou find out the Almighty unto perfection? It is as high as heaven; what canst thou do? deeper than hell; what canst thou know? The measure thereof is longer than the earth, and broader than the sea.” Then the inquiry comes down from above as well as rises from beneath. God himself turns this very ignorance on the part of man into a reason why man should worship, inquire, and prostrate himself in the abasement of adoration “Gird up now thy loins like a man; for I will demand of thee, and answer thou me. Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding. Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it?” What is true of the physical universe is true of that larger creation which Christians recognise as the spiritual origin of life and progress; specially is it true of the wondrous fulness of the grace and goodness of God. The mightiest mind that ever consecrated its powers to the Christian cause exclaimed in wonder, “O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out!” Jesus Christ himself assures the Church that only One has ever seen the length and breadth, the depth and height of the universe of God. “And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.” What has man seen of the universe? Yet how pompously and loudly he talks about his acquisitions of knowledge, about his scientific attainments, and about his right to formulate conclusions, and establish dogmas of orthodoxy and heterodoxy! We are but of yesterday, and know nothing. Tomorrow, as we have often said, is the secret of time, which the wisest man can only guess at and cannot fully reveal and determine. Thus are we beaten back in our highest ambition, and are taught that we are only wise when we are religious; only most philosophical when we are most trustful and obedient.

Agur lays down an estimate of the divine word which the ages in all their multifold experience have only confirmed and if possible enlarged.

“Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him. Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar” ( Pro 30:5-6 ).

The glories of the divine word are here compared with the glories of nature, and a supreme excellency is assigned to the revelation of God. “Every word of God is pure,” that is, it has been tried, tested, proved, and ascertained to be good, not by speculation, but in the fire of experience. By “pure” we are to understand gold that has been purged of dross. Not only is every word pure in the sense of holiness, but every word is pure in the sense of having been tried and severely tested. Nothing is left to conjecture or to speculation: the word of God stands upon the rock of human experience. The Psalmist says, “The words of the Lord are pure words,” and then he proceeds to explain what is meant by the word pure, saying, “as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.” Then again, when the Psalmist extols the divine word, he gives after every tribute to its excellence a reference to human experience; he says, for example “The statutes of the Lord are right,” and his proof is, “rejoicing the heart”: he continues, “The commandment of the Lord is pure,” and his reason for saying so is, “enlightening the eyes”: he continues, “The fear of the Lord is clean,” and the reason he assigns is, “enduring for ever.” So we have not only high philosophy but simple experience; we can begin with the philosophy, or we can begin with the experience; but at whatever point we begin we reach the conclusion that “The judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether.” Agur gives as a reference to human experience this statement in the fifth verse, “He is a shield unto them that put their trust in him.” That is a statement which can be tested; we can refer to our religious life, to the providence of God as seen in our own history. We must not confine our attention to this day or to that day, but take in a sufficient breadth of time, and doing so we shall be able to draw a just conclusion as to the government of God seen within the circle of our own going. “O Israel, trust thou in the Lord: he is their help and their shield. O house of Aaron, trust in the Lord: he is their help and their shield. Ye that fear the Lord, trust in the Lord: he is their help and their shield.” God is very jealous lest any should add to his words, not by way of explaining their meaning, which is legitimate, but in the way of supplying supposed omissions, or adding something that is of another grade and quality. The flower is not added to the root; it comes out of the root as its natural and final expression. So the word of the Lord in its terse expressions may be expanded into volumes and libraries, and yet nothing may be added in the sense which is forbidden. When men add their own fancies or their own inventions to the divine testimony they are guilty of felony; the addition is but so much subtraction, for it perverts the meaning, it lessens the force, it modifies or destroys the original authority. “Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you.” Speaking of his own book, John says that he received this message: “If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: and if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.”

Having surveyed himself, and the universe, and the spiritual revelation of God, Agur seems to concentrate his thoughts upon two practical points. After all, this is what we ourselves must do. We can look at our own nature until we are filled with contempt; we can look upon the universe until we are overwhelmed and filled with dismay, giving up in despair the thought of ever knowing the boundless creation of omnipotence: and we can look upon the divine word until we see that the word of God is infinitely greater than his works: after all this survey and study we have to come back to one or two practical things, and rest upon these, assured that from these alone can we move on with any security and hope of larger studies and wider investigations.

“Two things have I required of thee; deny me them not before I die: remove far from me vanity and lies: give me neither poverty nor riches; feed me with food convenient for me: lest I be full, and deny thee, and say, Who is the Lord? or lest I be poor, and steal, and take the name of my God in vain” ( Pro 30:7-9 ).

This is practical piety. May it be with us as it was with Agur. When we return from our vast contemplations may it be to take up a policy of actual conduct, of simple piety, looking well to the issue of our own actions, and putting ourselves trustingly and lovingly under the inspiration of God. Let the Lord be our purse-keeper; let us put the key of our door into God’s hands; yea, let us give ourselves over to him wholly, that he may control our uprising and our downsitting, our going out and our coming in. Agur would have “food convenient for” him; that is, literally, “bread of my portion”: just the simple daily appointment: the little quantity needed from sunrise to sundown: Agur would thus be as a child at home, not asking for anything great or grand, but simply that life might be sustained, that life itself might be turned to the highest and holiest purposes. “Godliness with contentment is great gain. For we brought nothing into this world, and it is certain we can carry nothing out. And having food and raiment let us be therewith content.” The apostle himself learned this lesson, saying, “I have learned in whatsoever state I am, therewith to be content.” The word “learned” is the keyword of the whole expression. It did not come naturally, it was not an instinct or an intuition; it was a matter of simple, real experience. Many things may have been tried, many promises may have been tested, many courses may have been experimented upon, but the upshot of the whole is the divine learning, the sacred lore, that contentment is the true ambition, and that contentment is the beginning of real riches. If we are eager or impetuous, or determined to be wealthy, we shall fall into many an abyss. “They that will be rich fall into temptation and a snare, and into many foolish and hurtful lusts, which drown men in destruction and perdition.” Agur was thus a Christian before the time. He represented in his own spirit and conduct the teaching of the Apostle Paul and the teaching of the Apostle John. “The love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.” Agur seems to have anticipated all this, and to have desired that he might be preserved from such disaster. “All that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.” Such is the testimony of the Apostle John. When Jeshurun waxed fat he kicked; when he was covered with fatness he forsook God, and lightly esteemed the Rock of his salvation. When the people of God were led into a rich pasture they were filled, and their heart was exalted; and in the day of their exaltation God said, “Therefore have they forgotten me.” We cannot amend Agur’s prayer. It is not easily offered with the whole consent of the mind and heart. The words themselves are often repeated, but how few there are who realise how far-stretching is their meaning, how complete is the trust in divine providence which they express. Judge me, O my Father; thou knowest my capacity, my power of resisting temptation, my weakness, and my strength; thou knowest how soon I should be overthrown and victimised and destroyed; thou knowest whether I was intended to be a trustee of great power and wealth, or but a humble doorkeeper in thy great creation: only teach me what thy will is, and help me to express it in love, obedience, and joyous hopefulness. Then shall I grow in grace, and be prepared for larger duties and heavier responsibilities.

“There is a generation that curseth their father, and doth not bless their mother. There is a generation that are pure in their own eyes, and yet is not washed from their filthiness. There is a generation, O how lofty are their eyes! and their eyelids are lifted up. There is a generation, whose teeth are as swords, and their jaw teeth as knives, to devour the poor from off the earth, and the needy from among men” ( Pro 30:11-14 ).

These four generations are but one. This is Agur’s view of the age in which he lived, or it may be his summary of human nature as it had come under his own observation. It is noticeable that the same characteristics are pointed out by the Apostle Paul in 2Ti 3 . Have there ever been any other generations within all the boundaries of time? Has the world ever been lacking in unfilial souls? How many men are there whose own self-estimate is admirable, and whose filthiness is obvious to all observers! Who has not seen the generation whose eyes are lofty, and whose eyelids are lifted up? and who has not seen all the three generations represented in the fourth, whose teeth are as swords, and their jaw teeth as knives, to devour the poor from off the earth, and the needy from among men? Self-conceit is at the centre of all the evil character which is here depicted. The men who curse their father and their mother do so in the loftiness of their self-complacency. Whenever eyes are lofty, and eyelids are lifted up, we may be perfectly sure that the teeth are as swords, and the jaw teeth as knives. Impious piety is the very vilest kind of religion. Hypocrisy is as cruel as it is deceitful. Evil men put on the garments of religion, but carry the swords or daggers of vengeance underneath the Christian velvet The Bible will always have reality, as we have seen again and again. Pretence, profession, ostentation cannot receive the smallest degree of allowance from Bible teaching. Simplicity, true-heartedness, frankness, reality of purpose, these are everywhere commended in the sacred volume. The spiritual claims of the Bible are largely sustained by its direct and healthy criticism of the manners of society. The Bible does not look upwards only, as if lost in religious rapture; it looks abroad, on the right hand and on the left, and with penetrating criticism delineates every speciality of human character. The generations of men are familiar to it; human nature is not an unknown quantity that is talked about in mystical language; it is rather the positive reality that is fully comprehended and wisely estimated, and is dealt with from high religious altitudes. We can belong to any of these four generations if we please. We can be unfilial; we can be pure in our own eyes; we can lift up our eyelids in impious mockery to heaven; we can sharpen our teeth as swords, and our jaw teeth as knives; all this evil distinction is open to us; but inasmuch as its history is bad, in and out, without one single redeeming feature, let us rather abhor that which evil and cleave to that which is good. The opposite characteristics of these verses may be repeated in our lives with complete and happy success: we can be filial, we can cleanse ourselves from all iniquity, we can look down upon the earth in pity and in love, we can fill our mouths with gracious words, sweet promises inspired by the divinely purified heart. Evil is never portrayed that it may be copied; it is always delineated that it may alarm and shock and repel men; showing them how awful a thing it is to depart from the spirit of purity, and import discord into the music of divine purpose and administration.

Fuente: The People’s Bible by Joseph Parker

XXIV

OTHER PROVERBS OF SOLOMON AND THE APPENDICES

Pro 25:1-31:31 .

The title of the section, Pro 25:1-29:27 , is found in Pro 25:1 : “These also are proverbs of Solomon, which the men of Hezekiah king of Judah copied out.” Perowne says,

This title is interesting as affording a proof that revival of literary activity accompanied the revival of religion and of national prosperity which marked the reign of Hezekiah. Hezekiah himself was a poet of no mean order (Isa 38:9-12 ); and “the men of Hezekiah” were doubtless a body of scribes engaged under the direction of the king in literary labors. But beside this, this brief title is one of those “fragments of history,” which, as Professor Sayce has shown, “have been illuminated by the progress of oriental research,” and “the importance and true significance of which can now be realized for the first time.” This title points, he thinks, to the existence of a royal library in Jerusalem, into which these proverbs, never before edited, were now gathered and “copied out” and similar to the libraries which are now known to have existed in the cities of Babylonia and Assyria. The vassalage of Judah to the king of Assyria in the reign of Ahaz had necessarily led to the introduction of Assyrian culture into Jerusalem. Ahaz himself had led the way. In the court of the palace he had erected a sundial, a copy of the gnomons which had been used for centuries in the civilized kingdoms of the Euphrates and the Tigris. But the erection of the sundial was not the only sign of Assyrian influence. The most striking feature of Assyrian and Babylonian culture was the libraries, where scribes were kept constantly employed, not only in writing and compiling new books, but in copying and re-editing older ones. The “men of Hezekiah” who “copied out” the proverbs of Solomon performed duties exactly similar to the royal scribes in Nineveh.

It would be a profitable exercise to note all the varieties of stanza, and to select a number of the most beautiful proverbs found in this section, and then compare Pro 25:7 with Luk 14:8-10 as an example of the New Testament elaboration of a proverb, but these matters must be left to the Bible student to be worked out for himself. The author recommends an earnest reading and careful study of this wonderful section of the proverbs of Solomon.

The collection of proverbs in Pro 30 is ascribed to a philosopher, or teacher, named Agur, the son of Jakeh, and is addressed by him to Ithiel and Ucal, presumably his scholars or disciples. The name Ithiel occurs again as that of a Benjamite in Neh 11:7 . Ucal as a proper name is not found elsewhere in the Old Testament. Horton says, Whoever Agur was, he had a certain marked individuality; he combined meditation on lofty questions of theology with a sound theory of practical life. He was able to give valuable admonitions about conduct. But his characteristic delight was to group together in quatrains visible illustrations of selected qualities or ideas.

The following is a brief analysis of Pro 30 :

The chapter, which is highly interesting and in some respects unique, on which account it may have been selected out of other similar literature for publication as an Appendix to this book, consists of a Title, or note of authorship (Pro 30:1 ), followed by a prologue, in which in a spirit of deep abasement, which is the spirit of true wisdom, the author confesses his own utter ignorance in view of the great questions which offer themselves for solution. The study of nature makes it clear that there is a God; but who can tell Who and What He is (Pro 30:2-4 )? Only by revelation can He be known; and in that revelation, held sacred from all admixture, man finds Him and is safe (Pro 30:5-6 ). To the God thus found and trusted the writer turns with a two-fold prayer that he may be in himself a real and true man; a prayer that in his earthly lot he may have the happy mean, removed from the temptations which belong to the extremes of poverty and riches (Pro 30:7-9 ). Then, after an isolated proverb of the familiar type (Pro 30:10 ), another peculiarity of this Collection, which may have been a further reason for its being appended to the Book of Proverbs, is introduced. A series of five “numerical proverbs,” or “quatrains,” as they have been called, groups of “four things,” with a single proverb inserted between the second and third groups (Pro 30:17 ), brings the Collection to a close with the exception of one final proverb at the end of the chapter (Pro 30:32-33 ). CAMBRIDGE BIBLE

It is very interesting to note in this chapter Agur’s prayer (Pro 30:7-9 ), the four insatiable things (Pro 30:15-16 ), the four inscrutable things (Pro 30:18-20 ), the four intolerable things (Pro 30:21-23 ), the four wise little things (Pro 30:24-28 ) and the four stately things (Pro 30:29-31 ), all of which have their lessons for us. There are several fine isolated proverbs here (Pro 30:10-11 ; Pro 30:14 ; Pro 30:17 ; Pro 30:32-33 ), each with its own lessons.

Pro 31:1-9 has King Lemuel for its author. This is just another name for Solomon. Taking the chapter as a whole, the following is a good, brief analysis:

1. Salutation (Pro 31:1 )

2. Maternal admonitions (Pro 31:2-9 ).

3. Characteristics of a worthy woman (Pro 31:10-31 ).

From the salutation we learn that King Lemuel was the author of Pro 31:1-9 which is the oracle taught him by his mother. This is a fine example of maternal influence. There can be no finer compliment to a good mother than the effect of her life and teaching finding expression in the conduct and writings of her children.

The maternal admonitions in Pro 31:2-9 are expressions of the desire of a true mother’s heart for her children. The warning here concerning strong drink with its results in the lives of kings and princes might be good advice for kings, princes, governors, and others in high positions today. It will be noted that the admonition here relative to strong drink is immediately connected with the admonition concerning women and it does not require an extensive observation now to see the pertinency of these warnings. These are twin evils and wherever you find one of them you find the other also. It is not to be understood that there is sanction here of strong drink as a beverage, but rather the medicinal use of it as in the case of Paul’s advice to Timothy to take a little wine for the stomach’s sake. It may also be noted here that righteous judgment is unjoined and this, too, is always in danger at the hands of those who indulge in strong drink.

The passage, Pro 31:10-31 , is an acrostic, or alphabetical poem, and a gem of literature. This passage is the picture of a worthy woman. In the Cambridge Bible we have this fine comment:

The picture here drawn of woman in her proper sphere of home, as a wife and a mother and the mistress of a household, stands out in bright relief against the dark sketches of woman degraded by impurity, or marred, by imperfections, which are to be found in earlier chapters of this Book (Pro 2:16-20 ; Pro 5:1-23 ; Pro 5:7 ; Pro 22:14 ; Pro 23:27-28 , and Pro 11:22 ; Pro 19:13 ; Pro 21:19 Corruptio optimi pessima. We have here woman occupying and adorning her rightful place, elevated by anticipation to the high estate to which the Gospel of Christ has restored her. It is an expansion of the earlier proverbs: “Whoso findeth a wife findeth a good thing, and obtaineth favor of the Lord” (Pro 18:22 ). The ideal here set forth for the woman is fine and represents her at her best and most influential business, viz: that of making a home.

QUESTIONS

1. What is the title of the section, Proverbs 25:1-29:28, and of what is it a proof?

2. What are the varieties of stanza found in this section?

3. What kinds of parallelism are found in this passage?

4. Give ten of the most beautiful proverbs found in this section, showing their application.

5. What proverbs in this section are elaborated in a New Testament parable?

6. Who were Agur, Ithiel, and Ucal and what may be remarked especially of Agur?

7. Give a brief analysis of Pro 30 .

8. What is Agur’s prayer?

9. What are the four insatiable things according to Agur?

10. What are the four inscrutable things?

11. What are the four intolerable things?

12. What are the four wise little things?

13. What are the four stately things?

14. Who was King Lemuel?

15. Give a brief analysis of Pro 31 .

16. What do we learn from the salutation?

17. What are the maternal admonitions in Pro 31:2-9 and what do you think of them?

18. What can you say of the passage, Pro 31:10-31 ?

19. According to this passage what is the picture here of a worthy woman?

20. What do you think of the ideal here set forth for the woman?

Fuente: B.H. Carroll’s An Interpretation of the English Bible

Pro 30:1 The words of Agur the son of Jakeh, [even] the prophecy: the man spake unto Ithiel, even unto Ithiel and Ucal,

Ver. 1. The words of Agur the son of Jakeh. ] The Vulgate renders, Verba Congregantis filii Vomentis, taking these proper names for appellatives, as if the penman of this chapter meant to tell us that he would here give us his sacred collectanies or miscellanies, such as he had taken up from the mouths of wisest men, who had vomited or cast them up, in a like sense as that painter in Aelian drew Homer vomiting, and all the other poets licking it up. a This Agur, whether he lived in Solomon’s days or Hezekiah’s, was an excellent man, as the word Gheber here used imports; Vir bonus et prudens, minus tamen clarus (as one saith of Jesse, David’s father), a godly, wise man, though nothing be elsewhere spoken of him in Scripture. Some think that, being requested by Ithiel and Ucal, two of his disciples, to give them a lesson, Socrates-like he answered, Hoc unum scio, quod nihil scio: This one thing I know, that I know nothing: “Surely I am more brutish than any man,” sc., of myself, further than taught of God; for every man is a brute by his own understanding, as Jeremiah hath it. Jer 10:8 But I rather incline to those that take Ithiel and Ucal for Christ, whose goodness and power – those two pillars of a Christian’s faith, as Jachin and Boaz were of Solomon’s temple – are by these two names deciphered, and whom he propounds as the matter of his prophecy. Now, because sense of misery must precede sense of mercy, neither can any be welcome to Christ, but “the weary and heavy laden”; therefore he first bewails his own brutishness – fetching it up as low as Adam fallen, Pro 30:2 and aggravating it in that he had not yet acquired better abilities. Pro 30:3 Next he flees to Ithiel and Ucal, by the force of a particular faith – Ithiel, God with me, and Ucal, God Almighty, through whom I can do all things. This, this was the right ready way of coming to Christ; and him that thus cometh he will in no wise cast out. Joh 6:37 There is a good interpreter, b that, paralleling this text with Jer 9:23-24 , reads it thus: A gathering together of the words of Agur, the son of Jakeh. Let the excellent man say, ‘Let God be with me, let God be with me, and I shall prevail.’

a Aelian, Hist. var.

b Muffet.

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

Agur = I shall fear. Probably a master of assemblies, as in Ecc 12:11. Nothing is known of him, but we accept all that was in the Scriptures which the Lord Jesus referred to. We know as little of some of the Minor Prophets.

prophecy = oracle, or burden.

man. Hebrew. geber. App-14.

Ithiel = El [is] with me. App-4.

Ucal = I shall be able.

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

Chapter 30

This is the end of the proverbs that were gathered by Hezekiah’s men. Now in the thirtieth chapter we have,

The words of Agur ( Pro 30:1 )

Whoever he is. He tells us who he is, but it really doesn’t help.

[he’s a] son of Jakeh ( Pro 30:1 ),

But I don’t know who Jakeh is.

even the prophecy: the man spake unto Ithiel, even unto Ithiel and Ucal ( Pro 30:1 ),

And men that I don’t know. So yet God has seen fit to put this here in the scriptures. Agur declares,

Surely I am more brutish than any man, I have not the understanding of a man. I neither learned wisdom, nor have the knowledge of the holy ( Pro 30:2-3 ).

In other words, the guy isn’t making any claims for himself, Ph.D.’s or anything else. “I have not learned wisdom, nor do I have the knowledge of the holy. I’m more brutish than any man. I don’t have the understanding of men.” But now he asks some very searching questions.

Who hath ascended up into heaven, or descended? ( Pro 30:4 )

Talking about men.

who has gathered the wind in his fists? ( Pro 30:4 )

Surely no man.

who hath bound the waters in a garment? ( Pro 30:4 )

Surely no man.

who hath established all the ends of the earth? ( Pro 30:4 )

Not man. He’s talking about God. He’s talking about the things that are in God’s category. Paul tells us, “He who has ascended is the same one who first of all descended. And when He ascended, He led the captives or led the captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men” ( Eph 4:8-9 ). So, “Who hath ascended up into heaven, or descended? Who has gathered the winds in his fists? Who has bound the waters in a garment? Who has established all the ends of the earth?”

what is his name ( Pro 30:4 ),

Interesting. But even more interesting, he said,

what is his son’s name ( Pro 30:4 ),

Referring to God’s Son. And so it is an interesting question. He is speaking of the characteristics and the things that belong unto God. He said, “What is His name?” The name, of course, is Yahweh. And what is His Son’s name? Yahovah Shua, Jesus.

if you can tell? For every word of God is pure: he [that is, God] is a shield unto them that put their trust in him. Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar ( Pro 30:4-6 ).

Don’t take upon yourself to add to the Word of God.

Now in Deuteronomy after God gave the law, God gave a warning that a person wasn’t to try to diminish the law. Taking away from the commandments that God had given. Or man wasn’t to seek to add to it. Yet the Jews in their Talmud added some sixty volumes of interpretation to that law, the Mishnah, the Talmud. Here again, “The Word of God is pure.” Now he says, “Don’t add to it, lest God reproves you, and you be found a liar.”

In the end of the book of Revelation, God pronounces a special curse upon any man who would add to the words of that book or take away from the words of that book. “Unto him who would dare to add to the book, to him shall be added the plagues that are in the book. He that would dare to take away from the words of the book, his name shall be taken out of the book of life” ( Rev 22:18-19 ).

It is a very heavy thing for a man to presume to speak for God. And God gives some very serious warnings to anyone who would presume to speak for God. “Woe unto them who say, ‘Thus saith the Lord,’ when I have not spoken, saith the Lord of hosts.” And God tells all the things He’ll do to that person who dares to speak in the name of the Lord when God hasn’t really spoken.

Now in Peter’s epistle, he said that, “God hath given to us all that pertains to life and to godliness” ( 2Pe 1:3 ). Really, you don’t need any more than the Word that God has already given. All that we need for life and for godliness has already been given to us in the Word of God. We don’t need some modern day revelation from God.

Now the problem of men speaking for God, as there are men who purport that they do, the Catholic Church has placed an aura around the Pope and the papal infallibility so that he supposedly is speaking for God. And his word is acknowledged as being the Word of God. Or with the Mormons, their prophets and their president speaks the word of God. And they have to accept it as scripture, and they can give you argumentation, “Why should God quit speaking to men?” and so forth. And you know, that God is speaking to us today through the prophets and all. The thing is, as is declared here, “Lest he reprove thee and thou be found a liar.” Now those men who have purportedly spoken for God, the thing that happens is that the next guy comes along and oftentimes will disclaim what they have said. And he’s speaking for God when he disclaims that the previous person said.

Brigham Young, one of the prophets and the leaders of the Mormon Church, supposedly speaking for God said an awful lot of radical things that the church denies today. The Mormon Church denies much of the doctrine that Brigham Young proclaimed. He actually proclaimed that Adam was their God. The only God with whom they had to do. He proclaimed that there are some sins for which the blood of Jesus Christ cannot atone; a person has to shed their own blood to atone for particular sins. The blood of Christ is not sufficient. And he preached this in many a sermon; how you can do those friends a favor by shedding their blood in order that their sins might be expiated.

Now the Mormons today deny this kind of a shedding your own blood for the atonement of your own sins. But yet, one of their prophets declared it speaking for God. Now God doesn’t change His mind. Thus, when a man purports to be speaking for God when God hasn’t spoken, that man is usually discovered to be a liar. So the Word of God is pure. It doesn’t change. It isn’t altered. But men so often purportedly speak for God when indeed God hasn’t spoken.

Two things have I required of thee; deny me them not before I die: Remove far from me vanity and lies ( Pro 30:7-8 ):

Now this is more or less the prayer of this Agur unto God. “Just two things, Lord, I desire. Don’t deny me them before I die. Remove me far from vanity and lies.”

give me neither poverty nor riches; feed me with food that is convenient for me: lest I be full, and deny thee, and say, Who is the LORD? or lest I be poor, and steal, and take the name of my God in vain ( Pro 30:8-9 ).

He’s really seeking just sort of a moderate kind of a life. “I don’t want riches, lest I would say, ‘Who is God?’ And deny God. Or I don’t want to be poor either that I would be tempted to go out and steal in order to take care of my needs. So God, just give me that in-the-middle average life.”

Don’t accuse a servant to his master, lest he curse you, and you be found guilty. Now there is a generation that curses their father, and does not bless their mother. There is a generation that are pure in their own eyes, and yet they are not really washed from their filthiness. There is a generation, O how lofty are their eyes! and their eyelids are lifted up. There is a generation, whose teeth are as swords, and their jaw teeth as knives, to devour the poor from off the earth, and the needy from among men ( Pro 30:10-14 ).

A wicked generation indeed from verse Pro 30:11-14, the different generations that do these wicked things.

Now the horseleach has two daughters, crying, Give, give. And there are three things that are never satisfied, yes, there are four things that say not, It is enough ( Pro 30:15 ):

Four things that you can’t really satisfy.

First, the eye that mocketh at his father, and despiseth to obey his mother ( Pro 30:17 ),

I beg your pardon. I just jumped. Four things that say, ‘It isn’t enough.’ The first is:

The grave ( Pro 30:16 );

Never says it’s enough. People are dying everyday. The second thing:

the barren womb; the earth that is not filled with water ( Pro 30:16 );

The dry parched earth.

and the fire, none of them say, It is enough. Now the eye that mocks his father, and despises to obey his mother, the ravens of the valley shall pick it out, and the young eagles shall eat it. Now there are three things that are too wonderful for me, yea, four which I know not: the way of an eagle in the air; the way of a serpent upon a rock; the way of a ship in the midst of the sea; and the way of a man with a maid. Such is the way of an adulterous woman; she eats, and wipes her mouth, and says, I have done no wickedness. There are three things on the earth that are disquieted, and for four which it cannot bear ( Pro 30:16-22 ):

Four odious things.

The servant when he reigns; a fool when he is filled with meat; an odious woman when she is married; and a handmaid that is the heir to her mistress. There be four things which are little upon the earth, but they are exceeding wise ( Pro 30:22-24 ):

Or wiser than wise. Four little things yet so very wise. Wise beyond their own wisdom.

The ants are a people not strong, yet they prepare their meat in the summer; the conies are but a feeble folk, yet they make their houses in the rocks; the locusts have no king, yet they go forth all of them by bands; the spider takes hold with her hands ( Pro 30:25-28 ),

Or the gecko.

and is in the kings’ palaces ( Pro 30:28 ).

From the ant we learn the wisdom of preparing for the future. How that it lays up its food in the summer. Because somehow the ant has an awareness that the time is coming when it won’t be able to get out and lay up food, so it stores up the food while it has the opportunity to do so.

Jesus said in an interesting parable, “Make use of the unrighteousness of mammon, so that when they fail, you will be received into the everlasting kingdom” ( Luk 16:9 ). In other words, use what you have now for your eternal benefit. That’s wise. Many people don’t have that wisdom. The ant teaches us the wisdom of preparation for the future.

The coney, the little hyrax, teaches us the wisdom of recognizing our own weakness and feebleness and to take shelter in that which is stronger than we are. Makes his home in the rocks. Recognize our own weakness and hide ourselves in that rock, Jesus Christ.

The locust shows wisdom in his cooperative efforts. By himself, the locust can do no harm. As he goes forth in bands, he can be devastating. Oh, that the church would learn the lesson of working together, cooperative endeavors for the kingdom of God.

And finally, the gecko shows its wisdom by taking hold with his hands and as the result, dwells in king’s palaces. Even as we are to take hold of the promises of God as they of the Old Testament did, that we might dwell one day in the King’s palace.

There are three things which go well, yea, four are beautiful in their going: the lion which is the strongest among beasts, and doesn’t turn away for any; the greyhound; and the goat also; and a king, against whom there is no rising up. If you have done foolishly in lifting up yourself, or if you have thought evil, lay your hand upon your mouth. Surely the churning of milk bringeth forth butter, and the wringing of the nose bringeth forth blood: so the forcing of wrath will bring strife ( Pro 30:29-33 ).

And such are the words of Agur. Agur, who is the son of Jakeh, who makes no claims for himself. “

Fuente: Through the Bible Commentary

Pro 30:1-4

Pro 30:1-4

THE LAST TWO CHAPTERS

“These final two chapters are remarkably different from the rest of the book. This chapter is composed of six paragraphs which in Pro 30:1 seem to be ascribed to Agur, about whom we have no information. The final chapter is ascribed to Lemuel king of Masa; but nothing is known either of Lemuel, or of any country known as Masa. Some Jewish and Christian expositors have identified Agur with Solomon; but to this writer it appears to be impossible that David was ever known as Jakeh (Pro 30:1).

Toy subdivided the chapter as follows: “Title (Pro 30:1 a). the words of Agur (Pro 30:1 b-4), an exhortation to trust God (Pro 30:5-6), a prayer (Pro 30:7-9), an isolated maxim (Pro 30:10), a series of tetrads (Pro 30:11-31), and a sextet on pride and anger (Pro 30:32-33).

THE TITLE

Pro 30:1 a

“The words of Agur the son of Jakeh; the oracle.”

Of either one of the proper names here, nothing is known; and in the LXX, no proper names at all appear here. One man’s guess is as good as another’s. “Some scholars argue that the words here rendered as proper names are not names at all but an Aramaic phrase. It is true that there are a number of Aramaisms in this chapter; and earlier scholars like Toy dated the chapter in the second century B.C.; but the theory that the presence of Aramaisms signifies a late date has been completely exploded. (See our thorough discussion of this subject in Vol. 1 of our Minor Prophets series of commentaries, in the treatise on Jonah.)

It is not known whether “the words of Agur” may be understood as applicable to the whole chapter, or as limited to this first paragraph.

“The oracle here is the proper translation of the Hebrew; and it emphasizes the authority of what follows. The RSV and others (by an emendation) translate the word as Masa. We are extremely suspicious of most of the emendations that scholars presume to make in the Hebrew text.

Pro 30:1-4

THE SON OF GOD MENTIONED

“The man saith unto Ithiel, unto Ithiel and Ucal:

Surely I am more brutish than any man, And have not the understanding of a man;

And I have not learned wisdom, Neither have I the knowledge of the Holy One.

Who hath ascended up into heaven, and descended? Who hath gathered the wind in his fists? Who hath bound the waters in his garment? Who hath established all the ends of the earth? What is his name, and what is his son’s name, if thou knowest?”

“Ithiel and Ucal” (Pro 30:1) We are just as much in the dark about these two names as we are of those in Pro 30:1 b. In fact, the Hebrew text here (depending upon the vocalization of the Hebrew consonants) is also legitimately translated: “I have wearied myself, O God, I have wearied myself, O God, and come to an end. This rendition, of course, fits the context much better than the other one.

The outstanding feature of this paragraph is the marvelous humility of the writer. His confession of almost infinite ignorance in those areas which most deeply concern humanity is a beautiful contrast indeed with the colossal conceit and arrogance which are the twin badges of our mortality. “In his own way, he affirms that reverence is the beginning of knowledge (1Co 8:2).

This whole paragraph is in the same line of thought with Job 38:1-10; and the answer that thunders in our ears at the end of each of these six questions is, “No man”! The writer is speaking of the Holy One (and he used the plural [~’Elohiym] for God).

“Who is his Son?” (Pro 30:4). This is the highlight of the paragraph, and we have taken the liberty of capitalizing the word Son, which is an evident reference to the Mediator. “The writer would not have dared to ask a question like this if he had believed God to be an abstract unity rather than a compound unity. Delitzsch interprets the passage, “As a reference to the Mediator in creation, revealed at last as God’s son. “Greenstone denies that the passage refers to the [@Logos], but offers no positive alternative to explain the passage. “Ewald also found here the idea of the [@Logos], as the first-born Son of God; and J. D. Michaelis felt himself constrained to recognize here the New Testament doctrine of the Son of God announcing itself from afar. And why may not this be possible?

Pro 30:1. Four names are here introduced to us, unknown to us but probably well known in those days: Agur (the author), Jakeh (his father); and Ithiel and Ucal (the ones being addressed). Ithiel is more important of the two in that he is not only mentioned first but twice. These last two chapters contain material that is not compiled by Solomon (this chapter by Agur and chapter 31 by King Lemuel). Both chapters depart from the one-verse sayings to sections of material. The word Oracle shows that what follows is inspired even if not written by Solomon.

Pro 30:2. Whoever Agur was, he here reveals the fact that it was not through natural endowment that he was about to write. Psa 73:22 also uses the word brutish, and it carries the idea of a low level of understanding.

Pro 30:3. And this verse shows that it was not through education received from others that he was about to write. It is very probable that he was a rustic, without education, and without any human help, as was the prophet Amos; and that all that he knew now was by the inspiration of the Almighty, independent of which he was rustic and uneducated (Clarke).

Pro 30:4. Here are five questions dealing with the sublime and divine, Concerning the ascending and descending, Rom 10:6-7 asks two questions: Who shall ascend into heaven?…and Who shall descend into the abyss? What would be the purpose of such ascending and descending? Deu 30:11-13 is that from which Romans 10 is quoting, and it shows that such going up and going down (or out) was for the purpose of gaining divine knowledge and bringing it back to mankind: This commandment…is not in heaven, that thou shouldest say, Who shall go up for us to heaven, and bring it to us, and make us hear it, that we may do it? Neither is it beyond the sea, that thou shouldest say, Who shall go over the sea for us, and bring it to us? The answer to the first four questions in this verse is, No man! Creation and Providence are the works of God-Job 38 – Psalms 104; Isa 40:12-14 (questions 2-4), and so is the Revelation-1Co 2:9-11 (question 1). If somebody insisted that some man has done these things which we attribute to God, Agur wanted to know his name and his sons name.

Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary

This and the following chapter constitute an appendix to the Book of Proverbs. It is impossible to say who Agur was. In this selection from his writings we have an introduction, in which he a r m s the fact of man’s little wisdom, and then utters the memorable prayer which reveals his fear of Jehovah and his desire for that balanced life which is one of safety.

From the prayer to the end of the chapter we have his observations on various matters affecting conduct. In this the first section opens with a proverb (verse Pro 30:10). Then follow descriptions of four evil generations and of “four things” perpetually dissatisfied. The second section opens with a proverb (verse Pro 30:17), and is followed by four groups of four things. The first four excite wonder, the second four, terror; the third four are little things, but exceeding wise; the final four are stately things. The whole movement ends with a proverb (verses Pro 30:32-33).

Fuente: An Exposition on the Whole Bible

the Advice of a Shrewd Observer

Pro 30:1-17

This chapter contains a collection of sayings of one person, Agur, of whom we know nothing further. It is supposed that he lived after the return from the Exile. The opening verses of the chapter may be thus rendered: The utterance of the man who has questioned and thought. I have wearied after God, I have wearied after God, and am faint; for I am too stupid for a man, and am without reason, and I have not learned wisdom, nor have I knowledge of the All-Holy.

Agur answers his complaint in Pro 30:5-9. You cannot know God by your own discovery, but He will make Himself known to you through the written Word, to which no addition may be made, Pro 30:6. See also Joh 1:18, which shows our clearest revelation of Him. But there are two conditions: We must put away vanity and lies; and we must be satisfied with Gods arrangement of our daily food. Notice the following quatrain, Pro 30:11-14, which is descriptive of four kinds of evil men: the unfilial, the self-righteous, the haughty, and the rapacious. The next quatrain, Pro 30:15-16, treats of the insatiable; and this is followed by a further description of the doom of the disobedient: strong, wise, shrewd, and sanctified sense.

Fuente: F.B. Meyer’s Through the Bible Commentary

Proverbs 30

We now take up the study of the words of Agur, a wise man who keenly felt his ignorance, as is generally the case with the truly enlightened. In the first verse we learn of his parentage.

30:1

The first two proper names in this passage (Agur and Jakeh) have been translated by some as common nouns; in which case we would understand the verse to say, The words of a gatherer, the son of [the] pious. This might imply that the contents of Proverbs 30 have been gathered by an editor from various sources to be preserved for our instruction. It is evident, however, that neither the translators of the Bibles in use today nor the Masoretic scribes so understood it. In the Chaldee and Syriac translations the capitalized words are found as given in the text of the King James version.

Professor Stuart, a learned Hebraist, by changing the vowel-points, renders the whole verse: The words of Agur, the son of her who was obeyed in Massa. Thus spake the man: I have toiled for God, I have toiled for God, and have ceased.

Some commentators have supposed Agur to stand for Solomon and Jakeh for David; but the most straightforward explanation is that Agur was an inspired man of whom we have no record elsewhere in Scripture. His fathers name gives no clue to his family or tribe in Israel. Ithiel, which is translated God is with me and Ucal, able, are apparently his companions, or possibly persons who received instruction from him.

30:2-3

Agur begins his oracle by declaring his own ignorance apart from divine enlightenment-that vision of 29:18 which enables a man to be a teacher of holy things. He is keenly aware of his limitations and lack of intelligence in the serious matters about which he is concerned. He has been compared with Amos, who was not a prophet nor the son of a prophet. However, the Lord enlightened Amos while he was engaged in his ordinary occupation and gave him the gift that enabled him to be a rebuker of kings. Agur was a plain, simple man, of little natural ability, perhaps even below average in human intelligence. Yet the Lord opened his understanding, revealing to him great and precious things; and He gave him the wisdom to impart these truths to, not only Ithiel and Ucal, but untold thousands who are still profiting from his words. He was one of those holy men of God who spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost (2Pe 1:21). Inspiration is Gods way of taking a poor, feeble instrument and so controlling his mind, tongue, and pen as to cause him to give forth the very words of the eternal One.

30:4

The most learned man becomes incredibly ignorant when confronted with questions like those posed in this verse. We are at once reminded of the Lords challenge in Job 38 and 39. At best, human knowledge is very limited and narrow. No man, apart from divine revelation, could reply to the questions asked here. The first never found an answer until the words of our Lord concerning Himself, as recorded in Joh 3:13: And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven. He it was who descended likewise, as it is written, Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth? He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things (Eph 4:9-10).

How much there is for the believer in the precious truth connected with the Lords descent and ascension! Because of our sins He died on the cross, bearing the righteous judgment of God. There He drank the dreadful cup of wrath that we could never have completely drained to all eternity. But because of who He was, He could drink the cup and exhaust the wrath, leaving nothing but blessing for all who trust in Him. He died and was buried, but God raised Him from the dead, and in triumph He ascended to glory. Enoch was taken from this life without experiencing death. Elijah was caught up in a flaming chariot and carried by a whirlwind to Heaven. But neither of these went up in his own power. Jesus, His work finished and His ministry on earth accomplished, ascended of His own volition, passing through the upper air as easily as He had walked on the water.

The fact of His having ascended to Heaven and having been received by the Shekinah-the cloud of divine Majesty-testifies to the perfection of His work in putting away forever the believers sins. While Jesus was on the cross, Jehovah laid on him the iniquity of us all (Isa 53:6). He could not be now in the presence of God if one sin remained on Him. But all have been atoned for and put away, never to come up again. Therefore He has entered Heaven, by the power of His own blood, having accomplished eternal redemption. Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, He led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men (Eph 4:8). He had destroyed him that had the power of death, that is, the devil, that He might deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage (Heb 2:14-15).

The trembling, anxious sinner is pointed by the Holy Ghost, not to church or sacraments, not to ordinances or legal enactments, not to physical limitations or feelings, but to a risen and ascended Christ seated in highest glory!

The righteousness which is of faith speaketh on this wise, Say not in thine heart, Who shall ascend into heaven? (that is, to bring Christ down from above:) Or, Who shall descend into the deep? (that is, to bring up Christ again from the dead.) But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach; That, if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation (Rom 10:6-10).

Christ carried our sins on the cross. He died for them. He has been raised from the dead in token of Gods infinite satisfaction in His work. He has ascended up to Heaven, and His place on the throne of God as a man in glory is proof positive that our sins are gone forever. When this fact is embraced it gives deep and lasting peace.

When the believer realizes that all has been done in a way that pleases God; that He who accomplished it is one with the Father; that man as a fallen creature had no part in that work save to commit the sins for which the Savior died: then, and not until then, does the majesty of the work of the cross dawn on the soul.

The question, What is his name, and what is his sons name, followed by the challenge, if thou canst tell? finds its answer in the New Testament revelation of the Father and the Son.

30:5-6

There are two great facts enunciated in these verses. The first is the perfection of the Word of God and the second, the all-sufficiency of that Word. The Scriptures, as a whole, are called the Word of God. Any portion taken separately is a word, or saying, of God. All Scripture is God-breathed; every part of it is divinely inspired. It is therefore pure and perfect in itself. All who rest on it find its great Author is a shield from the enemys assaults and a refuge for their souls. He will be the protection of those who confide in Him; but no one who doubts or questions the integrity of His words really trusts Him.

To attempt to add to what God has already written is to deny the all-sufficiency of Scripture. It will provide for every circumstance of life and enlighten the saint in every aspect of the faith. In each age there have been visionaries and enthusiasts, as well as frauds and charlatans, who have sought to supplement the Bible with revelations and compilations of their own, claiming divine authority. But when compared with these writings, the Holy Scripture shines forth like a diamond of beauty and value surrounded by worthless bits of glass and paste. The Bible alone is truth. All imitations are lies that deceive the one who believes and follows them.

The apocryphal books to both Testaments are an example of deceptive writings. This is particularly true in regard to the wild legends of Tobit and Judith, the apocalyptic visions of Hermes, and the ghostly records of the pseudo-gospels of the Infancy, St. Thomas, and Nicodemus.

The Jewish Talmud and the vagaries of the Cabala are the same kind, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.

In the Christian era, especially in the last two centuries, many imitations have been palmed off on the credulous as being of the same character as Holy Scripture. But judged by the words of Pro 30:5-6, we unhesitatingly declare these writings to be lies of Satan. Of this number are the pretended revelations and wild hallucinations of Emanuel Swedenborg; the Book of Mormon and kindred works of Joseph Smith and his followers; the Flying Roll of the Jezreelites; the prophecies and visions of Ellen White, regarded by the Seventh-day Adventists as of equal authority with the Bible; the unchristian and unscientific theories of Mary Baker Eddy, as set forth in Science and Health, which its followers claim to be a key to the Scriptures. To this list may be added any and every book or teaching that claims a divine origin, but has not been included in the Law, the Prophets, the Psalms, or the New Testament. In the grand collection of the Holy Bible, God has made known His holy will and revealed all that He will impart concerning Himself, His purpose, and His ways, until the ushering in of the glory for the saints. That day will also be the day of doom for those who refuse His sure testimony, trampling it beneath their feet or adding to it the poor thoughts of sinful man!

Read Psa 12:6 and 119 in its entirety; Deu 4:2; and 12:32; Col 1:25; and Rev 22:18-19.

30:7-9

This prayer of Agur appeals to the heart of the saint in all dispensations. It has a strong resemblance to the touching prayer of Jabez recorded in 1Ch 4:10. It is an appropriate expression for any child of God, even though grace has taught the soul to say, I have learned, in whatsoever state I am, to be content. I know both how to be abased, and I know how to abound: every where and in all things I am instructed both to be full and to be hungry, both to abound and to suffer need (Php 4:11-12). Only as the heart is surrendered to Christ can one triumph over all circumstances. He who knows himself understands well why Agur could pray for moderate circumstances if it were the will of God. He did not distrust divine power to keep him in any state. He did distrust himself.

The first of the two things that he required of the Lord, was to be kept from iniquity. He desired that vanity and lies be removed far from him. The man of God fears sin and hates it. The new nature within him makes it impossible that he should be happy while walking in an evil way. Holiness is his joy and delight, therefore he groans for full deliverance from the flesh, that lawless principle within his breast that wars against the new nature. A professing Christian who finds pleasure in vanity and lies, demonstrates the true condition of his heart and makes it plain to every Spirit-taught soul that he is still a stranger to the new birth. A hatred of sin and yearning to be delivered from its power and its very presence is one of the surest evidences the Spirit is at work in the soul, even though the person may not yet understand completely the precious, peace-giving truths of the gospel. The youngest and the oldest saint may therefore very properly take up the cry of Agur, Remove far from me vanity and lies.

The second petition has to do with temporal things and is worthy of careful notice. We can well understand a man praying that he be preserved from poverty, but it is most unusual to find one who dreads wealth and prays to be kept from riches. He dreaded abject poverty, lest in the weakness of his flesh, he would become dishonest, and bring reproach on the name of his God. But riches, too, were equally to be feared, because it is a common thing for men to grow more and more independent of God as their worldly goods are increased; Jeshurun waxed fat, and kicked:then he forsook God (Deu 32:15). The wealthy are exposed to many snares that those in moderate circumstances seldom experience. Agur had observed this. Therefore he would not desire to revel in luxury, but would be fed with food befitting his station in life. He would choose, if such were the will of God for him, to occupy a middle position between the two extremes of deep need and overflowing abundance. The more we meditate on this prayer, the more we see its wisdom and piety.

30:10

The circumstances of a servant in the East, who was often a slave, were hard at best. Therefore he who took it on himself to accuse a servant to his master, whether the accusation were true or false, was likely to be hated by the poor wretch he had informed on. And if the accuser were proven to have had no just grounds for his charge he would be put to shame by one of inferior station. Applying this principle to Christians, we are reminded of the impertinence and lack of thoughtfulness and care for one another, which would lead one saint to judge the service of his fellow laborer. Who art thou that judgest another mans servant? to his own master he standeth or fallethLet us not therefore judge one another any more: but judge this rather, that no man put a stumbling-block or an occasion to fall in his brothers way (Rom 14:4, 13).

30:11-14

The word generation is used here, as in many other parts of Scripture, to describe a particular class of mankind having certain characteristics in common. Our Lord used it this way when He spoke of the Jews as an evil and adulterous generation and declared that that generation should not pass away prior to His return from Heaven. To suppose He meant a generation of thirty to forty years is to throw the entire prophecy into confusion.

Agur graphically describes a generation of prideful people for our instruction and warning. Self-sufficient, they recognize no indebtedness to father and mother, but curse the one and do not bless the other. Contaminated with the horrible pollution of their sins, they are nevertheless pure in their own sight, each declaring his own goodness. See Pro 20:6.

Rolling their eyes and raising their eyebrows, they demonstrate their supercilious insolence and haughtiness. If anyone seeks to correct them or make them aware of their true condition in the sight of God, they turn angrily on him as wild beasts ready to tear him with their teeth, which are like swords and knives. Even where there is no provocation, they can be cruel and treacherous, devouring the poor and the needy. See Pro 6:17 and 21:4.

This generation of people is typified in the New Testament by the Pharisees. Outwardly they were cold and proud, correct and pious, while secretly they devoured widows houses and did not heed the cry of the poor.

Such is man in his self-righteousness. Such would be characteristic of all, had not the matchless grace of God made some different!

30:15-16

Proud and self-sufficient though he be, the heart of man is never satisfied. Like a leech voracious of his food, he is never full. The two daughters are perhaps simply a symbolical way of declaring this characteristic of the blood-sucker of Arabia. But I have followed Professors Noyes and Stuart in regarding the words Give! Give as the names of the daughters. The name indicates their wretched habits.

Notice the peculiar yet exact use of the numbers three and four. Three things are never satisfied: the unseen world, into which disembodied spirits are constantly descending; the barren womb; and the earth on which rain falls incessantly somewhere. But four things say not, It is enough. Therefore to the three already given, the author adds fire. It devours until all that it can reach has been consumed. Then it has to cease and is, in a sense, satisfied, but only because it must be; were there more material to feed on, it would go on destroying still.

All of these are just pictures of the restless yearning, implanted in mans bosom by the Fall. The world and all that it contains is not enough to fill and satisfy mans heart. Thou hast made us for Thyself, said Augustine of Hippo, and our hearts will never be at rest, until they rest in Thee. How slow we are to learn the lesson!

30:17

See verse 11 of this chapter. It is a well-known fact that ravens, eagles, and many other birds of prey begin their attack on a carcass, living animal, or person by plucking out the eyes. Instinct seems to tell them that once the power of sight is gone, their victims are quite disabled. The crow shall one day pick out thine eyes! is an Eastern imprecation which may indeed be founded on this very proverb.

The disobedient mocker will come to grief in a similar way to what is described here. Suddenly, but surely, he will be deprived of the power of vision. He will stumble in the darkness, vainly trying to beat off the foes that have destroyed his happiness and would further ruin his life. It is the law of retribution to which all have to bow. How many a parent, shamed and heart-broken because of the waywardness of a rebellious son or daughter, has remembered in an agony of remorse his own similar disobedience when his parents, long since departed, were harassed and distressed by his refusal to be controlled. These memories return in later years with crushing force.

30:18-20

Again we have a three and a four carefully distinguished. All the causes of wonder are beyond a mans ability to explain, but only three are impossible for him. He cannot trace the paths of an eagle in the air, a serpent on a rock, or a ship in the sea. The way of a man with a woman-completely controlling her mind and will-may not be able to be explained, yet there are too many examples of it to permit its being considered as too wonderful for him.

The author goes on to describe the behavior of an adulterous woman. Hardened in conscience, she lives in her sin; but like the eater who wipes his mouth and removes all evidence of his eating, she hides her guilt and boldly says, I have done no wickedness.

Exhort one another daily, lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin (Heb 3:13) is a verse to be profitably kept in mind. Sin is frequently excused as something for which men are not morally accountable. People often consider sin a mental and physical disease rather than as iniquity for which the wrongdoer will be called to account. But God has declared plainly that He will bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil (Ecc 12:14).

30:21-23

The first three of these obnoxious things are very irritating. The fourth completely overturns the order of the household.

A servant ruling is like the sweeping storm of Pro 28:3. It was not an infrequent occurrence in the East for a slave or a servant to be suddenly elevated to great power through some remarkable turn of events; sometimes it was through treachery, as in the case of Zimri (1Ki 16:1-20), or through favoritism as in the undeserving Haman (Esther 3). Persons of a low position who are exalted are often far harder on the populace than those born in high station. One has said that a servant ruling becomes the most insolent, imperious, cruel, and tyrannical of masters. Equally disquieting is a fool or a churl who is full of food-that is, has all that his heart desires. Rolling in plenty, he despises the needy and considers that his possessions entitle him to respect, though he lacks every virtue. This was true of Nabal the husband of Abigail to whom we have referred before.

A fitting completion to this wretched trinity is an odious woman when married. Unamiable and vindictive in her disposition, she destroys the peace and happiness of her family.

The fourth instance, however, is to be dreaded more than all, so far as interfering with the order of the home is concerned. The Septuagint renders the clause A handmaid when she hath supplanted her mistress. A home is completely destroyed when one employed as a servant wins the husbands affections, alienating his wife and children. Unhappily, such instances are far from rare and have wrecked thousands of families. How important it is to watch for the first beginnings of an unholy familiarity that may result so fatally!

30:24-28

In the four wise things described in these verses we have a beautiful picture of the gospel.

We have already remarked on the provident habits of the grain-eating ant of Palestine, in the notes on 6:6-8. Its wisdom consists in diligently preparing for the future. Instinctively the ant knows to make use of present opportunities in order to supply coming needs. It carefully stores away its food, anticipating a time when the bright days of summer are past and gone, and the cold of winter prohibits its search for provision to sustain life.

In material things, man readily shows the same wisdom as this tiny creature. He, too, provides against the coming days when ill health or old age will forbid his going forth to labor. But is it not amazing that men who display remarkable foresight in earthly matters will forget altogether to prepare for that unending eternity to which every moment brings them nearer?

Forgetful of the ages that follow this short life on earth, they allow golden opportunities to slip by, never to return. They rush carelessly on, ignoring the need of their souls and the fearful danger that lies just beyond death. As it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment; So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation (Heb 9:27-28). Here we learn of the fast-approaching danger and of the One who alone can deliver from it. But the majority of mankind are so insanely concerned about the fleeting present that they completely ignore the everlasting future.

To all such, the insignificant little ant preaches loudly, crying in the ears of any who will listen, Flee from the wrath to come (Mat 3:7); Prepare to meet thy God (Amo 4:12)! The ant is a practical preacher too, for it teaches by action. Refusing to idle away the golden hours of summer, the ant faithfully uses the present in view of the future. It is unlike human beings who waste the days of childhood, youth, and middle age with insignificant matters, leaving themselves unprepared for eternity,

The ant pictures the wisdom that all should take to heart. If the reader is unsaved, if he has not yet settled his eternal matters by coming to Christ, let me shout in his ears the cry of the shipmaster to the runaway prophet: What meanest thou, O sleeper? arise, call upon thy God (Jon 1:6)! If you are not awakened soon, you will be aroused too late; you will learn that preparation days are over and eternity has begun with your soul still unsaved, and you will abide forever without Christ!

To him who desires to escape coming judgment the coney also has a message telling of the only safe refuge. Properly speaking, the little animal of the 26th verse is not a coney at all; it is a very timid, defenseless creature of the marmot type, known to naturalists as the Syrian hyrax or rock badger. The true coney belongs to the rabbit family and does not live in the rocks. But the hyrax does. It is described as a small animal found in Lebanon, Palestine, Arabia Petra, Upper Egypt, and Abyssinia. It is about the size, figure, and brownish color of the rabbit, with long hind legs adapted to leaping, but is of a clumsier structure than that quadruped. It is without a tail, and has long bristly hairs scattered over the general fur; as to its ears (which are small and roundish instead of long, like the rabbit), its feet, and snout, it resembles the hedge-hog. Because of the structure of its feet, which are round, and of a soft, pulpy, tender substance, it cannot dig, and hence is not fitted to live in burrows like the rabbit, but in the clefts of the rocks. It lives in families; is timid, lively, and quick to retreat at the approach of danger; and hence is difficult to capture. In its habits it is gregarious, and feeds on grain, fruits and vegetables. In the Hebrew it is called Shaphan and is included in the lists of unclean animals in Lev 11:5 and Deu 14:7, because, though its jaws work with a cud-chewing motion, it does not have a divided hoof. Psa 104:18 refers to the same fact that is brought to our attention here in the Proverbs: The high hills are a refuge for the wild goats; and the rocks for the conies.

The hyrax is feeble and defenseless in the presence of its enemies and unable to burrow and make a house for itself. It finds a suitable dwelling-place in the clefts of the rocks where it is safe from the power of the marauder and protected from the fury of the elements. Surely the picture is plain. That Rock was Christ, says the apostle, when writing of the rock from which flowed the living water in the wilderness (1Co 10:4). There too the rock speaks of Him; for He alone is the sinners refuge. The little unclean hyrax, weak and feeble, flees to the rocks and is safe. So, too, the helpless unclean sinner, awakened to a sense of his dire need and aroused by the signs of the storm that is soon to break over the heads of all who neglect Gods salvation, flees for refuge to the Lord Jesus Christ. He finds in Him a safe and blessed shelter where no foe can ever reach him and judgment can never come.

It is in the clefts of the rock that the hyrax hides; it is in a Savior, pierced for our sins and bruised by the awful vengeance of the Holy One, that the believing soul finds a hiding place.

On Him almighty vengeance fell,

Which would have sunk a world to hell;

He bore it for a chosen race

And thus became their hiding-place.

Have you found a refuge in Him? If you are still living under the wrath of God, cease from all effort to save yourself (which can only result in bitter disappointment in the end). Flee to Jesus while He still extends the peace-giving invitation, Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest (Mat 11:28).

The third wise thing mentioned in Pro 30:27 is the locust. Having no visible leader, they go forth in ranks, like soldiers in their respective regiments. They are so methodical that they seem to be acting under definite instructions and in strictest discipline. To those who have found a refuge in Christ the locusts furnish an example of that subjection one to another and to our unseen head in Heaven. This might well shame us as we contemplate the broken, scattered condition of the people of God and reflect on our share in the terrible ruin.

To the world and the world-church, the body of Christ must seem like a heterogeneous, miscellaneous company, with no leader and no bond of union. But the same Jesus who died for His peoples sins is now seated in highest glory; God has made Him the head of all who have been redeemed by His precious blood. The Holy Spirit, sent down from Heaven upon His ascension there as man, is now indwelling every believer; this binds all together in one great company, every one members one of another (Eph 4:25).

When the soul grasps this blessed truth, it will lead to judgment of all that is opposed to the truth of the church as revealed in Scripture. If there is one body, and the Word of God knows no other, I will acknowledge my membership in that alone; by obedience to the truth, I should walk worthy of the vocation wherewith I am called.

The locusts all work together and this declares their wisdom. So it should be with the body of Christ. Divisions and schisms are plainly declared to be sinful and works of the flesh. For ye are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you envying, and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men? (1Co 3:3)

Earnestly the saints are exhorted to walk together in love and fellowship, striving together for the faith of the gospel (Philippi-ans 1 21). Throughout the letter to the Philippians this precious unity is ever insisted on. In 1Co 1:10 likewise, the apostle writes: Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment. Such is the lesson of the locusts. May we have grace to learn it in the presence of God.

It is now generally acknowledged that the Hebrew word shemameth in verse 28 does not refer to the spider, but to a little house-lizard called the gecko. It is very common in Palestine and has a peculiar idiosyncrasy for fine hangings and palatial homes. It uses its forefeet very much like hands to catch its food, chiefly flies and spiders, and securely hold them while it devours them. On the under side of each toe is a tiny sponge-like sac containing an adhesive liquid. As it runs up marble walls or out on decorative ceilings, this substance oozes out; it enables the gecko to take hold with its hands on the smooth, slippery surfaces, from which it is not easily dislodged.

This lizard should speak to us of the power of faith. This is indeed the hand by which the believing sinner takes hold of the precious truth of God and enters into His blessings. Faith allows us to be at home in the Kings palace and ensures an eternal abode in the Fathers house.

It is amazing grace that gives all who believe on the Lord Jesus Christ a place by faith even now in the heavenlies.

God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us, Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;) And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus: That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus (Eph 2:4-7).

He has gone up on high as our representative. Soon we will be there with Him to enjoy His companionship for eternity!

Happy is the soul who has learned the message of these four wise things!

30:29-31

It is quite proper to speak of the first three creatures as excelling in their movement, though it would hardly apply to a king. Majestic and glorious, he moves with stately bearing and therefore comes under the second head.

The lion is characterized by unflinching boldness; it represents that holy courage which should mark the Christian soldier as he contends earnestly for the faith once delivered to the saints. In his faith, he is to have virtue, true courage, to withstand in the evil day and remain true to his course. It is not mere dogged determination that is contemplated, but the irresistible might of weakness that leans on God; this is what led Paul to write, when I am weak, then am I strong (2Co 12:10).

The second in this series has been variously translated as a greyhound, a girded horse, a zebra, and a strutting rooster. The latter is preferred in the Septuagint, Syriac, Vulgate, and Chaldee versions. But according to the best authorities the word simply means girded as to the loins. It may therefore be applied to any slender creature characterized by swiftness. The translators of the King James version preferred greyhound as most fully expressing the idea of an animal adapted to running. It matters little what beast is signified. The lesson for us is clear enough. As a girded animal does not rest until it reaches its prey or the goal to which it is running, so the saint is to press swiftly on, refusing to be turned aside by the attractions of this world. He is viewed as a racer in Php 3:13-14:

Brethren, I count not myself to have apprehended: but this one thing I do, forgetting those things which are behind, and reaching forth unto those things which are before, I press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus.

This should always be the Christians attitude. Having no city here, he does not halt to dally with the insignificant things of earth. With girded loins and eyes fixed on Christ, he hastens on to the judgment seat where the prize is to be awarded.

Wherefore seeing we also are compassed about with so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which doth so easily beset us, and let us run with patience the race that is set before us, Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God (Heb 12:1-2).

Christ was the great pattern-pilgrim, passing through this world as a stranger; He found only sorrow and grief here, but His joy is now full in glory!

The male goat is the climber. Refusing the low and often un-healthful valleys, he mounts up higher and higher to the rocky hills and the peaks of the mountains. (See Psa 104:18). Breathing the exhilarating air of the top of the rocks, he finds both pleasure and safety in his retreat. The lesson is simple. The Christian must walk on the high places; then like Habakkuk, he will be able to rejoice in the day of trouble and joy in the God of his salvation when everything of earth seems to fail (Hab 3:17-19). From the soul of the climbing saint there will ever be melody.

A heavenly-minded soul is lifted above all the mists of this poor world and enabled to view all from Gods standpoint.

If ye then be risen with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ sitteth on the right hand of God. Set your affection on things above, not on things on the earth. For ye are dead, and your life is hid with Christ in God (Col 3:1-3).

This is the lesson of the male goat. Would that every believer could enter into it!

The last in the list of these pleasant things is the king going forth in undisputed, majestic strength. It is the overcomer, the man of faith, made a king unto God; his dignity is never greater than when he walks in lowliness and meekness through this world, drawing his supplies from above not from below. Great is the honor conferred on all who have been redeemed. No longer children of the night, but of the day, they are called to overcome the world in the power of the truth revealed to them by faith. Abraham was such a king as he went from Melchizedeks presence to meet Sodoms fawning monarch. He vanquished this ruler in a different way from that in which he had defeated the confederacy headed by Chedorlaomer (Genesis 14). God would have every Christian defeat his enemy in stately majesty, joining forces with Him, and counting the richest treasures of earth as dung and dross. This is the victory that overcometh the world, even our faith (1Jn 5:4). Strong in faith, the man of God views his present situation in the light of his future reward. Then, even though accounted as sheep for the slaughter, he can exclaim, Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him that loved us (Rom 8:37).

30:32-33

Having depicted in parable the dignity of the saint and his appropriate behavior, Agurs last word is an exhortation to self-judgment. He gives a warning to those who may have forgotten their holy calling by foolishly exalting themselves, and speaking or acting with evil intent. If the thoughts are not pure, speech is exceedingly dangerous. It is far better to cover ones mouth than to persist in what is unrighteous.

It is so easy to provoke another to anger. To do so betrays a soul that is out of communion with God and a disobedient spirit. As butter is produced by churning and blood by twisting the nose, so strife results from unnecessary provocation. The servant of the Lord must not strive (2Ti 2:24). He is exhorted to demonstrate gentleness and that fine courtesy which marked all that Jesus said and did. Coarse, ungenerous words and ways are very unbecoming in one who is the recipient of Gods mercy. He is therefore expected to demonstrate the compassion of Christ toward even his enemies.

With this final warning Agurs message comes to a close. He is unknown except for this precious collection of wise sayings preserved for our edification in this one chapter. Yet how much we would have lost if the Spirit of God had not included his ministry in the sacred volume!

Fuente: Commentaries on the New Testament and Prophets

Pro 30:24-28

I. “The ants are a people not strong,” etc. (1) This is forecast. The ants know the time of their opportunity, and make the best of it. (2) Every man has a summer. “Now is the accepted time; now is the day of salvation.”

II. “The conies are but a feeble folk,” etc. The tenant is weak; the habitation is strong. Here is a puny, a very feeble folk, going up towards the great rock house. There is something very pathetic, very beautiful, in that-in weakness seeking the granite, in feebleness hiding itself in some pavilion of rock. There is a Rock provided for all weakness.

III. “The locusts have no king, yet they come forth all of them by bands”-a very beautiful and practical republic. They have no king, but every one of them has a little bit of kingliness in himself. Here I find co-operation. That is how it must be in business, in families, in Churches, in governments, in all great confederacies of life.

IV. “The spider taketh hold with her hands,” etc. Does this mean skill? This skill will have its reward. Does it mean patience in working out elaborate and beautiful results? Then here is progress-getting into kings’ houses, into high places, into palatial position. “In all labour there is profit.”

Parker, City Temple, 1871, p. 52.

I. You must learn of the ants to take thought about time to come. Youth and childhood are your summer. Now is the best time for laying up food for your souls.

II. You must learn of the conies to have a place of safety to flee to in time of danger. Your souls have many enemies.

You need the help of One who can keep you safe. Those boys and girls are wise who put their trust in Jesus Christ, and ask Him to take care of their souls. Jesus is the true Rock for children to flee to.

III. You must learn of the locusts to love one another, to keep together, and help one another.

IV. You must learn of the spider not to give up trying to be good because of a little trouble. Keep on trying not to do what is evil, and trying always to do what is good and pleasing to God.

Bishop Ryle, Boys and Girls Playing, p. 45.

References: Pro 30:24.-Outline Sermons to Children, p. 80. Pro 30:26.-Spurgeon, Evening by Evening, p. 327. Pro 31:1.-W. Arnot, Laws from Heaven, 2nd series, p. 392; E. Paxton Hood, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xxiii., p. 56. Pro 31:1-9.-R. Wardlaw, Lectures on Proverbs, vol. iii., p. 367. Pro 31:10-12.-E. H. Bradby, Sermons at Haileybury, p. 160. Pro 31:10-31.-W. Arnot, Laws from Heaven, 2nd series, p. 397; R. Wardlaw, Lectures on Proverbs, vol. iii., pp. 378, 400. Pro 31:26.-A. Rowland, Homiletic Magazine, vol. x., p. 129. Pro 31:30.-E. W. Shalders, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xiii., p. 35. Pro 31:30, Pro 31:31.-W. Arnot, Laws from Heaven, 2nd series, p. 407.

Fuente: The Sermon Bible

VI. THE WORDS OF AGUR THE SON OF JAKEH

CHAPTER 30

Some hold that Agur is another name for Solomon. This opinion is also upheld by the Talmud, which speaks of six names which belonged to the King: Solomon, Jedidiah, Koheleth, Son of Jakeh, Agur and Lemuel. But this opinion cannot be verified, nor do we know who Agur the son of Jakeh was. The Septuagint and the Vulgate have translated the Hebrew words and formed a sentence out of them. Agur means assembler and Jakeh has the meaning of pious, so that some think that Agur means an unknown godly man who gathered these sayings and they were embodied in this book. We leave the name as it is, and believe that Agur, the son of Jakeh, is the name of the author of this chapter. Whoever Agur was, he had a certain marked individuality; he combines meditation on lofty questions of theology with a sound theory of practical life. He was able to give valuable admonitions about conduct. But his characteristic delight was to group together in quatrains visible illustrations of selected qualities or ideas (R.F. Horton). The opening verse also tells us that he spoke to Ithiel (God with me) and Ucal (I shall be able). The Revised Version has a marginal reading instead of the two names Ithiel and Ucal: I have wearied myself, O God. I have wearied myself O God, and am consumed. We do not adopt this.

The structure of the chapter itself is different from the other chapters in this book. It begins with a prologue, containing his confession, in which he shows a spirit of deep abasement and acknowledgment of his own ignorance Pro 30:2-33).

This is followed by five questions concerning creation and the Creator and His Son Pro 30:4.

The questions are answered by Gods revelation. This is indicated in the next two verses Pro 30:5 and Pro 30:6.

Next comes a prayer by Agur the son of Jakeh Pro 30:7-33).

One proverb follows next in the tenth verse. After that come the so-called quatrains, six groups of proverbs each consisting of four things. Between the second and third group a single proverb is inserted Pro 30:17 and at the close of the chapter stands another proverb.

In the prologue he takes the low place, and in his confession manifests the deepest humility, with no taint of pride, thus illustrating the true humility enjoined in the proverbs of Solomon. Because he confessed that he had no understanding nor knowledge of the holy, the Lord gave him all what he lacked.

The questions he asks are concerning the Creator. Who is He that hath ascended up into heaven and descended? Who hath gathered the wind in His fists? Who hath bound the waters in a garment? Who hath established all the ends of the earth? What is His Name, and what is His Sons Name, if thou canst tell? He knows there is a Creator. He cannot question the eternal power and Godhead, which alone can account for this ordered universe. He has not, like many thinkers, ancient and modern, dropped a plummet down the broad deep universe, and cried, No God. He knows there is a God; there must be an intelligence abled to conceive, coupled with power able to release this mighty mechanism. But Who is it? What is His Name or His Sons Name? Here are the footsteps of the Creator; but where is the Creator Himself? (Expositors Bible) By searching God cannot be found out; the fullest answer is given in the New Testament. We are reminded of Joh 3:13. We know Him who has ascended, because He descended from heaven; Who is the Lord and Creator of all, now in Gods presence as the glorified man, and some day He who ascended into heaven will descend again.

That in the next place the Word of God is mentioned, that is the written revelation of God, is not without meaning. Man needs this revelation to know the Lord, and have the question answered which human speculation and scientific research can never answer. On account of the statement add thou not unto His words critics have surmised that the canon of the Old Testament must have been completed when this chapter was written. They have put the date long after the exile. But such a conclusion is unwarranted. God had commanded long before that nothing should be added to His words Deu 4:22). The prayer of Agur in Pro 30:7-9 is closely linked with the foregoing verses. He prays for deliverance from vanity and lies, that he may have a true and honest heart, so necessary for the reception of the truth of God; then he prays to have neither poverty nor riches. Poverty might induce to steal and take the name of God in vain, then His Word would be rejected by him; and riches would mean the same, as it might lead him to say, Who is the Lord?

The proverb in the form of a command in Pro 30:10 is isolated from the trend of thought in this chapter. The first quatrain comes next in Pro 30:11-14. Four times the word generation is used, describing the classes of people frequently mentioned in the preceding chapters of proverbs. Then follow four things which are insatiable. The climax is reached gradually. The horseleach (or vampire) has two daughters by name of Give. Even so is the poor heart of man; and there are three and four things of the same character; the unseen regions into which disembodied spirits are going day after day, year after year; the barren womb; the earth upon which rain descends yet is never filled with water, and the fourth thing, the fire, which never saith, it is enough, which consumes till nothing is left. These unsatiable things mentioned are symbolical of the condition of the natural man, always taking in yet always, restless and never satisfied. Then there are four things inscrutable: The way of the eagle in the air; the way of the serpent on a rock; the way of a ship in the midst of the ocean; and the way of a man with a maid Pro 30:18-33).

Four disquieting things are given in Pro 30:21-23. In Pro 30:24-28 the four little things, yet wise, are pictured. They are the ants, the conies, the locusts and the lizard (not spider as in the A.V.). Here are lessons for man: the sluggard, the fool, the evil man, and other characters touched upon in proverbs are put to shame by the sagacity of these little things. Four graceful things conclude these sayings: A lion, a greyhound, an he-goat and a king, against whom there is no rising up. So may the righteous man act. Bold as a lion, swift as the greyhound to carry out the Lords will in the Lords service, climbing the steeps like the he-goat, and always victorious like a king undefeated. We see that these statements of Agur have a definite bearing upon the entire book of Proverbs inasmuch as they restate and illustrate the different characters, such as the ungodly, the unwise, the fool, the sluggard, the proud, the righteous, the godly, the humble, etc., mentioned in the book. Agurs message ends with a word of counsel to exercise self-restraint.

Fuente: Gaebelein’s Annotated Bible (Commentary)

Agur: Agur was probably a public teacher, and Ithiel and Ucal, his pupils; and this was the massa, or oracle, which he delivered, not by his own wisdom, but by the Holy Spirit, for the benefit of man; and which, it is probable, was added by “the men of Hezekiah.”

even: Pro 31:1, 2Pe 1:19-21

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

The last division consists of two supplements, one of the words of Agur (chap. 30), and the other of Lemuel (chap. 31).

Agurs words begin with an exaltation of the Word of God (Pro 30:1-6), followed by short and pithy maxims with reference to the rich and the poor, pride and greed, etc.

Lemuels words open with a philosophical statement, apply chiefly to kings, followed by his well-known poem in praise of the virtuous woman.

Fuente: James Gray’s Concise Bible Commentary

Pro 30:1. The words of Agur Who this Agur was no one has ever yet been able to show: it is probable, however, that both he and Jakeh, his father, were well known in Israel at the time this chapter and the next were added to the preceding parts of the proverbs. Jakeh is thought to have lived either in Solomons time or soon after, and to have been famous in his generation for wisdom and piety; even the prophecy The prophetical instruction; for as prophets were public preachers as well as foretellers of things to come, so their sermons, no less than their predictions, are commonly called their prophecies. Ithiel and Ucal Two friends and cotemporaries of Agur, who desired his instructions.

Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

Pro 30:1. The words of Agur. The style of this book seems to be much older than that of Solomon. Its simplicity very well agrees with the times of the patriarchs, or when the judges presided. He confesses his ignorance of navigation.Ithiel, God with me; and Ucal, the mighty one, seem to have been either friends or pupils of Agur. But too many critics play and trifle with the import of their names. Thousands in Israel also put the name of God to the beginning, and sometimes to the termination of a childs name, as Eldad, Elkanab, Amniel, Zabdiel, Uzziel, &c. Hezekiahs scribes seem to have thought that this piece, and Lemuels, had better be added to the Proverbs than formed into a separate book.

Pro 30:2. Surely I am more brutish than any man. Agur who speaks of God in exalted language, does not appear to have been trained to the study of wisdom. Perhaps he could not write, or was so humble as to think nothing of his wisdom worthy of a manuscript; and therefore, impressed with grateful recollections of his worth, his two friends wrote these fragments of his ministry. He begins by avowing his ignorance, neglect of learning, and want of knowledge of the Holy One. Hence we learn that Agur was truly wise; he knew his own heart, his brutishness by nature, and his want of wisdom and acquaintance with God. Here divine wisdom and genuine piety always begin.

Pro 30:4. Who hath ascended up into heaven. This holy man knew much, by the avowal that he knew nothing, compared with the grandeur of God. The prophet Isaiah, great in eloquence and wisdom, speaks of God with the same self-abasement as Agur does: Isa 40:17.What is his sons name, as in Psa 2:7, the Messiah. The Chaldaic reads as the Hebrew. This is a most remarkable expression. It shows that Agur was acquainted with the Judge of all the earth, who conversed with Abraham. Genesis 17. He knew that there was from eternity a sociality in the Godhead, in the person of the Father, the Son, and the Spirit; but he knew it not distinctly. The Messiah was concealed in the bosom of the Father. Pro 8:22. Joh 1:18. The perfect discoveries of a Trinity, and of human redemption, were mysteries hid in ages past. The Messiah created the world, and holdeth the winds in his fists. His names and perfections can no more be told than the names and perfections of the Father. Adorable mystery, unfathomable in depth, but sanctifying in effect. Oh may we, all brutish and ignorant by nature, ever be pupils in so divine a school; for the whole happiness of angels and men consists in tracing the wisdom, power, and love of God, as unfolded in creation, providence and redemption.

Pro 30:8. Give me neither poverty nor riches. We have here the prayer of a sage, who asks mediocrity of condition; and the philosophy of all nations has acquiesced in the justness of this sentiment. All enlightened men must be aware of the calamities of greatness, and of the temptations attendant on wealth, luxury, and honour. And shrinking, on the other hand, at poverty and want, they have given the largest share of happiness to the middle rank of society. But this, after all, is but philosophy; for the poor man, undisturbed with the pride of knowledge, sings in his cottage as the thrush in the copse; the middle ranks are by no means contented with their lot, but are daily pressing towards wealth and dignity; while the great revolt at the idea of humiliation. Be that as it may, Agurs prayer is so popular that we have extant in the English tongue more than a hundred printed sermons on this text, which sufficiently unfold a clergymans wish. Agur however, rectified his wish by piety and submission.Feed me with food convenient for me. It is the glory and perfection of christianity to resemble Christ, who said in the hour of anguish, Father, not as I will, but as thou wilt. St. Paul also said, I have learned in whatsoever state I am therewith to be content. I know how to be abased and how to abound; to be full, and to be hungry. Happy is that man who alike fears the wanton insolence we see in the rich, and the continual murmuring among the ungrateful poor.

Pro 30:10. Accuse not a servant unto his master. This wise man cautions us against meddling with other families in accusing domestics, for there is no man which may not do us harm, nor of whom we may not have need.

Pro 30:11. There is a generation that curseth their father. He divides the wicked into four classes. First, those who are ungrateful, and blasphemous to their parents. These, by war or wickedness, shall mostly come to an untimely death: Pro 30:17. Blessings flow from fathers to children; and when a son returns them with a curse, it is the worst of crimes. Secondly, those who are pure in their own eyes. Being proud and ignorant, they guard the outward walk, but cherish the foulest evils of the heart. Hence there is little hope of doing them good. The third and fourth are the haughty and the cruel, who scorn and oppress the poor. They are far from humanity, and therefore far from God, who will pay them back the measure they mete.

Pro 30:18. There befour things which I know not.

(1) The way of the eagle, which at an immense distance seeks and pursues his prey, and shapes his course through the trackless air with certainty and precision.

(2) How a serpent could without feet reach the high rock.

(3) How a ship could be managed at sea. The art of navigation is admirable, and especially so to the ancients. The adduction of this art is a mark of the high antiquity of the age when Agur lived.

(4) How a learned seducer could prevail on a woman to surrender her virtue, which should be dearer than life itself; and how, after seduction, she can become such a mystery of iniquity as the harlot and adulteress often prove.

Pro 30:21. For three things the earth is disquited, and for four which it cannot bear. He marked four grievances which were insupportable. A servant suddenly raised to power: here nature goes from one excess to another, and tyranny in him is intolerable. A fool full of meat and wine. An ignorant, talkative, immodest woman when she gets honoured with the nuptial tie: and an old maid who has lived with a matron till she is adopted for her heir.

Pro 30:24. There be four things which are little upon the earth, but they are exceeding wise. He teaches us wisdom by four obscure insects. The ant in providing for winter, the coney who selects a safe and dry situation for her house, the instinct of the locust, and the industry of the spider.

Pro 30:29. Four things are comely in going. The lion in battle, the greyhound for swiftness in his course, the he-goat on the hills, leaping from rock to rock; and leaving danger far behind; and a king, a monarch, against whom all revolters must forfeit their life.Thus the mind disposed to learn wisdom from the simple study of nature, has the volume ever open, where the manifold wisdom of God appears in all its strong characters.

Fuente: Sutcliffe’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

Proverbs 30. The Sayings of Agur.It is uncertain whether the title embraces the whole chapter or Pro 30:1-9, or Pro 30:1-4 only.

Pro 30:1. The title is extremely obscure, and has been much discussed. The VSS show a wide divergence in their interpretation. It is perhaps simplest to accept the title as referring to some sage of repute among the Wisdom circles in the Greek period.

Pro 30:1 b has been interpreted in many ways, the proper names being taken as significant words. The most interesting is that which represents the sage as saying (cf. mg.), I have wearied myself, O God, I have wearied myself and have not succeeded. This offers a striking connexion with Pro 30:2-4. But it is too hypothetical to be adopted, and, as in Pro 30:1 a, it seems best to retain the proper names, either as those of fellow-sages or pupils.

Pro 30:2-4. A passage reflecting the attitude of the author of Job and Psalms 73 towards the problem of Gods real nature and His government of the world. The sage declares his ignorance; like Socrates, he has discovered the knowledge of his ignorance, and feels that this marks him off from those who think they know. For brutish cf. Psa 73:22, with its passionate confession of failure to understand God. Our passage is, of course, only a fragment, and is therefore difficult to compare with Job or Psalms 73, but we do not find in it the passion and yearning for God which underlies the apparent scepticism of the author of Job or of Psalms 73.

Pro 30:4 seems to imply an acquaintance with Job 38, and helps to fix the date of the passage and of the collection. What is his name, etc., cannot refer to God. It is a sarcastic inquiry after the name of the man, or of his son, who has ascended up to heaven and returned with a knowledge of its secrets. Cf. the early Christian use of the idea in Joh 3:13, Eph 4:9 f.

Pro 30:5 f. It is not clear whether these two quotations form part of Agurs oracle. They are from Psa 18:30 (cf. Psa 12:6 also) and Deu 12:32 respectively. It is difficult to define the reference. The Sadducees regarded the Pharisees as innovators in doctrine, especially in their eschatological beliefs (cf. Exp., Oct. 1914, pp. 305f.).

Pro 30:7-33. Except Pro 30:10; Pro 30:17; Pro 30:32 f., this is a collection of numerical aphorisms, a literary form which appears quite early in Heb. literature (cf. Amo 1:3 to Amo 2:6).

Pro 30:7-9. A prayer for two things, sincerity and a modest competency.

Pro 30:11-14. Four evil generationsdespisers of parents, self-righteous, proud, and extortionate.

Pro 30:15 f. Four insatiable things.

Pro 30:15 a is apparently a fragment of a lost proverb. MT is unintelligible, and no satisfactory emendation can be offered. The remainder gives the regular form of tetrad. The four things are: Sheol, the barren womb (LXX has the love of woman), the earth never satisfied with water, and fire. Malan compares the Indian proverb from the Hitopadesa: Fire is not sated with wood, nor the ocean with the streams, nor death with all the living, nor women with men.

Pro 30:17. Possibly a fragment of a lost tetrad, or a gloss on Pro 30:11, just as Pro 30:20 is obviously a gloss on Pro 30:19 d.to obey: purely conjectural, and based on a cognate Ass. form. LXX old age is probably the true text.

Pro 30:18-20. Four inexplicable things. This tetrad, like the two in Pro 30:24-31, is derived from observation of nature. For the ship and the eagle cf. Wis 5:10 f.

Pro 30:21-23. Four intolerable things. Ironic observations on the vicissitudes of life.

Pro 30:23. odious: hardly the sense of the word in this connexion. It might almost be rendered in English idiom an old maid, a woman unsought in marriage.

Pro 30:24-28. Four little wise things.

Pro 30:25. cf. Pro 6:6.

Pro 30:26. conies is erroneous. Render, as in Lev 11:5 (mg.), the rock-badger. It is the hyrax, a small rock-dwelling animal, mentioned in Psa 104:18, Lev 11:5, and Deu 14:7.

Pro 30:27. cf. the description of the locust armies in Joel 2.

Pro 30:28. Read mg.

Pro 30:29-31. Four majestic things.

Pro 30:31. Corrupt. The original cannot be recovered. RV greyhound is one of many guesses at the Heb. expression compressed as to the loins (cf. mg.). The LXX, with most VSS, reads cock. It gives a fuller form for the last three, which is probably exegetical paraphrase rather than faithful representation of the original. The fourth clause also is very uncertain.

Pro 30:32 f. An aphorism, apparently in six-line form, against haste in speech or action. The text is obscure and uncertain.

Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible

In THE FIVE CHAPTERS now completed are proverbs of Solomon copied out by Hezekiah’s servants. The last two chapters show a distinct change in character, both being called “prophecies,” and written by two different writers. The number five is plainly characteristic of the book of Proverbs, being the number of man’s responsibility and of the government of God; and hence chapter 29, the fifth section of this series, has emphasized this over-ruling government and its results in such a way that it should secure the utter subjection of every reader.

But even the book of Proverbs must not end here. If the book is largely moralizing, it has much greater ends than this; and these last chapters are necessary to bring a satisfying completeness from the instruction of the book, – seven as we know being the number of perfection, completeness, rest. They are certainly proverbial in character, yet being prophecies, they are a communication of the mind of God, first as regards His exposing and overcoming all the workings of evil (ch.30); and secondly in the fulness of grace given of His hand to produce abundant blessing and fruitfulness in the subject heart (ch. 31 ).

It cannot but be observed how wonderfully full and satisfying is the conclusion of this book in contrast to that of Ecclesiastes. For as regards proper numerical order, Proverbs is the fifth and last of the poetic books while Ecclesiastes is the fourth.

But it is amazing to consider that in a book written by the wisest of men a book of highest wisdom, this one chapter should be inserted, written by another man, a man unknown. who confesses himself more brutish and ignorant than any man! Is this not intended to teach us, after the clearest possible declaration of principles of moral wisdom, that in reality this wisdom is beyond the ability man can find in himself to follow it? Even Solomon himself badly failed in keeping his own advice. And the honest confession of man’s ignorance of God is the only basis upon which he can expect God to give him the wisdom he lacks. Consequently this very confession of ignorance is wisdom, and Agur in some respects shows more wisdom than Solomon in this chapter. Being a sixth section of this series, it is a plain manifestation of what man is, his frailty, his ignorance, his sinfulness; while God’s victory is beautifully implied in the latter part of the chapter.

“The words of Agur, the son of Jakeh, even the prophecy: the man .spoke unto Ithiel, even unto Ithiel and Ural.”

Whoever Agur may he, he refers to himself only as “the man.” and his description of himself is humbling. Yet his name means “gathered,” and he is the son of Jakeh. which means “he shall be cleared.” If the chapter is the very exposure of man in his vanity. yet do these names not imply that God’s grace can clear the guilty. and gather those whose disorder has scattered them? Moreover the prophecy is spoken to Ithiel, which means, “With me is God,” and to Ucal, meaning “I shall be enabled.” Thus, where man is manifested in his helplessness, the promise of blessing is present, in the living God.

“Surely I am more brutish than any man, and have not the understanding of a man. I neither learned wisdom, nor have the knowledge of the holy.”

We must not in any way think of this as put-on humility. There can be no doubt the man means it when he so speaks. When he considers things that are holy, things that are high, and outside the realm of human observation, he is profoundly impressed with his own ignorance, and feels deeply that his intelligence is not that of normal manhood. We must not suppose that Agur was by any means an imbecile according to the standards of ordinary society, but that in relation to spiritual understanding, he was brought to declare the same sentiments as Asaph in Psa 73:22. “So foolish was I, and ignorant: I was as a beast before Thee.” Sad to say, this is really the condition of mankind generally, but few realize it; and he who does realize it feels it so intensely personally that he appears in his own eyes more ignorant than all others. It is a similar principle when Paul speaks of himself as the chief of sinners. Indeed, this is the very real evidence of the working of the Spirit of God in a man’s soul to show him in what darkness he has been.

He speaks of not having learned wisdom. Thus human education had not given him wisdom in Divine things. Nor did he have the knowledge of the holy: this was not either a matter of human intuition. Yet, in what follows, the wisdom of Agur’s words is most remarkable. But it is higher than human: it is a revelation from God, who uses this instrument in declaring things most valuable in regard to the blessing of souls. Indeed, in all cases, such instruments are those He can most effectively use.

“Who hath ascended up into heaven, or descended? Who hath gathered the wind in his fists? Who hath bound the waters in a garment? Who hath established all the ends of the earth? What is His Name, and what is His San’s Name, if thou canst tell?”

Is this verse not intended to show the complete ignorance of man apart from a revelation from God? It is indisputable that the heavens are there – above us, – and they have drawn the interest of man from time immemorial; but who has ascended there to fathom its mysteries? or who has descended to reveal its mysteries? While man’s excursion to the moon shows his thirst for this knowledge, yet he knows he has barely touched the fringes of space: to ascend to heaven is how different a matter! There is a realm of things transcendently beyond him, and he knows it.

But coming lower than space, who controls the invisible wind in fists of awesome strength? Certainly man does not. Or who binds the water within bounds, water which by its very nature is unbound, unstable, the seas the very symbol of unrestrained lawlessness? Or who has given the solid earth its stability? In these three, all that is observable around us is comprehended, atmospheric, liquid, or solid. What real control does man have over these? Yet who can deny they are controlled? Let atheism, or science, or philosophy tell us, what is the name of this great Controller, and what is His Son’s Name? But human investigation is impossible here: intellect, intuition, education must confess in this their hopeless inability to supply an answer.

How wonderful then is the suitability of verse 5 at this point,

“Every word of God is pure: He is a shield Unto them that put their trust in Him.”

Revelation is the only answer. In order to be known, the Creator must reveal Himself. Simple, honest reasoning should lead anyone to this conclusion. His Word is this revelation, and it is of course absolutely pure in every part of it. It is not a mixture, but preserved totally free from adulteration. Only they who trust it are shielded from falsehood. Faith, not intellect therefore, is the principle that receives this revelation. Unbelief is really stupidity here, for any honest consideration must come to the conclusion that if a revelation of God is made, the only possible right attitude on man’s part is to believe it. And the God who reveals Himself is the Shield of all who put their trust in Him. How simple, and how wonderful.

“Add thou not unto His words, lest He reprove thee, and thou he found a liar.”

Any revelation of God. Since it is a revelation, must be precisely and absolutely accurate as He gives it. No thought of man must be allowed to intrude in the slightest degree, or it could not be a revelation of God. If man attempts this, as many have dared to do, he is exposing himself to the solemn rebuke of God, and will be exposed as a liar. Dreadful condemnation! These first six verses then show God as Sovereign.

“Two things have I required of Thee; deny me them not before I die: Remove far from me vanity and lies: give me neither poverty nor riches: feed me with food convenient for me: Lest I be full, and deny) Thee, and say, Who is the Lord? or lest I be poor, and steal, and take the Name of my God in vain.”

The dependent spirit of a creature of God is seen in its simplicity here. Conscience is in true exercise, and a discerning distrust of the flesh. First, vanity is the very realm in which the entire world moves. Living only for the present, man has no substance that he can really grasp as his own: the objects of his labor and desire are but beautifully adorned bubbles, empty and ready to burst. It is simply “the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life”; and devoid of all substantial, eternal reality. “Lies” are added in connection with this, for these too have far too strong influence in all of society, and only a true dependence upon God in prayer will preserve the child of God from either vanity or lies. Let us echo such a prayer as this from earnest lips, that such things should be far removed from us.

But he prays also that God would supply him with necessities, but allow him neither poverty nor riches. Agur has spoken of his ignorance, but certainly this prayer is far wiser than what generally characterizes men. He knows the serious dangers of wealth, wherein men too often trust, and in doing so, show little regard for the God who has blessed them. Even Solomon, with all his wisdom, proved to be unequal to the trust committed to him in the way of riches and honor. He used it to allow his own heart to he led astray.

On the other hand, poverty too is not good. This has no doubt been occasioned by sin, and many nations of the world today suffer because they have chosen a path of self-will rather than bowing to the Lord Jesus Christ. The answer here again is a true, real faith that trusts the Living God. And this is expressed in this beautiful and honest prayer. The danger of stealing and taking God’s Name in vain he recognizes, and will not trust himself, but his trust is in God. If men steal to satisfy their hunger they often use God’s Name as justifying this, but this is false, an outrage against that Name. We may easily understand a man’s feelings in his stealing in such a case; but honest prayer to God would result in a righteous answer, however hopeless the condition seemed to be. Can we not be absolutely certain that a prayer like this will be definitely answered? It is manifestly a prayer of faith.

“Accuse not a servant to his master, lest he curse thee, and thou be found a liar.”

The previous verses have evidenced the true character of a servant. Yet, even when faithful, a servant may be criticized severely by others, and this is specially so in the case of a servant of God. Rom 14:4 solemnly warns us, “Who art thou that judgest another man’s servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, God is able to make him stand.” It is the master to whom the servant must answer, and any unbecoming interference in this case may actually merit the curse of the master, with the real guilt found to be in the accuser. How sobering a reminder for us, if we should be at all given to a critical attitude.

This irresponsibility is seen to be further developed in the following verses.

“There is a generation that curseth their father, and doth not bless their mother.”

All society knows that this generation is today rather formidable in its size, yet the horror of it is little considered. A brazen, critical spirit will not stop short of contempt even for parents.

“There is a generation that are pure in their own eyes, and yet is not washed from their filthiness.”

Side by side with the harsh denunciation of others including parents, goes this haughty self-justification, a proud hypocrisy that trusts self and yet is transparently filthy and untrustworthy.

“There is a generation, O how lofty are their eyes! and their eyelids are lifted up.”

This goes further than simply self-righteousness, for it is not only the case of those considering themselves pure when they are not, but rather of those who proudly consider themselves superior to everyone else. All man-devised religions have this character and produce such effects in their deluded followers. It is merely the worship of self in the final analysis.

“There is a generation, whose teeth are as ‘swords’, and their jaw teeth as knives, to devour the poor from off the earth, and the needy from among men.” Thus the heart of the ungodly is clearly and unmistakably manifested. Pride is not content to be merely proud, but will express itself in cruelty toward those who cannot defend themselves, and by this means asserts its superiority, attempting to force others to bow in servile fear. This section then, from verse 10 to 14, is the third, manifesting the heart of man as in the light of God’s presence.

The fourth section now continues to the end of verse 23, showing man’s ways proving his weakness and failure.

“The leech hath two daughters: Give, give. There are three things never satisfied four which, say not, ‘It is enough: Sheol, and the barren womb; the earth which is not filled with water, and the fire which saith not, It is enough” (New Trans.).

Is there not here the implied lesson that man by nature resembles a leech, a parasite, always ready to draw from a supply not really his own? So Israel in the wilderness, having been shown wonderful grace from God, only responded with continual dissatisfaction and murmuring. “Give, give” was her language, with little spirit of thankfulness.

But if this is man’s character, he ought to be interested in considering seriously the four things that never say “It is enough.” “Sheol” is the unseen state of the soul and spirit when death separates them from the body. Relentlessly, without respite, this dreaded king of terrors takes its victims one by one. Let man therefore be stopped in his tracks of material self-seeking, to consider that he too may very soon be claimed by death and the unseen.

Next is “the barren womb.” Like Hannah, any wife who has a mother’s heart cries out with a longing that can be satisfied only with the birth of a child. The spiritual lesson here is of utmost value. Our hearts are so constituted that if we do not hear true fruit for God we shall not enjoy true satisfaction. And fruit is borne only through the heart submissive to the operation of the Spirit of God. This is another important consideration.

Next, “the earth that is not filled with water.” A dry land thirsts for water, and seems never to be filled. Man’s soul too is so constituted as to thirst, and only the living water of the Word of God can meet such thirst. The believer is therefore likened to “the earth which drinketh in the rain that cometh oft upon it,” and “receiveth blessing from God” (Heb 6:7). But without this there can be no satisfaction.

Finally, “and the fire that saith not, It is enough.” The devouring fire will rage so long as it can find an object to fasten upon. For instance, lack of rain will leave the forests tinder dry, and the awesome, relentless fire, when once it begins, will have pity upon nothing. Similarly, let man refuse the precious water of God’s Word, and become like a dry and withered tree, how can he escape the fire of the judgment of God? Awful are the words describing the eternal torment of hell, “where the worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched” (Mar 9:44). It is time now to seek true satisfaction, not to wait until all hope of it is impossible.

“The eye that mocketh at his father, and despiseth to obey his mother, the ravens of the valley shall pick it out, and the young eagles shall eat it.”

The eve is that by which true knowledge is discerned, but it may be used in contempt of its Maker and of the authority committed by its Maker to parents: this is gross abuse. If fire speaks of the direct judgment of God, the ravens and eagles speak rather of God’s judgment providentially carried out by unclean agents. How dreadful to be thus reduced to a state of painful blindness and the misery of spiritual destitution! It is a judicial blindness which man, through haughty self-will, brings on himself, though it may be accomplished by means of others who are as unclean and ravenous as ravens and eagles.

“There be three things which are too wonderful for me, yea, four which I know not: The way of an eagle in the air; the way of a serpent upon a rock; the way of a ship in the midst of the sea; and the way of a man with a maid.”

All of these have in common the fact that there is no set pattern: their maneuvers are unpredictable. Is not all of this a reflection of the way of mankind in his being tested in his little time here? “The heart is deceitful above all things and desperately wicked: who can know it?”

The realms of the air, the land, and the sea are again observed here, before “the way of a man” is spoken of. The first sphere, mysterious and wonderful, provides no visible support for the eagle, yet it soars high into the heavens, dives and climbs, spirals and floats in a manner that awakens the wonder of every interested observer. Yet all the while the eagle may be watching for a victim, upon which he falls with sudden swiftness from the sky. What a picture of the judgment of God, ready to fall upon the world, by whatever means it may please Him. Let man consider!

The rock on the other hand is solid, a type of Christ as the eternal God, the stable Rock of Ages. The serpent of course makes no impression on the rock, yet there its sinuous, twisting, unobjective, unreasoning character is displayed. What is all Satan’s activity in comparison to the blessed Rock of Ages? Does it not cause us to marvel when we consider the cunning, crooked ways of the evil one in malice against the Lord Jesus, and yet with no real. sensible objective? How tragic too that multitudes of mankind follow the same tortuous course, as though lost in a hopeless maze, at the very time that salvation in Christ is near them if they would only receive Him.

But the sea is the very picture of instability, a type of the nations in a state of constant unrest and turmoil. A ship may surmount the waves, though greatly affected by them. Of course he is thinking of a small sailing ship, tossed in every direction, hardly seen to be making progress toward a definite end. In Mat 14:1-36, the ship is the picture of the hope of Israel, tossed with the waves of Gentile opposition (v. 24); and similarly in Mar 4:37. All seems hopeless until the Lord Jesus takes control, – walking on the sea in the first case, and on entering the ship causing the wind to cease, bringing them safely to land: and in the other case speaking to the sea, “Peace, be still.” Do we not also today marvel at Israel’s pre-carious state of being tossed and threatened by the angry nations, yet still surmounting the waves, upheld as though by an invisible hand? Yet only the coming of the Lord Jesus will quieten the waves, and bring Israel’s ship to shore.

But more than this, even “the way of a man with a maid” is beyond Agur’s knowledge. Psychologists may attempt to explain the motives and reasoning behind men’s actions, but at best these are only guesses: true wisdom will acknowledge that here is something beyond its ability to explain. Indeed, man does not know his own heart sufficiently to honestly explain the reasons for his actions. Only God knows accurately the thoughts, motives, reasonings of man that give occasion to his strange ways. Where a man’s heart is involved, it is useless to expect that cool, calculating wisdom will dictate his actions, and he will be no more able to explain than is a child who is asked why he has done a senseless thing. The attempt to analyze motives will never lead to a proper conclusion: how much better to leave these things as matters of wonder, not to be explained by human wisdom. Since we cannot be trusted even to rightly interpret our own motives, how much less can we be trusted in reference to motives of others!

But underlying this also is the more amazing marvel of the love of Christ for His bride, the church. Can we by human reason understand His marvelous ways of love and grace, in giving Himself for so unworthy an object, in nourishing and cherishing her in tenderest concern, sanctifying and cleansing her, with the washing of water by the Word, with a view to presenting her to Himself:’ ( Eph 5:25-29 ). We shall never fathom all that is involved in this: but it will engage our wondering adoration for eternity. The verse following is in sad contrast to this, and contemplates the falsehood of an unfaithful wife.

“Such is the way of an adulterous woman; she eateth, and wipeth her mouth, and saith, I have done no wickedness.”

A corrupt nature is so corrupt that it is insensible to its corruption. It will satisfy its own lusts (“eat”), wipe away the evidences of it, and justify itself. Indeed, man can go to the grossest excesses of evil, and still insist there is nothing really wrong in what he does. And yet only an honest confession of his guilt would make him a candidate for the forgiving grace of God. But Israel has been an unfaithful wife, and the false church is of course glaringly guilty of this corruption.

“For three things the earth is disquieted, and for four which it cannot bear: For a servant when he reigneth: and a fool when he is filled with meat: For an odious woman when she is married: and an handmaid that is heir to her mistress.”

If in verses 15 to 17 we have seen no satisfaction, and in verses 18 to 20, no explanation, in these verses is the evident lesson of no rest. What a picture of the world do these three portray! But in the last of the three, the four features mentioned have in common the fact that proper order is upset, and all is thrown out of balance. If so, rest is impossible.

The rule of a servant will generally be intolerable: he is likely to be puffed up with pride that glories in his authority, with a resulting misrule and oppression. But to apply this in the fullest proper sense, all men are actually servants: to God alone belongs the place of reigning. Every king of Judah and of Israel has proven the inability of man to reign properly: all were failures in the end. They could not bring rest to their nation. And the earth has been continually disquieted through all the reigns of men. Only the reign of the Lord Jesus Christ will answer this state of unrest and agitation.

But if first we have seen the rule of the wrong person, next is the prosperity of the wrong person. To see the wicked prosper was a painful distress to the Psalmist (Psa 73:3-9). Yet it is common. The fool, leaving God out of his reckoning, is a base materialist, and when satiated with all he wants (filled with meat), he is characterized by pride, violence, corruption, wickedness, oppression, and brazen speaking against God (Psa 73:6-9 ). Here is another cause for endless disquietude in the world. But faith looks further on, and with Asaph says, “Until I went into the sanctuary of God; then understood I their end” (Psa 73:17). When such men are reduced to utter desolation and eternal poverty, those who hunger and thirst after righteousness shall be eternally “filled.” But meanwhile we know that disorder possesses the world.

Thirdly, is the case of a wrong person united in relationship to another. Marriage is sacred, a bond of which God is the author. “An odious woman,” one whose character is revolting and untrustworthy, only adds brazen hypocrisy to her many sins in being married. In every way she is a contrast to the “virtuous woman” of chapter 31:10. But here again is a too prevalent condition in the world today, that of corruption of the holy relationships established by God.

The fourth case is that of the wrong person receiving honor. The handmaid here is one who disposes her mistress, as the Hebrew word for “heir” implies. Using subtle feminine charm she may be able to supplant her mistress in the affections of her husband. Thus her position is used for treachery. This is the most revolting of all these evils and yet who will correct it? In Christendom too a mere servant for hire, a professed law-keeper. will attempt to steal the place of the soul who stands solely upon the pure grace of God. But only those who stand in this relationship of pure grace before God are “heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ.” Gehazi is an example of the treachery of a hired servant, who knows nothing of grace (2Ki 5:20-27). But their number is all too great. These three verses then are a faithful summary of the reasons for the world’s unrest. And they are common things, which no legislation or education can change, for they spring from the natural sinful condition of man’s heart.

The fifth section of the chapter (vvs. 24-28) is a much brighter picture, for, following as it does the subject of man’s ways in weakness and failure, it speaks of the exercise of the soul as under responsibility. In this case there will he progress, for it will bring God into the scene, – God with man enabling him for his responsibilities. Each of the four cases in this section illustrates that in spite of creature limitation, there is blessing to be found. As it is God Himself who communicates to the ants, conies, locusts, and spiders (or lizards) such fine instincts as they express, and is Himself their preserver, so this is intended as direct teaching to the same end in relation to man.

“There be four things that are little upon the earth, but they are exceeding wise: the ants are a people not strong, yet they prepare their meat in the summer; The conies are but a feeble folk, yet make they their houses in the rocks; The locusts have no king, yet go they forth all of them by bands; The spider taketh hold with her hands, and is in king’s palaces.”

The ant’s weakness is not made an excuse for laxity. Diligently they labor to prepare food for winter. Let us, too, have wisdom in our brief span of life on earth, to prepare for eternity. It is the fool who ignores this, while amassing “much goods” “for many years,” – years on earth which he may not see at all (Luk 12:16-21). The ant rightly lives only for earth, and prepares for the only future she will have: man’s preparation only for earth is folly, for his earthly future is nothing compared to the eternity he must face. But the ant is intended to teach wisdom in diligence, and to reprove laziness. “Go to the ant, thou sluggard; consider her ways and be wise” (Pro 6:6).

The cony of verse 26 is evidently rightly the hyrax, a small, defenseless animal of the marmot type, not of the rabbit family, and not fitted to burrow, but dependent upon the holes and clefts of the rock for its protection. If its condition is extremely feeble, yet its position is strong. How apt a picture of the sinner saved by the grace of God. Weak as water himself, yet “in Christ” he has an impregnable position: “that Rock was Christ” (1Co 10:4). The weakness of the little creature does not discourage him, but drives him to the safety of a strong refuge. So that if the ant teaches preparation, the cony as clearly teaches preservation or security.

But the locusts are marvelous in the fact of their spontaneous unity and order. What a lesson for the church of God! They require no king, no great intellectual leader, who is an expert organizer; yet the order of their camp is more precise, more thoroughly unified than the world’s most carefully organized army. It is God who has given them this wise instinct. Alone, the little locust is virtually helpless: in bands they are practically invincible. How earnestly the responsibility of such unity and order is pressed upon the church of God in the New Testament epistles! Christ, the Head of the body, the church, is in Glory today, the only Head. But if He is not seen, is He any less capable of directing His saints in godly unity? It is all saints who are exhorted to “walk worthy of the vocation wherewith ye are called, with all lowliness and meekness, with longsuffering, forbearing one another in love: endeavoring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace” (Eph 4:1-3)

The power for unity is the unseen Spirit of God. The exercise of honest faith in every member of the body of Christ will result in an order beautiful as it is real. But the locust surely rebukes the shame of our many sad divisions, as well as rebuking the painful unbelief of man’s organization, the introduction into the church of human authority, clergy, church boards, denominational distinctions, which ruins all unity, rather than securing it. Let us notice too that verse 26 speaks of taking refuge in the rock, while verse 27 is rather the “going forth,” carrying the battle into the enemies’ country. Defense is surely necessary but we must learn to have proper offensive character also, and true unity is a wonderful strength for this.

Translators agree that the spider of verse 28 is actually the lizard, a small creature called the gekko, quite common in Israel. It seems to have a peculiar preference for luxurious buildings, and its feet are equipped with cup-like toes that produce an adhesive substance by which they can cling in any position to the smoothest surfaces, and are not easily dislodged. How precious a lesson of the hold dependence of faith that is satisfied with nothing less than dwelling in the house of the Lord, taking hold of the proper privileges and blessings that rightly belong by grace to the redeemed child of God. As Joshua was told, “Every place that the sole of your foot shall tread upon, that have I given unto you” (Jos 1:3), so the child of God is encouraged to possess those possessions that the grace of God has provided for him. His true place is as “raised up together and seated together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus” (Eph 2:6), and this is where his proper blessings are also: “blessed… with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ” (Eph 1:3). Let us then, like the lizard, take hold in the King’s palace and take hold of every blessing He provides.

Verse 29 now introduces the sixth (and last) section of the chapter. If man will not learn through the exercise of God’s governmental dealings, taking to heart the wisdom taught even by the smallest creatures, still God will triumph. And this sixth section indicates that God will curb and overcome the restless will of man. How good to know this! How good for our own souls that it is so!

“There are three things that have a stately step, and four are comely in going: The lion, mighty among beasts, which turneth not away for any; a (horse) girt in the loins; or the he goat; and a king, against whom none can rise up” (New Trans.).

These are all in contrast to the feeble creatures we have just considered; and they tell us of power, speed, ability, and authority that is greater than that of man in the flesh. But how beautifully and perfectly do we see all these characteristics in our Lord Jesus Christ, the Great Overcomer. He is “the Lion of the tribe of Judah,” strong beyond all others, Whose blessed moral courage is so displayed in His going straight on to the cross, not turning away for any, whether scribes, Pharisees, Pilate, Herod, or Satan: He could meet them all, and overcome them in death itself.

The second animal here is not actually named in the original, but perhaps refers to any animal “girt in the loins” that is having loins built for speed, evidently. The Lord Jesus too “girded himself,” the more effectively and promptly to serve. And in Revelation He is girt for the solemn service of judgment. Who can compare with Him in the promptitude and swiftness of His judgment of evil, and overcoming of man’s will? His coming will be as the lightning.

“An he goat also” would remind us of the graceful ease of His surmounting every obstacle, as the he goat leaps from crag to crag, and conquers the highest places above the level of man’s abode. God leaves nothing that is not put under His feet (Heb 2:8). Here is ability above and beyond mere mankind, but in One Who is yet Himself true Man, the Man from Heaven.

The dignity of perfect authority is last of all taught us in the king against whom none can rise up. There have been some in whom this character has been comparatively outstanding in history, yet only in our Lord will it be perfectly displayed in the Day of His glory soon to come. Not that mere force accomplishes this, but the power of love, of moral dignity, of faithfulness and truth, together with the infinite greatness of His Person. “Of the increase of His government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even forever” (Isa 9:7).

In view of this assured victory of God over all mankind, how appropriate are the last two verses, to press the truth home to our own souls.

“If thou hast done foolishly in lifting up thyself, or if thou hast thought evil, lay thine hand upon thy mouth. Surely the churning of milk bringeth forth butter, and the wringing of the nose bringeth forth blood: so the forcing of wrath bringeth forth strife.”

Two things are here solemnly exposed as causes of incalculable damage, – self exaltation and thoughts of evil toward God. A lion may lift up himself, (Num 23:24), because of his very strength, but if mere man would foolishly aspire to the place of God, he will be put down. How much better to judge ourselves now, lay our hand upon our mouth, and let God alone be great. Or if our thoughts have dared to question His wisdom. His righteousness, His ways, let it judge our thoughts now, and stop any rebellious word from passing our lips.

For the forcing of man’s will is certain to bring results of a certain kind. The churning of milk results in butter, a much preferable end than that of the last two cases. Milk is a familiar symbol of the Word of God (1Pe 2:2), and if our time is spent in mulling over what we find there, we shall be blessed with the rich butter, the concentrated fatness and prosperity of spiritual blessing. This kind of exercise is profitable. But the wringing of the nose is damaging, with no object of good: it will produce blood. And thus too the forcing of wrath can have no good object and will achieve no good end. It allows no peace or rest, but stirs up strife. Let man therefore judge his own will as evil, and bow to the wise and holy and perfect will of God.

Fuente: Grant’s Commentary on the Bible

30:1 The words of {a} Agur the son of Jakeh, [even] the prophecy: the man spoke to Ithiel, even to {b} Ithiel and Ucal,

(a) Who was an excellent man in virtue and knowledge in the time of Solomon.

(b) Who were Agur’s scholars or friends.

Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes

VI. COLLECTION 6: THE WISDOM OF AGUR CH. 30

Chapters 30 and 31 form a distinct section in Proverbs, because neither Solomon (Pro 1:1 to Pro 22:16; chs. 25-29), nor the unnamed sages (Pro 22:17 to Pro 24:34), wrote them. Two other wise men, whose names the text records, did. Some expositors speculate that because these men’s discourses occur at the end of the book, the writers probably lived later than the men of Hezekiah. [Note: E.g., Toy, p. 517.] Nevertheless who Agur and Lemuel were, as well as when and where they lived, remain mysteries.

The most distinctive features of Agur’s proverbs are his numerical style of grouping similar items, his picturesque speech, and a unique phrase he used. This phrase, "There are three things . . . even four," occurs with minor changes five times (Pro 30:15; Pro 30:18; Pro 30:21; Pro 30:24; Pro 30:29; cf. Pro 30:11-14).

"The purpose of such a device may be simply to indicate that the list is not exhaustive, though specific (see Amo 1:3; Amo 1:6). Or the purpose may be to emphasize the fourth item on the list." [Note: Jensen, p. 105.]

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

A. The introduction of Agur 30:1

Scripture does not refer to either Agur or his father (or ancestor) Jakeh elsewhere. At least one writer felt he may have been a contemporary of Solomon. [Note: Kidner, p. 178.] An "oracle" is a weighty message from God (cf. Zec 9:1), and the Hebrew word, massa, may refer to a place. [Note: Ross, p. 1119.] Ithiel and Ucal may have been Agur’s sons.

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

CHAPTER 31

THE WORDS OF AGUR

THE rendering of the first verse of this chapter is very uncertain. Without attempting to discuss the many conjectural emendations, we must briefly indicate the view which is here taken. A slight alteration in the pointing; instead of the Masoretic reading changes the proper name Ithiel into a significant verb; and another slight change gives us another verb in the place of Ucal. To remove the difficulty of the word “oracle,” a difficulty which arises from the fact that the chapter which follows is not a prophetic utterance of the kind to which that word might be applied, it is necessary, with Gratz, to make a more serious change. And to explain the word which occurs in a similar connection in Num 24:3; Num 24:15, and 2Sa 23:1-39. I we must suppose that some relative clause defining the nature of “the man” has been dropped. The great uncertainty of the text is witnessed by the LXX, who place this passage after Pro 24:23, and give a rendering which has very little resemblance to our present Hebrew text. It is highly probable, both from the subject matter and from the numerical arrangements, which are thoroughly Rabbinical, that this chapter and chapter 31 are of late origin, and represent the last phase of the proverbial literature of Israel in the days after the return from the Exile. If this be so, the obscurity and uncertainty are characteristic of an artificial period of literature, and of a decay in literary taste. Adopting, then, the alterations which have been mentioned, we obtain the following result:-

“The words of Agur the son of Jakeh, the proverb-writer”:

“The utterance of the man [who has questioned and thought]: I have wearied after God, I have wearied after God, and am faint, for I am too stupid for a man, and am without reason, and I have not learned wisdom, nor have I knowledge of the All Holy,” etc.

This chapter is full of curious interest. It is a collection of sayings which are apparently connected only by the circumstance that they were attributed to one person, Agur, the son of Jakeh. Whoever Agur was, he had a certain marked individuality; he combined meditation on lofty questions of theology with a sound theory of practical life. He was able to give valuable admonitions about conduct. But his characteristic delight was to group together in quatrains visible illustrations of selected qualities or ideas.

It may be well for us to glance at these picturesque groups, and then to return to the more philosophical and religious sentiments with which the chapter opens.

“Slander not a servant to his master,” says Agur, “lest the servant curse thee, and thou be held guilty.” Even underlings have their rights; the Lord makes their cause His own, and a curse from them falls with as much weight on a slanderer as the words of more influential people. It is one of the surest tests of a mans character to see how he treats servants; if he is uniformly courteous, considerate, just, and generous in his treatment of them, we may safely infer that he is a noble character; if he is haughty, domineering, revengeful, and malicious to them, we need not attach much importance to his pleasing manners and plausible services to those whom he considers his equals.

Now follow two of these singular quatrains. There are four kinds of men pointed out, and held up, not to our abhorrence, that is unnecessary, but simply to our observation: the unfilial, the self-righteous, the haughty, and the rapacious who devour the poor and the needy. It is not necessary to say anything about these persons. Their doom is stamped on their brows; to name them is to condemn them; to describe them is to write out their sentence.

Again, there are four things which like the blood-sucking horse-leech are always insatiable. The vampire has her daughters in the earth; it is, as Professor Cheyne says, “a quasi-mythical expression.” These daughters are two, nay, they are three, nay, they are four; and they are, as it were, the representatives of all creation: Sheol, the invisible world, which draws into itself the countless generations of the dead; the generative principle, which never wearies of producing new generations of the living; the earth, which is forever absorbing the cadent waters of heaven; and the fire, which will consume all the fuel that is given to it.

Now follows a further comment upon unfilial conduct: the eye is regarded as the instrument by which a son shows his feelings to his parents; he has not perhaps gone the length of uttering a curse against them, still less of raising his hand to ill-treat them, but his eye flashes derision upon his father, and by its haughty obstinacy declares that it will not obey his mother. The offending member shall be picked out by the clamorous ravens, and eaten by the young of the soaring eagle.

Next we have four more quatrains. First, there are the four wonders which baffle Agurs understanding; wonders which are comprehensible only to God, as the Vedic hymn says, –

“The path of ships across the sea,

The soaring eagles flight he knows.”

The wonder seems to be in the reality and power of impalpable things. How little of all that passes in the universe is open to observation, or leaves a track behind. The eagle mounts through the air as if he marched on a solid beaten road; the serpent, without limbs, glides over the smooth rock where feet would slip, and leaves no trace behind; the ship ploughs the deep, and over trackless waters follows her track which is invisible; a man and a maid meet, swift glances pass, hearts blend, and that is done which can never be undone; or on the evil side, the bad woman follows her illicit and bidden courses, while to all appearance she is a faithful wife and mother.

Secondly, there are four human conditions which are intolerable to society, viz., an essentially servile spirit put into the place of authority; a fool who, instead of being corrected, is confirmed in his folly by prosperity; a marriage where the wife is hated; and a slave girl in the position which Hagar occupied with relation to Sarah her mistress.

Thirdly, there are four kinds of animals which illustrate that size is not necessarily greatness, and that it is possible to be insignificant and yet wise. The tiny ants are a model of intelligent mutual co-operation and prudent thrift. The little jerboas seem helpless enough, but they are sensible in the choice of their homes, for they dwell securely in rocky fastnesses. The locusts seem as weak and inoffensive as insects can be, yet they form a mighty army, ordered in battle array; “they run like mighty men; they climb the wall like men of war; and they march everyone in his ways, and they break not their ranks.” {Joe 2:7} The lizard seems but a plebeian creature; you can seize it with your hands; it is defenseless and devoid of natural capabilities; and yet with its swift crawlings and tireless dartings it will find its way into kings palaces, where greater and stronger creatures cannot enter.

Lastly, there are four things which impress one with their stateliness of motion; the lion, the creature that is girt in the loins, whether a war-horse or a greyhound, the he-goat, and-surely with a little touch of satire-the king when his army is with him.

Then the collection of Agurs sayings ends with a wise and picturesque word of counsel to exercise a strong restraint over our rising passions.

But now we may turn back to the passage with which the chapter opens. Here is the cry of one who has sought to find out God. It is an old and a mournful cry. Many have emitted it from the beginning; many utter it now. But few have spoken with more pathetic humility, few have made us feel with so much force the solemnity and the difficulty of the question as this unknown Agur. We see a brow wrinkled with thought, eyes dimmed with long and close observation; it is not the boor or the sot that makes this humiliating confession; it is the earnest thinker, the eager enquirer. He has meditated on the wonderful facts of the physical world; he has watched the great trees sway under the touch of the invisible wind, and the waves rise up in their might, lashing the shores, but vainly essaying to pass their appointed boundaries; he has considered the vast expanse of the earth, and enquired, on what foundations does it rest, and where are its limits? He cannot question the “eternal power and divinity” which can alone account for this ordered universe. He has not, like many thinkers ancient and modern, “dropped a plummet down the broad deep universe, and cried, No God.” He knows that there is a God; there must be an Intelligence able to conceive, coupled with a power able to realize, this mighty mechanism. But who is it? What is His name or His Sons name? Here are the footsteps of the Creator, but where is the Creator Himself? Here are the signs of His working on every hand. There is an invisible power that ascends and descends on the earth by stair-cases unseen. Who is He? These careering winds, before which we are powerless, obey some control: sometimes they are “up-gathered like sleeping flowers” who is it that holds them then? These great waters sway to and fro, or they pour in ceaseless currents from their fountains, or they gather in the quiet hollows of the hills; but who is it that appoints the ocean, and the river, and the lake? Who feeds them all, and restrains them all? Whose is the garment which holds them as a woman carries a pitcher lashed to her back in the fold of her dress? The earth is no phantom, no mirage, it is solid and established; but who gave to matter its reality, and in the ceaseless flux of the atoms fixed the abiding forms, and ordered the appropriate relations? Ah! what is His name? Has He a son? Is man, for instance, His son? Or does the idea of the Eternal and Invisible God imply also an Eternal Son, a Being one with Him, yet separable, the object of His love, the instrument of His working, the beginning of His creation? Who is He? That He is holy seems an inevitable conclusion from the fact that we know what holiness is, and recognize its sovereignty. For how, in thinking of the mighty Being who made all things, dare I give Him a lower attribute than that which I can give to my fellow-men? How dare I withhold from Him that which I know of the Highest and the Best? But though I know that He is holy, the All Holy One I do not know. My weak and sinful nature has glimpses of Him, but no steady visions. I lose Him in the confused welter of things. I catch the gleam of His face in the hues of the rainbow and in the glow of the eternal hills; but I lose it when I strive to follow among the angry gatherings of the storm clouds, in the threatening crash of the thunder, the roar of the avalanche, and the rent ruins of the earthquake.

And the man, considering all things, questioning, seeking, exclaims, “I am weary and faint.” The splendors of God haunt his imagination, the sanctities of God fill his conscience with awe, the thoughts of God lie as presuppositions behind all his thinking. But he has not understanding; baffled and foiled and helpless, he says that he is too brutish to be a man. Surely a man would know God; surely he must be but one of the soulless creatures, dust of the dust, for he has not the knowledge of the Holy One.

To this impetuous hail of questions an answer comes. For indeed in the fact that the questions are put already the answer lies. In the humble cry that he is too stupid to be a man is already the clearest proof that he is raised incalculably above the brute.

But who is it that offers the answer in Pro 30:5-9? It would seem as if Agur himself has suggested the question-a question borrowed probably from some noble heathen thinker; and now he proceeds to meet the wild and despairing outcry with the results of his own reflection. He does not attempt the answer on the lines of natural religion. His answer in effect is this: You cannot know God, you cannot by searching find Him unless he reveals Himself; His revelation must come as an articulate and intelligible word. As the Psalm says-for it seems to be a quotation from Psa 18:30 -“Every word of God is tried: He is a shield unto them that trust in Him.” Agur appeals to a written revelation, a revelation which is complete and rounded, and to which no further addition may be made (Pro 30:6). It was probably the time when Ezra the scribe had gathered together the Law and the Psalms and the Prophets, and had formed the first scriptural canon.

Since then a great deal has been added to the canon, these words of Agur among the rest, but the assertion remains essentially true. Our knowledge of God depends on His self-revelation, and the method of that revelation is to speak, through the lips of God-possessed men, words which are tried by experience and proved by the living faith of those who trust in God. “I am that I am” has spoken to men, and to Him, the Eternally-existent, have they ascribed the visible universe. “The God of Israel” has spoken to men, and they have learnt therefore to trace His hand in history and in the development of human affairs. The Holy One has in prophets and poets spoken to men, and they have become aware that all goodness comes from Him, and all evil is hateful to Him. And lastly, His Son has spoken to men, and has declared Him in a way that never could have been dreamed, has shown them the Father, has revealed that new unutterable Name.

The answer to the great cry of the human heart, the wearied, fainting human heart, is given only in revelation, in the tried word of God, and completely only in the Word of God that was made flesh. The proof of that revelation is furnished to all those who trust in the God so revealed, for He becomes a shield to them; they abide under the shadow of His realized presence. It is not possible to add unto the words of God; our speculations lead us farther, but they only lead us into error; and by them we incur His reproof, and our fictions become disastrously exposed. The answer to philosophy is in revelation, and they who do not accept the revealed answer are left asking eternally the same weary and hopeless question, “What is his name, and what is his sons name?”

And now, with a quaint and practical homeliness which is very suggestive, Agur notices two conditions, which he has evidently observed to be necessary if we are to find the answer which revelation gives to the enquiry of the human heart after God. First of all we must be rid of vanity and lies. How true this is! We may hold the Bible in our hands, but while our hearts are void of seriousness and sincerity we can find nothing in it, certainly no word of God. A vain person and an untruthful person can receive no genuine revelation; they may believe, or think that they believe, the current religious dogmas, and they may be able to give a verbal answer to the question which we have been considering, but they cannot have the knowledge of the Holy One. More than half the godlessness of men is due simply to want of earnestness; they are triflers on the earth, they are painted bubbles, which burst if any solid thing touches them; they are drifting vapors and exhalations, which pass away and leave not a wrack behind. But there are many men who are serious enough in their search for knowledge, and yet are vitiated through and through by a radical want of truthfulness. They are prepared for facts, but only facts of a certain sort. They want to know God, but only on condition that He shall not be supernatural. They want to study the truths of the spiritual world, but only on condition that the spiritual shall be material. O remove far from me vanities and lies!

Then there is a second condition desirable for the due appreciation of religious truth, a social and economical condition. Agur might have known our modern world with its terrible extremes of wealth and poverty. He perceived how hard it is for the rich to enter the kingdom of heaven; and, on the other hand, how probable it is that hungry men will be seduced into stealing and betrayed into blasphemy. That there is much truth in this view we may easily satisfy ourselves by considering the wealthy classes in England, whose question, urged through all their pomp and ceremonial of heartless worship, is practically, “Who is the Lord?” and by then looking at the eight hundred thousand paupers of England, amongst whom religion is practically unknown except as a device for securing food.

And when we have duly weighed this saying of Agurs, we may come to see that among all the pressing religious and spiritual problems of our day, this also must be entertained and solved, How to secure a more equable distribution of wealth, so that the extremes of wealth and poverty should disappear, and all should be fed with the food that is needful for them.

Fuente: Expositors Bible Commentary