Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Proverbs 28:24
Whoso robbeth his father or his mother, and saith, [It is] no transgression; the same [is] the companion of a destroyer.
24. a destroyer ] “That is the deliberate villain who is prepared for any crime. Comp. Mat 15:4; Mat 15:6.” Rel. Tr. Soc. Comm. Comp. Pro 18:9.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Is the companion of a destroyer – i. e., he stands on the same footing as the open, lawless robber. Compare this with our Lords teaching as to Corban Mar 7:10-13.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 24. Whoso robbeth his father] The father’s property is as much his own, in reference to the child, as that of the merest stranger. He who robs his parents is worse than a common robber; to the act of dishonesty and rapine he adds ingratitude, cruelty, and disobedience. Such a person is the compatriot of a destroyer; he may be considered as a murderer.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Saith in his heart, supposing that he hath a right to his fathers goods.
Is the companion of a destroyer; either,
1. He hereby showeth that he is fallen into such wicked society, from whom he hath such counsel or example. Or,
2. He is no less guilty than a thief who robs and destroys men upon the highway; he is a thief and robber, because he hath no right to the actual possession of his fathers goods before his death, or without his consent.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
24. (Compare Mt15:4-6). Such, though heirs, are virtually thieves, to be rankedwith highwaymen.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Whoso robbeth his father or his mother,…. As Micah did of eleven hundred shekels of silver, Jud 17:2;
and saith, [it is] no transgression; what is his father’s or his mother’s is his own, or as good as his own, it will come to him at their death; and if he wants it before, he thinks he ought to have it; and if they are not willing to give it him, it is with him no sin to rob them of it; and this he says within himself, to quiet his conscience when he has done it; or to others who may charge him with it: but, whatever such a man thinks, sins against parents are greater than against others; as parricide is a greater sin than any other kind of murder, so robbing of parents is greater than any other kind of theft; it is more aggravated, especially when parents are aged, and cannot work for themselves, but depend on what they have for their livelihood; whereas a young man can, and ought, and should rather give to his parents than rob them of what they have;
the same [is] the companion of a destroyer; of a murderer; either he has got into such company which have put him upon such wicked practices; or he will soon get into such a society, and, from a robber of his father and mother, become a robber on the highway, and a murderer; and he has wickedness enough to be a destroyer of the lives of his parents, as well as of their substance; and sometimes the one sin leads to the other.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
24 He who robbeth his father and mother, and saith:
It is no wrong, Is a companion of the destroyer.
The second line is related to Pro 18:9. Instead of dominus perditionis there found, there is here , vir perdens ( perditor ); the word thus denotes a man who destroys, not from revenge, but from lust, and for the sake of the life of men, and that which is valuable for men; thus the spoiler, the incendiary, etc. Instead of there, here we have in the same sense. He who robs his parents, i.e., takes to himself what belongs to them, and regards his doing so as no particular sin,
(Note: Accentuate without Makkeph, as in Codd. 1294 and old editions.)
because he will at last come to inherit it all (cf. Pro 20:21 with Pro 19:26), to to be likened to a man who allows himself in all offences against the life and property of his neighbour; for what the deed of such a son wants in external violence, it makes up in its wickedness, because it is a rude violation of the tenderest and holiest demands of duty.
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
24 Whoso robbeth his father or his mother, and saith, It is no transgression; the same is the companion of a destroyer.
As Christ shows the absurdity and wickedness of those children who think it is no duty, in some cases, to maintain their parents (Matt. xv. 5), so Solomon here shows the absurdity and wickedness of those who think it is no sin to rob their parents, either by force or secretly, by wheedling them or threatening them, or by wasting what they have, and (which is no better than robbing them) running into debt and leaving them to pay it. Now, 1. This is commonly made light of by untoward children; they say, “It is no transgression, for it will be our own shortly, our parents can well enough spare it, we have occasion for it, we cannot live as gentlemen upon the allowance our parents give us, it is too strait for us.” With such excuses as these they endeavour to shift off the conviction. But, 2. How lightly soever an ungoverned youth makes of it, it is really a very great sin; he that does it is the companion of a destroyer, no better than a robber on the highway. What wickedness will he scruple to commit who will rob his own parents?
Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary
Robbery of Parents
Verse 24 declares that he who robs father or mother is just as guilty as the lawless robber who steals and destroys. The N.T. also interprets the child’s duty to aging parents as a strict obligation to provide (not destroy) that needed for their care, Pro 18:9; Pro 23:22; Pro 20:20; Pro 19:26; Exo 21:15; Mar 7:9-13; 1Ti 5:4; 1Ti 5:8.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
MAIN HOMILETICS OF Pro. 28:24
ROBBING PARENTS
I. A parents sacred rights. A father and mother, if they are worthy of the name, have a very strong claim upon their childrens consideration. Their children owe them obedience in their childhood, and reverent and loving regard when they have reached manhood. If their parents are rich, their possessions are to be held as peculiarly sacred. A feeling, says Wardlaw, should attach to it somewhat like that which attaches to holy thingsthings pertaining to God and His service. The violation of their property should be felt to be a description of sacrilege. On the other hand, if the parents are poor, their children are certainly bound to help to support them, and so in some measure to repay to them the expenses of their own bringing up. Christ puts this duty to parents before that of giving even to the support of Church ordinances, and severely condemns the Pharisees and Scribes for inculcating opposite teaching (Mar. 7:11).
II. The character of the child who violates these rights. There are, alas, many sons and daughters who, instead of rendering more honour to their parents than to other people give them less, and instead of showing more regard to their parents rights than to those of a stranger, seem to ignore the fact that they owe anything to them. In the matter of money, those who would not touch the possession of any other person will sometimes appropriate what belongs to their parents, and say, It is no transgression; or if they do not go quite so far as this, do not hesitate to live upon them when they ought to be earning their own living, or to incur debts which they know their parents will discharge. He who is guilty of any of these negative or positive transgressions robs, his father and mother, and his character is given here. Although he may not be openly a vicious manalthough he may seem to be much less blameworthy than the man who openly violates the law of the land, he is here put on a level with him. The sin in the sight of God is as great, and there is in such a man the capability of developing into an open transgressor, for he who can violate such holy demands of duty, and trample upon the rights of such a sacred relationship, only wants the motive and opportunity to commit actions which would at once class him among the criminals of society.
OUTLINES AND SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS
But if any widow have children or nephews, let them first learn to shew piety at home, and to requite their parents. (1Ti. 5:4.) It is observable, childrens kindness to their parents is termed piety or godliness, because it is a part thereof, and very acceptable to God. Besides, it is called a requiting them, intimating that it is not an act of grace, but of justice.Swinnock.
To say that we did not look upon a thing to be a transgression will be no just excuse for any piece of conduct we might have known to be criminal. It will only shew us to be so depraved that even our minds and our consciences are defiled.Lawson.
For Homiletics on the first clause of Pro. 28:25, see on chap. Pro. 13:10, page 305.
Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell
(24) It is no transgression.Because all would in time come to him.
The companion of a destroyer.Comp. Pro. 18:9. Though the deed may be done secretly, yet he is no better than one who by open violence and wrong assails his neighbour.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
24. Robbeth Strips them of their substance in any way.
Companion That is, he is to be classed with a destroyer, perhaps of life, a murderer. Comp. Pro 19:26; Mat 15:4-6; Mar 7:11.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Pro 28:24 Whoso robbeth his father or his mother, and saith, [It is] no transgression; the same [is] the companion of a destroyer.
Ver. 24. He that robbeth his father or his mother. ] As that idolatrous Micah did his mother of her gold; Jdg 17:2 as Rachel did her father of his gods; as Absalom did David of his crown. Thus, though it may seem a light sin, it is as much greater than stealing from another as parricide is than manslaughter, or as Reuben’s incest was than another man’s defiling his neighbour’s wife. Our parents are our household gods, as that heathen could say; and to give them cause of grief must needs be an offence of a deep dye, of a crimson colour, condemned by the very pagans. a
a Egone patri surripere quicquam possim? – Terent.
destroyer = a destroying man.
Pro 28:24
Pro 28:24
“Whoso robbeth his father or his mother, and saith, It is no transgression, The same is the companion of a destroyer.”
The background of this, as suggested by Cook, seems to be that very kind of “robbing” one’s parents that Jesus condemned in Mar 7:10-13. The fact that some robber of his parents might have the gall to say, “It is no transgression” points squarely at that Corban device invented by the Pharisees. This proverb places that class of robbery in the same category as “Open lawless robbery, effected by use of a deadly weapon.
Pro 28:24. Why would somebody rob his father and mother? First of all, it would be easy to do as compared to robbing anybody else, for he would know where everything was, he would be present in the house at times when they werent, etc. Or, he might think they would be more lenient upon him than upon somebody else, if what he did was ever found out. Or, he might salve his conscience by saying, Its all going to belong to us children in time anyway. This last thought could account for his saying to himself, It is no transgression. But as long as ones parents live, it is still theirs, and to take from them is robbing, and the whoso of our verse shows that it doesnt matter who does it, it is still robbing. How perverse to rob the very ones who gave him life, provisions, and rearing.! He is a companion of a destroyer because he is destroying their financial holdings. A similar expression (brother to him that is a destroyer) is said of a lazy person (Pro 18:9).
robbeth: Pro 19:26, Jdg 17:2, Mat 15:4-6
the same: Pro 28:7, Pro 13:20, Pro 18:9
a destroyer: Heb. a man destroying
Reciprocal: Exo 20:12 – Honour Deu 21:18 – have a stubborn 1Th 4:6 – go 1Ti 1:9 – murderers Heb 12:28 – with reverence
Pro 28:24. Whose robbeth his father or his mother Who openly or secretly, by force, fraud, or deceit, by arts or threats, or by negligent or wilful wasting, deprives them of their property, or runs in debt and leaves them to pay it; and saith In his heart; It is no transgression Supposing that he hath a right to his parents goods; the same is the companion of a destroyer Not only shows that he associates with spendthrifts, who will lead him to his ruin, but is wicked enough to be a highwayman, and murderer of others, for the satisfaction of his own lusts: he is indeed a thief and a robber, because he hath no right to the actual possession of his parents goods before their death, or without their consent.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments