Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Proverbs 30:2

Surely I [am] more brutish than [any] man, and have not the understanding of a man.

A confession of ignorance, with which compare the saying of Socrates that he was wise only so far as he knew that he knew nothing, or that of Asaph Psa 73:22.

Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible

Verse 2. Surely I am more brutish] These words can in no sense, nor by any mode of speech, be true of Solomon: for while he was the wisest of men, he could not have said that he was more brutish than any man, and had not the understanding of a man. It is saying nothing to the purpose, to say he was so independently of the Divine teaching. Had he put this in, even by innuendo, it might be legitimate: but he does not; nor is it by fair implication to be understood. Solomon is not supposed to have written the Proverbs after he fell from God. Then indeed he might have said he had been more brutish than any man. But Agur might have used these words with strict propriety, for aught we know; for 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, independently of which he was rustic and uneducated.

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

You come to me with a great opinion of my wisdom, and you expect that I should inform and instruct you in all things, yea, even in the greatest mysteries: but you are much mistaken in me; I am as ignorant and foolish as other men generally are, yea, more than many others; which he utters either,

1. From a deep sense of the common corruption of human nature, and of the blindness of mens minds in things concerning God and their own duty, and of the necessity of instruction from Gods word, and of illumination from his Spirit, without which they can never understand these matters. Or,

2. From a modest and humble apprehension of his own ignorance, which hath extorted such-like expressions even from heathen philosophers; whence Pythagoras rejected the title of a wise man when it was ascribed to him; and Socrates, though reputed the wisest man of his age, professed that he knew nothing but this, that he knew nothing.

Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole

2-4. brutishstupid, a strongterm to denote his lowly self-estimation; or he may speak of such ashis natural condition, as contrasted with God’s all-seeingcomprehensive knowledge and almighty power. The questions of thisclause emphatically deny the attributes mentioned to be those of anycreature, thus impressively strengthening the implied reference ofthe former to God (compare Deu 30:12-14;Isa 40:12; Eph 4:8).

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

Surely I am more brutish than [any] man,…. “Every man is [become] brutish in his knowledge”; man in his original state was a knowing creature but sinning lost his knowledge, and “became like the beasts that perish”; hence we read of the “brutish among the people”: but Agur thought himself not only brutish among the rest, but more brutish than any. So Plato o says of some souls living on earth, that they are , of a brutish nature; see Jer 10:14. Or I think the words may be rendered, “a brute [am] I [rather] than a man” p; have more of the brute than of the man, especially in the sight and presence of God; a very beast before him, or in comparison of other wise, holy, and good men; or with respect to the knowledge of spiritual, divine, and heavenly things, Ps 73:22; or “a brute [was] I from [the time]”, or “[ever since I was] a man” q; as soon as be was born, being born in sin, and like a wild ass’s colt, Job 11:12;

and have not the understanding of a man; or “of Adam” r; who was made after the image of God, which consisted in knowledge as well as holiness; who knew much of God, his nature, perfections, and persons; of the creatures, and the works of his hands and of all things in nature; but affecting more knowledge than he should lost in a great measure what he had, and brought his posterity in and left them in a state of blindness and ignorance, one of whose sons Agur was: or his meaning is, that he had not the understanding, as not of Adam in innocence, and of prophets and other eminent men of God, so not of ordinary men of those who had, he least share of the knowledge of divine things. Aben Ezra, who takes Ithiel and Ucal to be scholars or companions of Agur, supposes, that they asked him questions concerning the divine Being, nature, and perfections, to which he answers in this strain; showing his insufficiency to give them any instruction or satisfaction in such matters, or to discourse on such sublime subjects: or rather his view was to show the blindness and ignorance of human nature with respect to divine things he was about to treat of; and particularly to observe, that the knowledge of a Saviour, and salvation by him, were not from nature, and attainable by that; and that a man must first know himself, his own folly and ignorance, before he can have any true knowledge of Ithiel and Ucal, the mighty Saviour and Redeemer; of the need of him, and of interest in him. Some think his view is to prove that his words, his prophecy, or what he was about to say, or did say, must be owing entirely to divine inspiration; since he was of himself; and without a divine revelation, so very blind, dark, and ignorant; it could not be owing to any natural sagacity of his, who was more brutish than any; nor to any acquired knowledge, or the instruction of men, since he had none, as follows; and so , with which the words begin, may be rendered “for” or “because” s, as it usually is, “for I am more brutish, than any man”, c.

o De Leg. l. 10. p, 959. p “bardus sum prae viro”, Mercerus “brutus ego prae viro”, Cocceius, Schultens. q “Nam brutus sum ex quo vir sum”, Junius Tremellius, so Cartwright. r “Nec est mihi intelligentia Adami”, Cartwright. s “nam”, Junius Tremellius “quia”, Pagninus, Montanus “quoniam”, Michaelis.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

The now following confirms the fruitlessness of the long zealous search:

2 For I am without reason for a man,

And a man’s understanding I have not.

3 And I have not learned wisdom,

That I may possess the knowledge of the All-Holy.

He who cannot come to any fixed state of consecration, inasmuch as he is always driven more and more back from the goal he aims at, thereby brings guilt upon himself as a sinner so great, that every other man stands above him, and he is deep under them all. So here Agur finds the reason why in divine things he has failed to attain unto satisfying intelligence, not in the ignorance and inability common to all men – he appears to himself as not a man at all, but as an irrational beast, and he misses in himself the understanding which a man properly might have and ought to have. The of is not the partitive, like Isa 44:11, not the usual comparative: than any one (Bttcher), which ought to be expressed by , but it is the negative, as Isa 52:14; Fleischer: rudior ego sum quam ut homo appeller , or: brutus ego, hominis non similis . Regarding , vid., under Pro 12:1.

(Note: According to the Arab. is not a beast as grazing, but as dropping stercus ( ba’r , camel’s or sheep’s droppings); to the R. , Mhlau rightly gives the meanings of separating, whence are derived the meanings of grazing as well as of removing (cleansing) (cf. Pers. thak karadn , to make clean = to make clean house, tabula rasa ).)

Pro 30:3 now says that he went into no school of wisdom, and for that reason in his wrestling after knowledge could attain to nothing, because the necessary conditions to this were wanting to him. But then the question arises: Why this complaint? He must first go to school in order to obtain, according to the word “To him who hath is given,” that for which he strove. Thus refers to learning in the midst of wrestling; but , spiritually understood, signifies the acquiring of a kennens [knowledge] or knnens [knowledge = ability]: he has not brought it out from the deep point of his condition of knowledge to make wisdom his own, so that he cannot adjudge to himself knowledge of the all-holy God (for this knowledge is the kernel and the star of true wisdom). If we read 3b , this would be synchronistic, nesciebam , with standing on the same line. On the contrary, the positive subordinates itself to , as the Arab. faa’ lama , in the sense of ( ita ) ut scirem scientiam Sanctissimi , thus of a conclusion, like Lam 1:19, a clause expressive of the intention, Ewald, 347a. is, as at Pro 9:10, the name of God in a superlative sense, like the Arab. el – kuddus .

Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

Agur’s Sense of Inadequacy

Verses 2-3 acknowledge Agur’s sense of inadequacy as he ponders the greatness of God who created the universe his eyes and senses beheld. As he reflected upon the many aspects of divine wisdom and power he could see manifested daily, Agur felt that compared to the greatness of God, he had no wisdom or knowledge, that he was brutish (stupid). Agur was truly a humble man who appreciated the greatness of God, Pro 16:19; Pro 22:4; Pro 29:23; Isa 57:15.

Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary

(2) Surely I am more brutish than any man.Rather, than that I can be called a man, one formed in the image of God. (Comp. Psa. 73:22.)

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

2. Brutish Stupid, lacking intelligence, as compared with many others. Psa 73:22.

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

Man’s Response to God’s Presence – In Pro 30:2-3, Agur responds in broken humility at the presence of God.

Pro 30:2  Surely I am more brutish than any man, and have not the understanding of a man.

Pro 30:2 Comments – In the presence of God, we feel so unclean and small. We see the true wickedness of our own hearts and minds in this corrupt body. Agur, the author of this chapter has experienced a true encounter with Almighty God. His response is similar to the words of Isaiah when he had a vision of God on His throne. Note:

Isa 6:5, “Then said I, Woe is me! for I am undone; because I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips: for mine eyes have seen the King, the LORD of hosts.”

Gideon felt this way in his encounter with an angel:

Jdg 6:22, “And when Gideon perceived that he was an angel of the LORD, Gideon said, Alas, O Lord GOD! for because I have seen an angel of the LORD face to face.”

Samson’s father felt this way in his encounter with an angel:

Jdg 13:22, “And Manoah said unto his wife, We shall surely die, because we have seen God.”

Job had an encounter with God and felt this way:

Job 42:5, “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.”

The apostle Peter felt this way in his realization of the divinity of Jesus Christ:

Luk 5:8, “When Simon Peter saw it, he fell down at Jesus’ knees, saying, Depart from me; for I am a sinful man, O Lord.”

The apostle John had an encounter with the Lord Jesus Christ and felt this way:

Rev 1:17, “And when I saw him, I fell at his feet as dead. And he laid his right hand upon me, saying unto me, Fear not; I am the first and the last:”

Pro 30:3  I neither learned wisdom, nor have the knowledge of the holy.

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures