Verse 29. There be three things which go well] Here is another set of emblems; four things which walk beautifully and with majesty. 1. The lion. 2. The greyhound. 3. The he-goat. And, 4. A king.

1. Nothing can be more majestic than the walk of the lion. It is deliberate, equal, firm, and in every respect becoming the king of the forest.

2. The greyhound. zarzir mothnayim, the girt in the loins; but what this beast is we do not distinctly know. It is most likely that this was the greyhound, which in the East are remarkably fine, and very fleet. Scarcely any thing can be conceived to go with greater fleetness, in full chase, than a greyhound with its prey in view: it seems to swim over the earth.

3. The goat, tayish. This is generally allowed to be the he-goat; and how he walks, and what state he assumes, in the presence of his part of the flock, every one knows, who has at all noticed this animal. The ram also, which some suppose to be intended, is both fierce and majestic at the head of the sheep.

4. And a king, against whom there is no rising up. That is, a king whose court, counsels, and troops, are so firmly united to him, as to render all hopes of successful conspiracy against him utterly vain. He walks boldly and majestically about, being safe in the affections of his people. But the Hebrew is singular; it makes but two words; and these are they, umelech Alkum, “and King Alkum.” It is a doubt whether this may not be a proper name, as Agur abounds in them; see Ithiel, Ucal, and probably Alukah, Pr 30:15. But it is said, “We know nothing of a king named Alkum.” True; nor do we know any thing of Agur, Ithiel, Ucal, to say nothing of Alukah. And this might have been some remarkable chieftain, who carried his victories wherever he went, and was remarkably fortunate. If, however, we separate the word into al, “not,” and kum, “he arose,” we may make the interpretation above given.

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

That walk decently, and with great alacrity and courage; which are here commended to us to imitate in the management of our affairs.

Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole

24-31. These verses provide twoclasses of apt illustrations of various aspects of the moral world,which the reader is left to apply. By the first (Pr30:25-28), diligence and providence are commended; the success ofthese insignificant animals being due to their instinctive sagacityand activity, rather than strength. The other class (Pro 30:30;Pro 30:31) provides similes forwhatever is majestic or comely, uniting efficiency with gracefulness.

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

There be three [things] which go well,…. In a very orderly and composed manner; with constancy and cheerfulness, with great stateliness and majesty, intrepidly, and without fear;

yea, four are comely in going; very beautiful and lovely to look at as they walk.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

Another numerical proverb with the cipher 4 = 3 + 1:

29 Three things are of stately walk,

And four of stately going:

30 The lion, the hero among beasts,

And that turneth back before nothing;

31 The swift-loined, also the goat;

And a king with whom is the calling out of the host.

Regarding with inf. following (the segolated n. actionis is of equal force with an inf.), vid., under Pro 15:2.

(Note: In 29a, after Norzi, , and in 29b, , is to be written, and this is required by the little Masora to 1Sa 25:31, the great, to Eze 33:33, and also the Erfurt little Masora to the passage before us.)

The relation of the members of the sentence in 30a is like that in 25a and 26a: subj. and apposit., which there, as here, is continued in a verbal clause which appears to us as relative. It deserves to be here remarked that , as the name for a lion, occurs only here and at Job 4:11, and in the description of the Sinai wilderness, Isa 30:6; in Arab. it is layth , Aram. , and belongs to the Arameo-Arab. dialect of this language; the lxx and Syr. translate it “the young lion;” the Venet. excellently, by the epic . has the article only to denote the genus, viz., of the beasts, and particularly the four-footed beasts. What is said in 30b (cf. with the expression, Job 39:22) is described in Isa 30:4. The two other beasts which distinguish themselves by their stately going are in 31a only briefly named. But we are not in the condition of the readers of this Book of Proverbs, who needed only to hear the designation at once to know what beast was meant. Certainly , as the name for a beast, is not altogether unknown in the post-bibl. Heb. “In the days of Rabbi Chija (the great teacher who came from Babylon to the Academy of Sepphoris), as is narrated in Bereschith rabba, sect. 65, a zarzir flew to the land of Israel, and it was brought to him with the question whether it were eatable. Go, said he, place it on the roof! Then came an Egyptian raven and lighted down beside it. See, said Chija, it is unclean, for it belongs to the genus of the ravens, which is unclean (Lev 11:15). From this circumstance there arose the proverb: The raven goes to the zarzir because it belongs to his own tribe.”

(Note: This “like draws to like” in the form: “not in vain goes the raven to the zarzir , it belongs just to its own tribe,” came to be often employed, Chullin 65a, Baba Kamma 92b. Plantavitius has it, Tendlau more at large, Sprichwrter, u.s.w., Nr. 577.)

Also the Jer. Rosch ha-schane, Halacha 3: “It is the manner of the world that one seeks to assist his zarzir , and another his zarzir , to obtain the victory;” and Midrash Echa v. 1, according to which it is the custom of the world, that one who has a large and a little zarzir in his house, is wont to treat the little one sparingly, so that in the case of the large one being killed, he might not need to buy another. According to this, the zarzir is a pugnacious animal, which also the proverb Bereschith rabba, c. 75, confirms: two zarzir do not sleep on one board; and one makes use of his for contests like cock-fights. According to this, the is a bird, and that of the species of the raven; after Rashi, the tourneau, the starling, which is confirmed by the Arab. zurzur (vulgar Arab. zarzur ), the common name of starlings (cf. Syr. zarzizo , under zrz of Castelli). But for the passage before us, we cannot regard this as important, for why is the starling fully named ? To this question Kimchi has already remarked that he knows no answer for it. Only, perhaps, the grave magpie ( corvus pica ), strutting with upraised tail, might be called succinctus lumbos , if can at all be used here of a bird. At the earliest, this might possibly be used of a cock, which the later Heb. named directly , because of its manly demeanour; most old translators so understand it. The lxx translates, omitting the loins, by , according to which the Syr. and Targ.: like the cock which struts about proudly among the hens;

(Note: Regarding the Targum Text, vid., Levy under and . The expression (who is girded, and shows himself as such) is not unsuitable.)

Aquila and Theodotion: ( ) ; The Quinta: ; Jezome: gallus succinctus lumbos . Sarsar (not sirsir , as Hitzig vocalizes) is in Arab. a name for a cock, from sarsara , to crow, an onomatopoeia. But the Heb. , as the name of a bird, signifies, as the Talmud proves on the ground of that history, not a cock, but a bird of the raven order, whether a starling, a crow, or a magpie. And if this name of a corvinus is formed from the onomatopoeia , the weaker form of that (Arab.) sarsar , then , which, for , requires the verbal root , to girdle, is not wholly appropriate; and how strangely would the three animals be mingled together, if between and , the two four-footed animals, a bird were placed! If, as is to be expected, the “ Lendenumgrtete ” [the one girded about the loins = ] be a four-footed animal, then it lies near, with C. B. Michaelis and Ziegler, after Ludolf’s

(Note: Ludolf gave, in his Hist. Aethiop. i. 10, and Commentarius, p. 150, only a description of the Zecora, without combining therewith ; but vid., Joh. Dietr. Winckler’s Theol. u. Philol. Abhand. i. (1755) p. 33ff.: “A nearer explanation of what is to be understood by , Pro 30:31, along with a statement from a hitherto unpublished correspondence between the learned philologists Hiob Ludolf and Matthai Leydecker, a Reformed preacher in Batavia.” With Ludolf, Joh. Simonis also, in the Arcanum Formarum (1735), p. 687f., decides in favour of the zebra.)

example, to think of the zebra, the South African wild ass. But this animal lay beyond the sphere of the author’s observation, and perhaps also of his knowledge, and at the same time of that of the Israelitish readers of this Book of Proverbs; and the dark-brown cross stripes on a white ground, by which the zebra is distinguished, extend not merely to its limbs, but over the whole body, and particularly over the front of the body. It would be more tenable to think of the leopard, with its black round spots, or the tiger, with dark stripes; but the name scarcely refers to the colour of the hair, since one has to understand it after the Aram. = , 1Ki 18:46, or , Job 38:3, and thus of an activity, i.e., strength and swiftness, depending on the condition of the loins. Those who, with Kimchi, think that the [leopard] is thus named, ground their view, not on this, that it has rings or stripes round its legs, but on this, that it . But this beast has certainly its definite name; but a fundamental supposition entering into every attempt at an explanation is this, that , as well as and , is the proper name of a beast, not a descriptive attribute. Therefore the opinion of Rosse, which Bochart has skilfully established in the Hierozoicon, does not recommend itself, for he only suggests, for choice, to understand the name, “the girded about the loins,” in the proper sense of straps and clasps around and on the loins (thus e.g., Gesenius, Fleischer, Hitzig), or of strength, in the sense of the Arab. habuwk , the firmly-bound = compact, or samm alslab , the girded loin (thus e.g., Muntinghe). Schultens connects together both references: Utrumque jungas licet . That the by-name fits the horse, particularly the war-horse, is undeniable; one would have to refer it, with Mhlau, to the slender structure, the thin flanks, which are reckoned among the requisites of a beautiful horse.

(Note: Vid., Ahlwardt, Chalef elahmar’s Qasside (1859), and the interpretation of the description of the horse contained therein, p. 210ff.)

But if succinctus lumbos were a by-name of a horse, why did not the author at once say ? We shall give the preference to the opinion, according to which the expression, “girt about the loins” = “with strong loins,” or “with slender limbs,” is not the by-name, but the proper name of the animal. This may be said of the hunting-hound, lvrier (according to which the Venet., incorrectly translating : ),

(Note: Thus reads Schleusner, Opusc. Crit. p. 318, and refers it to the horse: nam solebant equos figuris quibusdam notare et quasi sigillare .)

which Kimchi ranks in the first place. Luther, by his translation, Ein Wind = Windhund [greyhound], of good limbs, has given the right direction to this opinion. Melanchton, Lavater, Mercier, Geier, and others, follow him; and, among the moderns, so also do Ewald and Bttcher (also Bertheau and Stuart), which latter supposes that before there originally stood , which afterwards disappeared. But why should the greyhound not at once be called ? We call the smaller variety of this dog the Windspiel [greyhound]; and by this name we think on a hound, without saying Windspielhund . The name (Symmachus excellently: , not , , i.e., strongly bound in the limbs) is fitted at once to suggest to us this almost restless, slender animal, with its high, thin, nimble limbs. The verbal stem (Arab.) zarr , signifies to press together, to knit together; the reduplicative form , to bind firmly together, whence , firmly bound together, referred to the limbs as designating a natural property (Ewald, 158a): of straight and easily-moveable legs.

(Note: The Aram. is shortened from , as from ; the particip. adj. signifies nimble, swift, eager, e.g., Pesachim 4a: “the zealous obey the commandment – as soon as possible hasten to fulfil it.”)

The hunting-hound ( salki or salki, i.e., coming from Seleucia) is celebrated by the Arab. poets as much as the hunting-horse.

(Note: Vid., Ahlwardt, Chalef elahmar’s Qasside, p. 205f.)

The name , though not superfluous, the author ought certainly to have avoided, because it does not sound well in the Heb. collocation of words.

There now follows , a goat, and that not the ram (Jerome, Luther), which is called , but the he-goat, which bears this name, as Schultens has already recognised, from its pushing, as it is also called , as paratus ad pugnam ; the two names appear to be only provincially different; , on the contrary, is the old he-goat, as shaggy; and also perhaps denotes it, as Schultens supposes, with twisted, i.e., curled hair ( tortipilus ). In Arab. tays denotes the he-goat as well as the roebuck and the gazelle, and that at full growth. The lxx (the Syr. and Targ., which is to be emended after the Syr.) is certainly right, for it understands the leading goat: . The text, however, has not , but , (Aquila, Theodotion, Quinta, and the Venet.). Bttcher is astonished that Hitzig did not take hold of this , and conjectures , which should mean a “gazelle-goat” (Mhlau: dorcas mas ). But it is too bold to introduce here ( ), which is only twice named in the O.T., and for is not the Heb. style; and besides, the setting aside of has a harsh asyndeton for its consequence, which bears evidence to the appearance that and are two different animals. And is the then so objectionable? More wonderful still must Son 2:9 appear to us. If the author enumerated the four of stately going on his fingers, he would certainly have said . By he communicates to the hearer, setting before him another figure, how there in the Song Sulamith’s fancy passed from one object to another.

To the lion, the king of the animal world, the king corresponds. This Hitzig regards as mutilated from (which was both written and pronounced as by the Jews, so as to conceal the true sound of the name of God) – which is untenable, for this reason, that this religious conclusion [“A king with whom God is”] accords badly with the secular character of this proverb. Geiger ( Urschrift, p. 62ff.) translates: “and King Alkimos corresponding to it (the lustful and daring goat)” – he makes the harmless proverb into a ludibrium from the time of the Maccabeo-Syrian war. The lxx, which the Syr. and Targ. follow, translates ; it appears to have changed into (standing with his people and haranguing them), like the Quinta: . ( ) . Ziegler and Bttcher also, reading and without any transposition, get t , which the former translates: “a king with the presence of his people;” the latter, “a king with the setting up of his people,” – not accordant with the thought, for the king should be brought forward as . For the same reason, Kimchi’s explanation is not suitable: a king with whom is no resistance, i.e., against whom no one can rank himself (thus e.g., also Immanuel); or more specially, but not better: who has no successor of his race (according to which the Venet. ). Rather this explanation commends itself: a king with whom ( i.e., in war with whom) is no resistance. Thus Jerome and Luther: against whom no one dare place himself; thus Rashi, Aben Ezra, Ralbag ( ), Ahron b. Josef ( = ), Arama, and others; thus also Schultens, Fleischer ( adversus quem nemo consistere audet ), Ewald, Bertheau, Elster, Stuart, and others. But this connection of with the infin. is not Heb.; and if the Chokma, xii. 28, has coined the expression for the idea of “immortality,” then certainly it does not express the idea of resistlessness by so bold a quasi compositum. But this boldness is also there mitigated, for is supplied after , which is not here practicable with , which is not a subst. like . Pocock in the Spec. historiae Arabum, and Castellus in the Lex. Heptaglotton (not Castellio, as the word is printed by Zckler), have recognised in the Arab. alkawm ; Schultens gives the lxx the honour of this recognition, for he regards their translation as a paraphrase of . Bertheau thinks that it ought to be in Arab. kawmuhu , but = alkawhu ma’ahu is perfectly correct, alkawhu is the summons or the Heerbann = arriere-ban;

(Note: Wetzstein’s Ausgewhlte Inschriften, p. 355: “The word kawm signifies people, not in the sense of populus , but in the sense of the Heb. (Job 24:7) = mukawim abrajul , he who breaks with or against any one.” Incorrect in Gesenius-Dietrich’s Heb. Wrterbuch.)

in North Africa they speak in their language in the same sense of the Gums. This explanation of , from the Arab. Dachselt ( rex cum satellitio suo ), Diedrichs in his Arab.-Syr. Spicilegium (1777), Umbreit, Gesenius, and Vaihinger, have recognised, and Mhlau has anew confirmed it at length. Hitzig, on the contrary, remarks that if Agur wrote on Arab. territory, we could be contented with the Arab. appellative, but not with the article, which in words like and is no longer of force as an art., but is an integ. component part of the word. We think that it is with exactly as with other words descriptive of lordship, and the many similar that have passed over into the Spanish language; the word is taken over along with the article, without requiring the Heb. listener to take the art. as such, although he certainly felt it better than we do, when we say “ das Alkoran ” [the Alcoran], “ das Alcohol ,” and the like. Blau also, in his Gesch. der Arab. Substantiv-Determ.,

(Note: In the “ Alt-arab. Sprachstudien,” Deutsch. Morgenl. Zeitschr. xxv. 539f.)

regards it as certain that Agur borrowed this from the idiom of the Arabians, among whom he lived, and heard it constantly spoken. By this explanation we first reach a correspondence between what is announced in lines first and second and line sixth. A king as such is certainly not “comely in going;” he can sit upon his throne, and especially as will he sit (Act 12:21) and not stand. But the majesty of his going shows itself when he marches at the head of those who have risen up at his summons to war. Then he is for the army what the he-goat is for the flock. The , preferred to , draws close together the e and the king (cf. e.g., Isa 14:9).

Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

      29 There be three things which go well, yea, four are comely in going:   30 A lion which is strongest among beasts, and turneth not away for any;   31 A greyhound; an he goat also; and a king, against whom there is no rising up.   32 If thou hast done foolishly in lifting up thyself, or if thou hast thought evil, lay thine hand upon thy mouth.   33 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.

      Here is, I. An enumeration of four things which are majestic and stately in their going, which look great:– 1. A lion, the king of beasts, because strongest among beasts. Among beasts it is strength that gives the pre-eminence, but it is a pity that it should do so among men, whose wisdom is their honour, not their strength and force. The lion turns not away, nor alters his pace, for fear of any pursuers, since he knows he is too hard for them. Herein the righteous are bold as a lion, that they turn not away from their duty for fear of any difficulty they meet with in it. 2. A greyhound that is girt in the loins and fit for running; or (as the margin reads it) a horse, which ought not to be omitted among the creatures that are comely in going, for so he is, especially when he is dressed up in his harness or trappings. 3. A he-goat, the comeliness of whose going is when he goes first and leads the flock. It is the comeliness of a Christian’s going to go first in a good work and to lead others in the right way. 4. A king, who, when he appears in his majesty, is looked upon with reverence and awe, and all agree that there is no rising up against him; none can vie with him, none can contend with him, whoever does it, it is at his peril. And, if there is no rising up against an earthly prince, woe to him then that strives with his Maker. It is intended that we should learn courage and fortitude in all virtuous actions from the lion and not to turn away for any difficulty we meet with; from the greyhound we may learn quickness and despatch, from the he-goat the care of our family and those under our charge, and from a king to have our children in subjection with all gravity, and from them all to go well, and to order the steps of our conversation so as that we may not only be safe, but comely, in going.

      II. A caution to us to keep our temper at all times and under all provocations, and to take heed of carrying our resentments too far upon any occasion, especially when there is a king in the case, against whom there is no rising up, when it is a ruler, or one much our superior, that is offended; nay, the rule is always the same.

      1. We must bridle and suppress our own passion, and take shame to ourselves, whenever we are justly charged with a fault, and not insist upon our own innocency: If we have lifted up ourselves, either in a proud conceit of ourselves or a peevish opposition to those that are over us, if we have transgressed the laws of our place and station, we have therein done foolishly. Those that magnify themselves over others or against others, that are haughty and insolent, do but shame themselves and betray their own weakness. Nay, if we have but thought evil, if we are conscious to ourselves that we have harboured an ill design in our minds, or it has been suggested to us, we must lay our hand upon our mouth, that is, (1.) We must humble ourselves for what we have done amiss, and even lie in the dust before God, in sorrow for it, as Job did, when he repented of what he had said foolishly (ch. xl. 4, I will lay my hand upon my mouth), and as the convicted leper, who put a covering upon his upper lip. If we have done foolishly, we must not stand to it before men, but by silence own our guilt, which will be the best way of appeasing those we have offended. 2. We must keep the evil thought we have conceived in our minds from breaking out in any evil speeches. Do not give the evil thought an imprimatur–a license; allow it not to be published; but lay thy hand upon thy mouth; use a holy violence with thyself, if need be, and enjoin thyself silence; as Christ suffered not the evil spirits to speak. It is bad to think ill, but it is much worse to speak it, for that implies a consent to the evil thought and a willingness to infect others with it.

      2. We must not irritate the passions of others. Some are so very provoking in their words and conduct that they even force wrath, they make those about them angry whether they will or no, and put those into a passion who are not only not inclined to it, but resolved against it. Now this forcing of wrath brings forth strife, and where that is there is confusion and every evil work. As the violent agitation of the cream fetches all the good out of the milk, and the hard wringing of the nose will extort blood from it, so this forcing of wrath wastes both the body and spirits of a man, and robs him of all the good that is in him. Or, as it is in the churning of milk and the wringing of the nose, that is done by force which otherwise would not be done, so the spirit is heated by degrees with strong passions; one angry word begets another, and that a third; one passionate debate makes work for another, and so it goes on till it ends at length in irreconcilable feuds. Let nothing therefore be said or done with violence, but every thing with softness and calmness.

Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary

Four Impressive Symbols

Verses 29-31 name 4 things which seem to suggest the wisdom and might of the creator Agur recognizes in Vs. 3-5.

1) The lion (Vs. 30) is not only recognized as the animal king who turns not away from any; but is also used as a symbol of the all conquering Jesus, Rev 5:5-14; Php_2:9-11.

2) The greyhound (Vs. 31) . is noted for its fleetness and can well portray the immediacy with which Jesus is pledged to respond to those who need Him, Psa 46:1; Isa 65:24.

3) The he goat (Vs. 31) was used as the scapegoat on which the sins of the people were placed, picturing Jesus bearing away the sins of the people, Lev 16:21-22.

4) The mighty king against whom none can rise (Vs. 31) pictures the triumph of Jesus as King of kings and Lord of lords, Rev 19:11-16.

Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary

CRITICAL NOTES.

Pro. 30:29. Go well, rather, are of stately walk.

Pro. 30:31. Delitzsch renders the last clause of this verse:A king with whom is the calling out of the host.

MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.Pro. 30:29-31

KINGLY QUALITIES

These words seem to set forth animal qualifications needed by human leaders.

I. They must be men of courage. A cowardly man in any position in society will, at some time or other, be found wanting, but what is needed in everyday life and by men in ordinary positions, is indispensable in him who has to lead others. A king in the days of Solomon was expected to be at the head of his army in the day of battle, and if he was not then an example to all beneath him in this respect, he brought disgrace and ruin upon himself and them. A king in all ages, and under all circumstances should be to his subjects what the lion is to the other beasts of the foresta pattern of dignity and courage.

II. They must be active and watchful. Both the greyhound and the war-horsewhichever may be here meantare characterised by swiftness of foot and great sagacity. They are ready at any moment to set forth on any errand, and are always on the alert when danger is near. The goat, also, is agile in its movements, and as sure-footed as it is fleet. All these animal qualities are symbolic of mental qualifications which must be possessed by those who aspire to lead and rule their fellow-men successfully. They must not be behindhand when called to action, but they must at the same time take heed to the dangers which may lie in wait for them. They must be ever ready at the call of duty, but they must not be rash and hasty, and so endanger much more than their own personal safety.

On the subject of Pro. 30:32-33, see on chap. Pro. 17:14, page 513.

REMARKS ON THE CHAPTER AS A WHOLE

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 supplement, 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 emphasised 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 references 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. 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, 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.)Langes Commentary.

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

29-31. Three four comely The author here adds the four things of stately or majestic gait.

A lion The most heroic among the beasts, or, at least, so popularly held, and, therefore, called the king of beasts.

A greyhound Literally, girt-of-loins, or compressed of loins. This animal has to be guessed at. Among the guesses are, the war-horse, the zebra, the wrestler, the cock, (so Vulgate.) The chief critics prefer the greyhound, which is said to be a remarkably fine animal in the East, and exceedingly fleet. In full chase he seems to swim over the ground.

A he goat Which at the head of his flock puts on as much sturdiness as an Oriental pasha.

A king, against whom is no rising up All this has only three words in the original , melekh alkum ‘ himmo. The second word is supposed to be a compound, a very unusual thing in Hebrew: al, not, and kum, to stand, or rise up no standing against him; or, let no one rise up against him. More satisfactory is the solution of Gesenius, who derives alkum from the Arabic, meaning the people, the populace, and reads: “A king with whom is the people” in the midst of his people. Surrounded and supported by them. So, also, Conant and others. Such a king may well walk forth reliantly, having the affection and confidence of his subjects. The Septuagint has: “A king publicly speaking before a nation.”

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

Pro 30:29 There be three [things] which go well, yea, four are comely in going:

Ver. 29. There be three things that go well. ] And all for our learning, to teach us in our several stations to deport ourselves in all gravity, maintain our dignity, and show our magnanimity. “Only let your conversation be as becometh the gospel of Christ,” saith Paul. Php 1:27 There is a , a comeliness and suitableness of carriage belongs to every calling, and this must be carefully kept. Vellem si non essem imperator, said Scipio to one that offered him a harlot: I would, if I were not a general. And remember that thou art a king’s son, said Menedemus to Antigonus; that will be a retentive to thee from unseemly practices. “Should such a man as I flee?” Neh 6:11 – et Turnum fugientem haec terra videbit? It is a pusillanimity to yield so much to men. The lion will not alter his gait though he die for it. We should learn regnum in pectore gerere, to be of noble resolutions. It is a common saying among us, Such a man understands himself well; that is, he understands his place, worth, dignity, and carries himself accordingly.

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

Pro 30:29-31

Pro 30:29-31

“There are three things which are stately in their march,

Yea, four which are stately in going:

The lion, which is mightiest among beasts

And turneth not away for any;

The greyhound; the he-goat also;

And the king against whom there is no rising up.”

“Strutting cock replaces `greyhound’ in many of the ancient versions; and the RSV has followed them. However, “greyhound and “war-horse are also legitimate renditions. A significant thing about this whole chapter is that, “There is no philosophizing or moralizing in it. The graphic, well defined pictures that are presented here are loaded with spiritual implications and moral teachings; but they are not pointed out. “The theological implications are left implicit, enriching the observer’s delight, if he has eyes to see, but not intruding upon it.

Pro 30:29. This verse introduces another set of four, this time things that are stately in their going or whose movements are remarkable.

Pro 30:30-31. What four? (1) The lion who fearlessly walks wherever he chooses and is fearlessly unafraid. (2) The greyhound who can run like the wind. (3) The he-goat. Clarke says this is referring to How he walks, and what state he assumes, in the presence of his part of the flock. (4) A king who has things under control so that there is no danger of rebelling against him. This is the way every king wishes it to be.

Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary

Reciprocal: Pro 6:16 – six Pro 30:15 – There Mic 5:5 – seven

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

Pro 30:29-31. There be three things which go well That walk decently, and with great alacrity and courage, or whose motion is majestic; A lion, which turneth not away for any Doth not flee from his pursuers, whether men or beasts, but walks away with a slow and majestic pace, as is observed by Aristotle, and many others; A greyhound Called in the Hebrew , girt in the loins, either because its loins are slender, and, as it were, girt up into a little compass, or because of its great agility and swiftness; for the girding of the loins was used for expedition, in going or working. The word is rendered by some, a horse, namely, a war- horse, having his armour girt about him, and marching to battle, which he does with great majesty and courage, as God himself observes at large, Job 39:19, &c. A he-goat also Which marches at the head of the flock in a grave and stately manner, conducting them with great courage and resolution, and being ready to fight for them, either with beasts or men that oppose him. And a king Hebrew, a king and his people with him, a king when he hath the hearts and hands of his people going along with him in his undertakings.

Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

To keep us from concluding that little is always better than big (in view of Pro 30:24-28), Agur produced four more illustrations of stately noble behavior. He showed the balance between groundless pride (cf. Pro 30:21-23) and false humility (cf. Pro 30:24-28). These stately things demonstrate that proper bearing in life comes neither from exalting nor from depreciating oneself. It comes from functioning as God created one to function (i.e., to be oneself, sincere).

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)