Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Psalms 15:4
In whose eyes a vile person is contemned; but he honoreth them that fear the LORD. [He that] sweareth to [his own] hurt, and changeth not.
4. Render with R.V.,
In whose eyes a reprobate is despised.
The truthfulness of his character is shewn in his estimate of men. The world’s false estimates are one of the evils which will disappear in the Messianic age (Isa 32:5 ff.). A reprobate, one who is not good metal but worthless dross (Jer 6:30), he treats with well-merited contempt, while ‘he honoureth those that fear Jehovah.’
By the Targum and some commentators, ancient and modern, the clause is rendered, despised is he in his own eyes, rejected, which is well paraphrased in P.B.V. “He that setteth not by himself, but is lowly in his own eyes;” cp. 2Sa 6:22. But (1) the words ‘despicable reprobate’ are such as David could hardly use to express humility and self-abasement; and (2) the contrast required by the parallelism is not ‘he despises himself and honours others,’ but ‘he abhors the base and honours the godly,’ i.e. shews right discernment in his regard for men. Cp. Psa 16:3; 1Sa 2:30.
He that sweareth &c] Though he hath sworn to his own hurt, he changeth not. He performs his oaths and vows without modification or rebatement, even though they may have been rashly made and prove to be to his own disadvantage. Comp. the phrase in the Law for the expiation of rash oaths (Lev 5:4), “if any one swear rashly with his lips to do evil or to do good.” Any ‘changing’ of animals devoted by vows (which were of the nature of oaths) was expressly forbidden (Lev 27:10). Here the reference is quite general.
The LXX, Vulg., and Syr. render, by a slight change of vocalisation, to his fellow (cp. Psa 15:3): and P.B.V. (as in Psa 84:7) combines both renderings in its paraphrase, ‘He that sweareth unto his neighbour and disappointeth him not, though it were to his own hindrance.’
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
In whose eyes a vile person is contemned – That is, who does not show respect to a man of base or bad character on account of his wealth, his position, or his rank in life. He estimates character as it is in itself, and not as derived from rank, relationship, or station. While, as stated in the previous verse, he is not disposed to take up a false or evil report against another, he is at the same time disposed to do justice to all, and does not honor those who do not deserve to be honored, or apologise for base conduct because it is committed by one of exalted station or rank. Loving virtue and piety for their own sake, he hates all that is opposite; and where conduct deserves reprobation, no matter where found, he does not hesitate to avow his conviction in regard to it. The sentiment here is substantially the same as in Psa 1:1. See the notes at that verse.
But he honoreth them that fear the Lord – No matter in what rank or condition of life they may be found. Where there is true piety he honors it. He is willing to be known as one that honors it, and is willing to bear all the reproach that may be connected with such a deeply cherished respect, and with such an avowal. Compare Psa 1:1.
He that sweareth to his own hurt, and changeth not – Who has made a promise, or entered into a contract, that is likely to turn out contrary to his expectations, to his own disadvantage; but who still adheres to his engagement. If the thing itself is wrong; if he has made a promise, or pledged himself to do a wicked thing, he cannot be under obligation to execute it; he should at once abandon it (compare the notes at Mat 14:9); but he is not at liberty to violate an agreement simply because it will be a loss to him, or because he ascertains that it will not be, as he supposed, to his advantage. The principles here laid down will extend to all contracts or agreements, pecuniary or otherwise, and should be a general principle regulating all our transactions with our fellow-men. The only limitation in the rule is that above stated, when the promise or the contract would involve that which is morally wrong.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Psa 15:4
In whose eyes a vile person is contemned.
Second moral appreciations
In whose eyes a vile person is contemned; but he honoureth them that fear the Lord. Then he is a man of sound moral appreciations. He does not pay respect where no respect is deserved. He does not withhold respect where it is merited. Says an old Puritan, We must be as honest in paying respect as in paying our bills. But let us pay them in the right quarter. Do not let us call the vile person honourable because he is clothed in purple and fine linen, and fareth sumptuously every day. And do not let us esteem the honourable man as vile because his equipage is poor and his nobility is clothed in rags. Let us call villainy vile wherever we find it, and let us esteem nobility as noble in whatever guise it may appear. This is one of the great characteristics of the friend of God; to whom the sweet is sweet and the sour is sour; evil is evil and good is good. Nothing is allowed to interfere with the soundness and sobriety of his judgment, and no verbal jugglery is permitted to destroy the healthiness of his discriminating vocabulary. He knows the superlative, and loves it! As for the saints that are in the earth, they are the excellent in whom is all My delight. (J. H. Jowett, M. A.)
The believers regard for those who fear God
Mr. Fox being asked whether he remembered not such a poor servant of God who had received succour from him in time of trouble answered, I remember him well; I tell you, I forget the lords and ladies to remember such. (John Trapp.)
He that sweareth to his own hurt, and changeth not.
The obligation of an oath
Among the duties mentioned in this Psalm we find this of constancy and faithfulness in keeping those promises which we have confirmed by an oath. Because the greatest temptation to the breaking of oaths proceeds from fear of some temporal damage, or prospect of some worldly advantage, therefore it is said, He that sweareth to his own hurt, and changeth not.
I. In what cases an oath doth oblige. No oath can oblige to that which is impossible; or to that which is unlawful; for justice requires that we do not invade the rights and privileges of other men. Oaths contrary to charity or mercy or humanity are void. No oath can oblige when it hinders a greater good. What if the matter be purely indifferent? There can be here no occasion of difficulty, except the matter be also of no moment. He is undoubtedly guilty of great irreverence towards God, that will cite His name to a trifle. If the matter of the oath be such as causeth a man to doubt whether it be lawful or no, in that case he had better perform it. There are cases relating to the person that swears. Here, whensoever we shall determine that an oath doth not bind, it will be for the want of the persons rightly understanding that he made one. A man may not know what an oath is; or he may swear when affected by anger, or by drink, or by fear; or by any other passion; or if a man swears to save his life, as from robbers.
II. In what sense an oath ought to be taken. That sense is to be taken which is most suitable to the business men are about. We may not precisely, without limitation, accept the sense of the swearer, or of the imposer, or that which the words of the oath will bear. The swearer may equivocate, or use mental reservations. What if a man swears and doth not intend to swear? Something of intention is always required to an oath. It would be a frivolous excuse for a man to say, he intended to swear, but did not intend to be obliged.
III. How great the obligation of an oath is. It is a solemn invocation of God to witness what we say, by His favour and mercy to us, if it be true; or by His vengeance upon us if it be false. It is a high advantage and privilege which God vouchsafeth to us, in that He gives us leave, upon urgent and weighty causes, to make use of His glorious Name as a seal to confirm the truth of what we assent. If, therefore, we take it up to avouch a falsehood, we are exceedingly ungrateful, we falsify that seal, we profane that dreadful name, we apply that which is most sacred to the worst of uses . . . For these and the like causes an oath hath generally been looked upon as a sufficient assurance and confirmation of the truth of any matter. He that seriously considers what an oath is cannot surely believe that any man is above the obligation of it. And as no man can be too great for such an obligation himself, so neither can he dispense with it in others. (Henry Hellier, M. A.)
Immutable in covenant
He that sweareth to his own hurt, and changeth not. Then he is immutable in covenant. His word is his bond. He is dependable. When he promises he redeems. And he does it even to his own hurt! If it necessitates bleeding, he still redeems it. He is faithful even unto death. He is grandly consistent, consistent not in the sense of never changing his opinion, but in the grander sense of never altering his loyalty to truth and his relationship to God. His word is a tower in which the weak and defenceless have a strong defence. (J. H. Jowett, M. A.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Verse 4. In whose eves a vile person is contemned]
7. This man judges of others by their conduct; he tries no man’s heart. He knows men only by the fruits they bear; and thus he gains knowledge of the principle from which they proceed. A vile person, nimas, the reprobate, one abandoned to sin; is despised, nibzeh, is loathsome, as if he were covered with the elephantiasis or leprosy, for so the word implies. He may be rich, he may be learned, he may be a great man and honourable with his master, in high offices in the state; but if he be a spiritual leper, an infidel, a profligate, the righteous man must despise him, and hold him, because he is an enemy to God and to man, in sovereign contempt. If he be in power, he will not treat him as if worthy of his dignity; while he respects the office he will detest the man. And this is quite right; for the popular odium should ever be pointed against vice.
Aben Ezra gives a curious turn to this clause, which he translates thus: “He is mean and contemptible in his own eyes;” and it is certain that the original, nibzeh beeynaiv nimas, will bear this translation. His paraphrase on it is beautiful: “A pious man, whatever good he may have done, and however concordant to the Divine law he may have walked, considers all this of no worth, compared with what it was his duty to do for the glory of his Creator.” A sentiment very like that of our Lord, Lu 17:10: “So likewise ye, when ye shall have done all those things which are commanded you, say, We are unprofitable servants; we have done that which was our duty to do.”
Taken in this sense, the words intimate, that the man who is truly pious, who is a proper member of the Church militant, and is going straight to the Church triumphant, is truly humble; he knows he has nothing but what he has received, he has no merit, he trusts not in himself, but in the living God. He renounces his own righteousness, and trusts in the eternal mercy of God through the infinitely meritorious atonement made by Jesus Christ. The language of his heart is, –
“I loathe myself when God I see,
And into nothing fall;
Content that thou exalted be,
And Christ be all in all.”
He honoureth them that fear the Lord]
8. This cause is a proof, however just the sentiment, that Aben Ezra has mistaken the meaning of the preceding clause. The truly pious man, while he has in contempt the honourable and right honourable profligate, yet honours them that fear the Lord, though found in the most abject poverty; though, with Job, on the dunghill, or, with Lazarus, covered with sores at the rich man’s gate. Character is the object of his attention; persons and circumstances are of minor importance.
The fear of the Lord is often taken for the whole of religion; and sometimes for that reverence which a man feels for the majesty and holiness of God, that induces him to hate and depart from evil. Here it may signify the lowest degree of religion, repentance whereby we forsake sin.
Sweareth to his own hurt, and changeth not.]
9. If at any time he have bound himself by a solemn engagement to do so and so, and he finds afterwards that to keep his oath will be greatly to his damage; yet such reverence has he for God and for truth, that he will not change, be the consequences what they may. He is faithful also to his promises; his bare word will bind him equally with an oath. He that will not be honest without an oath will not be honest with one.
The Hebrew might be thus translated: “He sweareth to afflict himself, and does not change;” and thus the Chaldee has rendered this clause. He has promised to the Lord to keep his body under, and bring it into subjection; to deny himself that he may not pamper the flesh, and have the more to give to the poor.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
In whose eyes, i.e. in whose judgment and estimation,
a vile person, i.e. one, that deserves contempt, an ungodly or wicked man, as appears from the next clause, where he that feareth God is opposed to him,
is contemned or despised, notwithstanding all his wealth, and glory, and greatness. He doth not admire his person, nor envy his condition, nor court him with flatteries, nor value his company and conversation, nor approve of or comply with his courses; but he thinks meanly of him; he judgeth him a most miserable man, and a great object of pity; he abhors his wicked practices, and labours to make such ways contemptible and hateful to all men as far as it lies in his power. But this contempt of wicked men must be so managed as not to cause a contempt of just authority, which if it be lodged in a wicked hand, doth challenge not only obedience, but also honour and reverence; as is manifest from the precepts and examples of Christ and of his apostles, who charge this upon the Christians every where, although the magistrates of those times were unquestionably vile and wicked men. See Act 23:5; Ro 13; 1Pe 5:13, &c. He honoureth, i.e. he highly esteemeth and heartily loveth them, and showeth great respect and kindness to them, though they be mean and obscure as to their worldly condition, and though they may differ from him in some opinions or practices of lesser moment. He that sweareth, to wit, a promissory oath, engaging himself by solemn oath to do something which may be beneficial to his neighbour.
To his own hurt, i.e. to his own damage or prejudice. As if a man solemnly swear by the name of the great God, that he will sell him such an estate at a price below the full worth, or that he will give a poor man such a sum of money, which when afterwards he comes to review and consider, he finds it very inconvenient and burdensome to him, where he is tempted to break his oath.
Changeth not, to wit, his purpose or course, but continues firm and resolved to perform his promise, and sacrificeth his interest and profit to his conscience, and the reverence of God and of an oath. See Eze 17:18,19.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
4. Love and hate are regulatedby a regard to God.
sweareth . . . hurtorwhat so results (compare Le 5:4).
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
In whose eyes a vile person is contemned,…. A “vile” man is a very wicked, profligate, and abandoned creature, one that is to every good work reprobate; and such sometimes are in high places, Ps 12:8; and are greatly caressed and esteemed by the men of the world; but then, as they are an abomination to God, they should be despised by his people, let them be what they will as to their riches, honours, and wisdom among men; as Haman was by Mordecai, Es 3:2; and Ahab by Elisha, 2Ki 3:14; and such who keep company with, and express a delight and pleasure in such sort of persons, ought by no means to have a place in the house of God. Some understand this of a good man being “despised in his own eyes”, as it may be rendered f; on account of his vileness, and the imperfection of his obedience, and as expressive of his great humility, esteeming others better than himself; and who renounces himself, and is rejected by himself, having a very mean opinion of himself; which is the sense of the Targum, Aben Ezra, and Kimchi; and which is no bad sense, though the former is countenanced by what follows;
but he honoureth them that fear the Lord; who have the covenant grace of fear wrought in their hearts, and serve the Lord with reverence and godly fear; that is, who are truly religious and godly persons; these such who are fit members of the church of Christ love heartily, esteem of highly, and honour them by thinking and speaking well of them, and behaving with great respect and decency to them; see Ro 12:10;
[he that] sweareth to [his own] hurt, and changeth not; having taken a solemn oath, so sacred is it with him, and such a regard has he to the name of God, by whom he swears, that though it is to his civil loss and detriment, yet he will not break it and depart from it, but punctually observe it: some render it, “he that swears to his neighbour, and changeth not” g; he that is just to his word, faithful to his promises, that exactly fulfils all the obligations he lays himself under unto others; he that is honest and upright in all his dealings. The Jewish writers interpret this clause of a man’s vowing and swearing to afflict himself by fasting, which, though it is to the emaciating of his body, yet he strictly observes his vow or oath; but this is foreign from the scope of the place: it might be rendered, “he that swears to do evil, and does not recompense or perform” h, it being better to break through such an oath than to keep it; see Le 5:4.
f “qui despicit se in oculis suis”, so some in Vatablus; “ille est despectus in propriis oculis, reprobatus”, Gussetius, p. 453. g , Sept. “proximo suo”, V. L. Sic. Syr. Ar. Aethiop. h So Ainsworth.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
The first part of this verse is explained in different ways. Some draw from it this meaning, that the true servants of God are contemptible and worthless in their own estimation. If we adopt this interpretation, the copula and, which David does not express, must be supplied, making the reading thus, He is vile and despised in his own eyes. But besides the consideration, that, if this had been the sense, the words would probably have been joined together by the copula and, I have another reason which leads me to think that David had a different meaning, He compares together two opposite things, namely, to despise perverse and worthless characters, and to honor the righteous and those who fear God. In order that these two clauses may correspond with each other, the only sense in which I can understand what is here said about being despised is this, that the children of God despise the ungodly, and form that low and contemptuous estimate of them which their character deserves. The godly, it is true, although living a praiseworthy and virtuous life, are not inflated with presumption, but, on the contrary, are rather dissatisfied with themselves, because they feel how far short they are as yet of the perfection which is required. When, however, I consider what the scope of the passage demands, I do not think that we are here to view the Psalmist as commending humility or modesty, but rather a free and upright judgment of human character, by which the wicked, on the one hand, are not spared, while virtue, on the other, receives the honor which belongs to it; for flattery, which nourishes vices by covering them, is an evil not less pernicious than it is common. I indeed admit, that if the wicked are in authority, we ought not to carry our contempt of them the length of refusing to obey them in so far as a regard to our duty will permit; but, at the same time, we must beware of flattery and of accommodating ourselves to them, which would be to involve us in the same condemnation with them. He who not only seems to regard their wicked actions with indifference, but also honors them, shows that he approves of them as much as it is in his power. Paul therefore teaches us, (Eph 5:11,) that it is a species of fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness when we do not reprove them. It is certainly a very perverse way of acting, when persons, for the sake of obtaining the favor of men, will indirectly mock God; and all are chargeable with doing this who make it their business to please the wicked. David, however, has a respect, not so much to persons as to wicked works. The man who sees the wicked honored, and by the applause of the world rendered more obstinate in their wickedness, and who willingly gives his consent or approbation to this, does he not, by so doing, exalt vice to authority, and invest it with sovereign power? “But woe,” says the prophet Isaiah, (Isa 5:20,) “unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness.”
Nor ought it to be regarded as a rude or violent manner of speaking, when David calls base and wicked persons reprobates, although they may be placed in an exalted and honorable station. If (as Cicero affirms, in his book entitled The Responses of the Aruspices) the inspectors of the entrails of the sacrifices, and other heathen soothsayers, applied to worthless and abandoned characters the term rejected, although they excelled in dignity and riches, why should not a prophet of God be permitted to apply the name of degraded outcasts to all who are rejected by God? The meaning of the Psalmist, to express it in a few words, is, that the children of God freely judge of every man’s doings, and that for the purpose of obtaining the favor of men, they will not stoop to vile flattery, and thereby encourage the wicked in their wickedness.
What follows immediately after, namely, to honor the righteous and those who fear God, is no mean virtue. As they are often, as it were, the filth and the offscouring of all things in the estimation of the world, so it frequently happens that those who show them favor and sympathy, excite against themselves every where the hatred of the world. The greater part of mankind, therefore, refuse the friendship of good men, and leave them to be despised, which cannot be done without grievous and heinous injury to God. Let us learn then not to value men by their estate or their money, or their transitory honors, but to hold in estimation godliness, or the fear of God. And certainly no man will ever truly apply his mind to the study of godliness who does not, at the same time, reverence the servants of God; as, on the other hand, the love we bear to them incites us to imitate them in sanctity of life.
When he hath sworn to his own hurt. The translation of the LXX. would agree very well with the scope of the passage, were it not that the points which are under the words in the Hebrew text will not bear such a sense. (297) It is, indeed, no proof of the inaccuracy of their rendering, that it does not agree with the points; for, although the Jews have always used the points in reading, it is probable that they did not always express them in writing. I, however, prefer following the commonly received reading. And the meaning is, that the faithful will rather submit to suffer loss than break their word. When a man keeps his promises, in as far as he sees it to be for his own advantage, there is in this no argument to prove his uprightness and faithfulness. But when men make a promise to each other, there is nothing more common than from some slight loss which the performance of it would occasion, to endeavor to find a pretext for breaking their engagements. Every one considers with himself what is for his own advantage, and if it puts him to inconvenience or trouble to stand to his promises, he is ingenious enough to imagine that he will incur a far greater loss than there is any reason to apprehend. It seems, indeed, a fair excuse when a man complains that, if he does not depart from his engagement, he will suffer great loss. Hence it is, that we generally see so much unfaithfulness among men, that they do not consider themselves bound to perform the promises which they have made, except in so far as it will promote their own personal interest. David, therefore, condemning this inconstancy, requires the children of God to exhibit the greatest steadfastness in the fulfillment of their promises. Here the question might be asked, If a man, having fallen into the hands of a highwayman, promise him a sum of money to save his life, and if, in consequence of this, he is let go, should he in that case keep his promise? Again, if a man has been basely deceived, in entering into a contract, is it lawful for him to break the oath which he shall have made in such an engagement? With respect to the highwayman, he who confers upon him money falls into another fault, for he supports at his own expense a common enemy of mankind to the detriment of the public welfare. David does not impose upon the faithful such an alternative as this, but only enjoins them to show a greater regard to their promises than to their own personal interests, and to do this especially when their promises have been confirmed by an oath. As to the other case, namely, when a person has sworn, from being deceived and imposed upon by wicked artifice he ought certainly to hold the holy name of God in such veneration, as rather patiently to submit to loss than violate his oath. Yet it is perfectly lawful for him to discover or reveal the fraud which has been practiced upon him, provided he is not led to do so by a regard to his own personal interest; and there is, besides, nothing to hinder him from peaceably endeavoring to compromise the matter with his adversary. Many of the Jewish expositors restrict this passage to vows, as if David exhorted the faithful to perform their vows when they have promised to humble and afflict themselves by fasting. But in this they are mistaken. Nothing is farther from his meaning than this, for he discourses here only of the second table of the law, and of the mutual rectitude which men should maintain in their dealings with one another.
(297) “The LXX., instead of להרע, [lehara,] to hurt, seem to have read להרע, [leharea,] to his fellow, for they render it, τῷ πλησίον αὐτου, to his neighbor, and so the Syriac, and Latin, and Arabic, and Ethiopic.” — Hammond. This rendering agrees very well with the scope of the Psalm, which relates to our dealing justly with our fellow-men; and it represents the good man as scrupulously performing the promissory oaths which he makes to his neighbor. But the ordinary reading, he sweareth to his own hurt, and changeth not, sets forth the moral integrity of the good man in a still more striking light, by describing him as performing his oath in the face of the greatest temptations to break it, when the performance of it may prove detrimental to his own interests; and this is no mean trial of a man’s virtue.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(4) In whose eyes.The first clause is obscure. The subject and predicate are not clearly marked; but the Authorised Version gives the right sense. It is quite out of keeping with the context to make both verbs predicates, and to translate, He is despised and rejected in his own eyes, i.e., thinks humbly of himself. The meaning is, Those deserving contempt are contemned; but the good who fear Jehovah are honoured.
To his own hurt.Literally, to do evil, i.e., to him-self (see Lev. 5:4). The LXX., by transposing the letters, read, to his neighbour; and the English Prayer Book version has apparently combined the two thoughts: Who sweareth to his neighbour, and dis-appointeth him not, even though it were to his own hindrance.
His words are bonds, his oaths are oracles,
His love sincere, his thoughts immaculate;
His tears pure messengers sent from his heart,
His heart is far from fraud as heaven from earth.
SHAKSPEARE: Two Gentlemen of Verona.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
4. A vile person is contemned This clause relates to the moral estimate given of a worthless character. The true, or ideal, man described in the text despises a “vile” person. He hates the hateful because he loves the lovely. He esteems as reprobate that which ought to be rejected, because his own moral sensibilities and perceptions are just and holy.
Honoureth them that fear the Lord Here is the rule by which his judgments and conduct are governed. Because his own aim is to honour God, he honoureth them that fear God.
Sweareth to his own hurt, and changeth not Not that a promise to do a wrong thing is binding either in equity or conscience, of which character is Herod’s oath, (Mat 14:9😉 but that a vow or engagement to do that which in itself is lawful and right must be kept, though the performance should involve pecuniary loss or personal suffering. Fidelity to just contracts is fundamental justice. See Num 30:2; Jdg 11:35
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Psa 15:4. He that sweareth to his own hurt, and changeth not The greatest temptation to the breach of oaths and promises to others, is, when the performance of them brings mischief on ourselves; for then is the trial of a man’s virtue; and not when he designs either to gain, or not to lose any thing by it. It is, therefore, a very considerable part of a just man’s character, that, whatever temporal inconvenience it may involve him in, he breaks not his oath which he has once given.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Psa 15:4 In whose eyes a vile person is contemned; but he honoureth them that fear the LORD. [He that] sweareth to [his own] hurt, and changeth not.
Ver. 4. In whose eyes a vile person is contemned ] An abject, a reprobate, as one rendereth it; be he as high as Haman; see Esther’s character of him, Est 7:6 , and Mordecai’s slighting of him, Est 3:2 (Josephus). Be he as great as Antiochus Epiphanes, to whom the Samaritans, excusing themselves that they were no Jews, wrote thus, To Antiochus, the great god. Daniel counted and called him a vile person, Dan 11:21 . So Elisha despised Jehoram the king, 2Ki 3:14 ; we also must despise the wicked; yet non virum, sed vitium, et salvo cuique loci sui honore, giving honour, befitting their places, to whom honour is due, Rom 13:7 ., but shunning that partiality taxed by St James, Jas 2:3-4 . The burgess of the New Jerusalem, reprobos reprobat, et probes probat, he cannot flatter any man, nor fancy such as in whom he findeth not aliquid Christi, something of the image of God. A golden colosse, stuffed with rubbish, he cannot stoop to.
But he honoureth them that fear the Lord
He that sweareth to his own hurt, and changeth not
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
to his own hurt. Septuagint, Syriac, and Vulgate, read “to his neighbour”.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
fear
(See Scofield “Psa 19:9”)
Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes
a vile: Psa 101:4, 2Ki 3:13, 2Ki 3:14, Est 3:2, Job 32:21, Job 32:22, Isa 32:5, Isa 32:6, Dan 5:17-31, Act 24:2, Act 24:3, Act 24:25, Jam 2:1-9
but: Psa 16:3, Psa 101:6, Psa 119:63, Mat 12:49, Mat 12:50, 1Jo 3:14
sweareth: Jos 9:18-20, Jdg 11:35, 2Sa 21:1, 2Sa 21:2, Mat 5:33
Reciprocal: Lev 19:12 – ye shall Deu 6:13 – shalt swear Jos 6:22 – as ye sware unto her 1Sa 19:6 – sware 1Ki 2:42 – Did I not 2Ch 16:3 – break 2Ch 19:2 – Shouldest Neh 13:25 – cursed Est 5:9 – he stood not up Job 30:8 – viler Psa 24:4 – sworn Psa 40:4 – respecteth Psa 139:21 – Do not I Pro 26:1 – so Eze 17:16 – whose oath Dan 11:21 – a vile person Mic 3:2 – love Mat 18:10 – heed 2Ti 3:3 – trucebreakers
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Psa 15:4. In whose eyes In whose judgment and estimation; a vile person An ungodly or wicked man, (as appears from the next clause, in which he that feareth God is opposed to him,) is contemned Or, thought meanly of, notwithstanding his wealth, or honour, or greatness, or even his learning and knowledge: who does not admire the person of such a one, or envy his condition, or court him with flatteries, or value his company and conversation, or approve of, or comply with, his course of life; but judges him a miserable man, and a great object of pity; abhors his practices, and labours to make such ways contemptible to all men, as far as lies in his power. It must be observed, however, that this contemning or thinking meanly of ungodly men, does not imply a contempt of just authority, which, if it be lodged even in a wicked mans hand, claims not only obedience, but also honour and reverence, as is manifest from the precepts and examples of Christ and his apostles. But he honoureth them that fear the Lord He highly esteems and cordially loves them, and shows them great respect and kindness, even though they be mean and obscure as to their worldly condition, and though they may differ from him in some opinions or practices of lesser moment. That sweareth to his own hurt Promises and engages upon oath to do something which may be beneficial to his neighbour, but apparently will be to his own damage. As if a man solemnly swear that he will sell his neighbour such an estate at a price below the full worth; or that he will give a poor man such a sum of money, to give which afterward he finds inconvenient to him. And changeth not His purpose, but continues firm, and resolved to perform his promise.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
15:4 {b} In whose eyes a vile person is contemned; but he honoureth them that fear the LORD. [He that] sweareth to [his own] hurt, and changeth not.
(b) He who flatters not the ungodly in their wickedness.