Verse 6. The law of parallelism leaves it open to us to refer the pronoun at the end of this verse to the righteous themselves, or to those, the unwary and innocent, for whom the words of the wicked lie in wait.—Plumptre.
The fiercer ebullitions of humanity may, indeed, be softened down and restrained. But the principle remains the same. The fiery elements only lie in slumbering cover, and often break out, wasting the very face of society.—Bridges.
The words.Speech is the great instrument of man. Talking is his trade. Wall Street and Lombard Street make their fortunes by the tongue. The “words of the wicked” are, therefore, their highest activities, and our proverb declares that these high acts are “a lying in wait for blood.” We would not deny that this may include the blood of others; but in the light of the last verse the grand victim is themselves (chap. i. 18). Each order on change is for a man’s last discomfiture.—Miller.
Though nature hath denied man the weapons of his teeth, yet wickedness giveth to some suchwordsas are more bloody beasts. The false witness will frame his tale so cunningly as if he intended nothing but a clearing of the truth, whereas he seeketh nothing but the shedding of blood. The corrupt judge will couch his words so closely, as if he meant nothing but to have justice executed, whereas they are nothing but ambushments to surprise innocent blood. But there are words which issue from the mouth of the upright, as making a sally out of some adjoining fort, whereby the prey is rescued, the pillagers are defeated, the innocent are delivered, the upright as victorious is crowned with the diadem of his judgment as in Job it is called (ch. xxix. 14); and which St. Gregory saith is rightly called a diadem, because by the glory of an excellent work it leadeth to the crown of a glorious reward. Now such were the words of Job’s mouth, who brake the jaws of the wicked and plucked the spoil out of his teeth, being eyes to the blind, feet to the lame, and a father to the poor.—Jermin.
The prayers of God’s people ascend up to God’s presence for His help, and those mouths prevail mightily that seek for redress of wrong at His hands. Herod thought it would be too late for all the friends which Peter had to minister help to him when he had clapped him in prison. But he remembered not how swift the godly be to prayer and how soon a prayer can come to God.—Dod.
Verse 7. Thepersonsof the wicked areoverthrown and are not,thehouseof the righteous (the very roof that sheltered him) shallstand.—Burgon.
He that is strong may be overthrown and may rise again, he that riseth not to what he was may rise in part to something, he that riseth not at all, may lie where he has fallen; but in the overthrow of the wicked all hope is gone of anything, for they themselves arenothing.Theywere notin goodness, theyare notby their wickedness. They are not to be recovered from their overthrow, because they are not changed to repentance by their overthrow. On the other side, not only the righteous shall stand, their family, their posterity shall stand, for God shall stand by them, and then no fear of falling can be unto them.—Jermin.
When a change of the estate of the ungodly is made from prosperity unto adversity, their utter destruction is commonly wrought, for their house being built upon the sand, the tempests and the winds arise and quite overthrow it. The whole manner of the overthrow is described in Job xviii. 15.—Muffet.
The righteous shall “have a place in the Lord’s house,” immovable here (Isa. lvi. 4, 5), and in eternity (Rev. iii. 12).—Bridges.
Solomon had a signal exemplification of this in the case ofSauland his fatherDavid.Possibly this instance might be in his eye at the time.—Wardlaw.
Eventually there must beoverthrow,even if it be no overthrow but death. When the wicked do fall, there is positivelynothing of them left.While in the deepest disasters of the righteous, nothing is notleft. “His house,”and by that is meant every possible real interest (1 Sam. ii. 35) shall stand for ever.—Miller.
Verse 8. Sometimes, and very often, the wicked shall commend him, commonly the righteous, and always the Lord Himself, but most of all at the last day, before all men and angels. They that are not void of uprightness shall not be destitute of praise and honour. Though some be blind that they cannot discern their understanding and graces, yet others have their eyesight and behold them. Though some be dumb and will not speak of their virtues, yet others have their lips open to commend them.—Dod.
And all wisdom consists in this, that a man rightly know and worship God. Apollonius, Archimedes, and Aristotle were wise in their generations, and so accounted, but by whom? Not by St. Paul, he hath another opinion of them (Rom. i. 22). Not by our Saviour (Matt. xi. 25).—Trapp.
According—“in exact proportion;” such as the meaning of the Hebrew. A man is more applauded for good sense than perhaps anything else.Wisdom—“shrewdness;” that attribute that leads to success. Therefore it sometimes means success (2 Kings xviii. 7). Successful shrewdness is a very positive sort. Such is the shrewdness of the righteous man (ver. 7).Perverse heart—“crooked sense,” literallyheart;though heart contains more of sense (νους) than we ascribe to it. If a man whose mind works crookedly every time becomes an object of contempt, why ought not the wicked to become so, whose very helmsmanships are a deceit? (ver. 5).—Miller.
How thrilling will be thecommendation of wisdombefore the assembled universe! (Luke xii. 42–44). Who will not then acknowledge thewisechoice of an earthly cross with a heavenly crown?—Bridges.
This is capable of two interpretations. It may refer to commendation bymen,or to commendation byGod.In the one case it may mean meresecular discretions,in the other it must meanreligious principle,according to the invariable testimony that “the fear of the Lord, that is wisdom.” This is not the wisdom that secures the eulogy of men; but it will ever secure that of the infinitely Wise, the Infinitely Good. And, indeed, the two things may be united. A man who fears God will always be afaithfulcounsellor, and if at the same time he have sound discretion in regard to the affairs of life, this will form the perfection of character, and there will be commendation both frommenandGod.. . . Inthe pride of your hearts, you may affect to hold very cheap the contempt of men; though even that is often mere pretension than reality, disappointment rankling at the heart, while scorn is curling the lip. But what must it be to be “lightly esteemed” at last, to be “despised” by that God who has in his hands the destinies of the universe!—Wardlaw.
main homiletics of verse9.
Show and Reality.
Whichever rendering we adopt of this verse the subject is the same—that of one man’s allowing his vanity, his love for appearances, to rob him of all real comfort, and that of his wiser brother’s preference of comfort to outside show.
I. The wise man who is despised.Men who have the moral courage to live in a simple style, and to labour with their own hands, will certainly be regarded with contempt by some, but by whom? By those whose good opinion and honour is not worth having. Children are taken with what is showy on the surface—they have little regard for what lies underneath. They will be more delighted with a soap-bubble than with a diamond. Butmenlook on things with different eyes. So it is only men and women of childish minds who estimate a man by his clothes, his house, or his establishment, and it is only such who will despise the first man mentioned in the text. If we take the common rendering of the verse, then this man is more useful to society than the other; for, instead of spending all his money on himself, he keeps a servant, and so gives another a means of living. For as it is implied that he does not lack bread himself, so he will not let those in his employ want the necessaries of life. Other things being equal, the man who, by a judicious use of his means, gives employment to others, is a greater benefactor to his race than he who spends his money in selfish luxury. At any rate, this man is a wiser man than the other, for he has the good sense to prefer the greater to the less. It is only obeying a natural instinct to satisfy the bodily wants, and to supply ourselves with all the substantial comforts of life before we spend money on things which do not, after all, add in the least to our real enjoyment, and yet the majority of men do sacrifice some of the former to the latter. He who has the moral courage not to do so shows his real wisdom. And by such a course of conduct he blesses others as well as himself—he does something to stem the tide of passion for keeping up appearances which in our age and country is the fruitful source of so much crime and misery—he, and he only, is the truly honest man, for he is content to pass for just what he is as to wealth.
II. The foolish and wicked man who “honours himself.”1.He is a fool.Vanity is one of the most despicable passions that can possess a man—it often leads a man to the most childish actions. No man of modern times was more entirely under its dominion than Voltaire, whose only aim in life seemed to be to gain that unsubstantial homage which afforded his spirit at the last such an unsatisfying portion. He did not literally lack bread, but he did find himself in his old age without anything which could give him any real comfort. The man mentioned in our text is so bent upon obtaining this false honour that he will “lack bread”—suffer positive bodily discomfort—rather than not obtain it. 2.He is a sinner.He lies in action, if not in word. While he is resorting to the meanest shifts in secret he is trying to make people believe that he is much better off than he really is. By stinting himself in the common comforts of life he sins against his own body and against his creator, for “the Lord is for the body” (1 Cor. vi. 13), and it is man’s duty to feed that house of the soul which is so “fearfully and wonderfully made” (Psa. cxxxix. 14). He therefore sins against himself and against society. It is worth while to inquire whether anybody will honour him after all his foolish efforts. God cannot, for He hates allhypocrisy. Men may, for their own interest, flatter him, and feign to respect him, but he will obtain no real honour, either from men like him in character, or from those who are better and wiser. “I have read,” says Thomas Adams, “of Menecrates, a physician that would needs be counted a god, and took no other fee of his patients than their vow to worship him. Dionysius Syracusanus, hearing of this, invited him to a banquet, and, to honour him according to his desire, set before him nothing but a censer of frankincense, with all the smoke whereof he was feasted till he starved, while others fed on good meat.” Such smoke as this is all the return such a man as the one pictured in this proverb will get for starving himself, and for sinning against his own body, against society, and against God.
outlines and suggestive comments.
We give a few of the many renderings of this verse:—
Better is he that laboureth and aboundeth in all things than he that boasteth himself and lacketh bread.—Wordsworth.
This proverb, like xv. 17, commends the middle rank of life with its quiet excellencies. A man of lowly rank, who is, however, not so poor that he cannot support a slave, is better than one that boasts himself and is yet a beggar. The first necessity of an Oriental in only moderate circumstances is a slave, just as was the case with the Greeks and Romans.—Delitzch.
Better is the condition of the poor man, who has the means under his control of aiding his exertions for sustenance, than the nobleman, real or fancied, who is in a state of starvation.—Stuart.
Each interpretation is tenable grammatically. (1) He whom men despise, or who is “lowly” in his own eyes (the word is used by David himself, 1 Sam xviii. 23), the trader, the peasant, if he has a slave,i.e.,if he is one step above absolute poverty, and has someone to supply his wants, is better off than the man who boasts of rank or descent, and has nothing to eat. Respectable mediocrity is better than boastful poverty. (2) He who, though despised, is a servant to himself,i.e.supplies his own wants, is better than the arrogant and helpless.—Plumptre.
Some do think it more miserable to be known to be miserable than to be so, and are more grieved to be disesteemed for it than to be pinched by it, wherefore they will feed the eyes of others with a show of plenty, although they have not bread to feed themselves. But he is better who, disesteeming the esteem of others and being servant to himself, does get his own bread, and is contented with it. For as he is servant, so is he master also; and howbeit he serveth, yet it is at his own pleasure. And this is his comfort, that while he serveth himself he hath to serve his need and occasions, when he thathonoureth himselfis fain at last to live by others. Or else take the meaning thus: the ambitious itch of many is so great, and so disquieteth their hearts, that they can lack anything, even bread itself, rather than honour and preferment; so that when they are swollen big in greatness and dignity they are even starved in their estate, and have not of their own the next meal to feed themselves. But better is he, especially if he be a good man, who—having to keep himself and a servant—doth keep within his means; and though he bedespisedby them that overlook him, yet he looks upon himself with thanks to God that it is so well with him. And, indeed, how can this man but be better than the other, when his servant is better than the other is. For as Chyrsostom speaketh, it cannot be but that he who is the slave of glory should be servant of all, yea, more vile than all other servants. For there is noservant commanded to do such base things as the love of glory commandeth him.—Jermin.
The son of Sirach, who may well be called an interpreter of this book of the Proverbs, hath a very like saying to this where he speaketh thus, “Better is he that worketh and aboundeth with all things, than he that boasteth himself, and wanteth bread” (Ecclus. x. 27).—Muffet.
When men are such slaves to the opinion of the world, they rebel against Him who makes no mistake in His allotments and often appoints a descent from worldly elevation as a profitable discipline (Jas. i. 10, 11; Dan. iv. 32–37). Yet it is hard, even for the Christian, as Bunyan reminds us, “to go down the valley of humiliation and catch no slip by the way.” We need our Master’s unworldly elevated spirit (John vi. 15) to make as safe descent. . . . “Let our moderation be known unto all men,” under the constraining recollection, “The Lord is at hand” (Phil. iv. 5). How will the dazzling glory of man’s esteem fade away before the glory of His appearing!—Bridges.
Paul travelling on foot, and living on the wages of a tent-maker, was more respectable than the pretended successor of his brother apostle, with a triple crown upon his head.—Lawson.
main homiletics of verse10.
Care for Animals and Cruelty to Men.
Even the animal is benefited by being related to a righteous man.
I. The righteous man regardeth the life of his beast.1.Because of the entire dependence of the creature upon him.Animals which are the property of man are entirely at his mercy. They have no power to change a bad master for a good one—no voice to utter their complaints—no means of getting redress for their wrongs. All these considerations tend to make a good man care for them, for the righteous man’s sympathies are always drawn out in proportion to the need of the object. And with regard to the animal creation, it may be that the present life is the only opportunity a man may have of showing kindness to them. If, on the other hand, animals live in another world, it may be all the better for men to treat them well here. 2.Because of his dependence upon his beast.Men are very largely indebted to animals for the sustaining of their life—it would be very difficult for the work of the world to be carried on without their help; man would certainly have to labour much harder if they had it not. Therefore, the righteous man feels that he is payinga debtwhen he “regards the life of his beast.” 3.Because the animal is an object of Divine care.The Bible has many references to the brute creation, and many passages which show that “Godregardeth the life of the beast.” Christ tells us that not asparrowfalls to the ground without His Father’s notice, and God has given special commands with reference to the care of dumb creatures.“Thou shalt not muzzle the ox when he treadeth out the corn”(Duet. xxv. 4). Seeing, then, that “God doth care for oxen,” a righteous man will do likewise. 4.Because of the lessons that may be learned from the animal creation.God often sends man to learn of them (see Isa. i. 3; Jer. viii. 7), and much suggestive teaching may be got from observation of their dispositions and habits. It would be ingratitude not to repay them with considerate care.
II. The wicked man is cruel.Wickedness is, in its nature, destitute of kindliness. The sea is by nature salt, and its saltiness makes it unfit to sustain human life. The father of wickedness is a cruel being—his only aim is to increase the misery of the universe. All his children have partaken more or less of his character since the first human murderer killed his brother. It is said here that even his acts of mercy are cruel. History gives many instancesof men whose so-called acts of mercy were only refined cruelties. It follows that if wicked men are cruel to their fellow-creatures—to men and women of their own flesh and blood, they will be even more indifferent to the welfare of creatures below man.
illustrations.
Sir Robert Clayton, as commander of a troop of British cavalry, which after service on the Continent was disbanded in the city of York, and the horses sold, could not bear to think that his old fellow-campaigners, who had born brave men to battle, should be ridden to death as butcher’s hacks, or worked in dung-carts till they became dogs’ meat, he therefore purchased a piece of ground upon Knavesmire heath, and turned out the old horses to have their run for life. What made this act to be the longer had in remembrance, was the curious fact, that one day, when these horses were grazing, a thunder-storm gathered, at the fires and sounds of which, as if mistaken for the signs of approaching battle, they were seen to get together and form in line, almost in as perfect order as if they had their old masters on their backs.
Sir James Prior tells us, in the last year of the life of Burke, that a feeble old horse which had been a favourite with young Richard—now dead—and his constant companion in all his rural journeyings and sports, when both were alike healthful and vigorous, was turned out to take the run of the park at Beaconsfield during the remainder of his life, the servants being strictly charged not to ride or in any way molest him. This pour worn-out steed it was that one day drew near to Burke, as the now childless and decrepit statesman was musing in the park, and after some moments of inspection, followed by seeming recollection and confidence, deliberately rested his head upon the old man’s bosom. The singularity of the action, the remembrance of his dead son, its late master, and the apparent attachment and intelligence of the poor brute, as if it could sympathise with his inward sorrows, rushing at once into his mind, totally overpowered his firmness, and throwing his arms over its neck, he wept long and loudly.
John Howard writing home from the Lazaretto, himself sick and a prisoner: “Is my chaise-horse gone blind or spoiled? Duke is well, he must have his range when past his labour; not doing such a cruel thing as I did with the old mare. I have a thousand times repented of it.”—Jacox.
outlines and suggestive comments.
What a cruelty of the wicked is, at its words, words might seem wanting to show, after it has been said that the tender mercies of the wicked are cruel. But “a righteous man regardeth the life of his beast.” Jacob, as flock-master, is studiously careful for his flocks and herds as well as for his tender children; “if men should over-drive them one day, all the flock would die;” so “I will lead on softly,” said he to Esau, “according as the cattle that goeth before me is able to endure.” The angel of the Lord standing in the way, rebukes Balaam for smiting his ass three times: that unrighteous man, wishing there were a sword in his hand, too literally regardeth not the life of his beast. . . . We certainly ought not, pleads Plutarch, to treat living creatures like shoes or household goods, which, when worn out with use, we throw away; and, were it only to learn benevolence to human kind, we should be merciful to other creatures. To be kind to these our fellow-lodgers is common humanity. To be cruel to them is to be below it. It is almost, if not quite, to be a little lower than themselves. It is, maintains, Sir Arthur Helps, an immense responsibility that Providence has thrown upon us in subjecting these sensitive creatures to our complete sway, and he avowedly trembles at the thought of how poor an answer we shall have to give, when asked the question how we have made use of the power entrusted to us over the brute creation. . . . The question of interposing law has been a vexed one, upon which the humanest have differed. . . . So hard-headed and cool-headed a thinker as Stuart Mill is decisive and incisive in his arguments in favour of legal intervention. Mr. Lecky’s suggestion of a doubt whether cruelty to animals can be condemned onutilitarian grounds, is met by the obvious answer that a utilitarian may rationally include in his definition of the greatest number whose happiness is to be the aim of human beings, not only human beings themselves, but all animals capable of being happy or the reverse; besides which it is urged that, even if we limit our view to the good of our own species, the argument is as strong as can be desired. “If the criminality of an action were to be measured simply by its direct effects on human happiness, we might probably urge that the murderer of a grown-up man was worse than the murderer of a child, and far worse than the torturer of a dumb animal. Yet, as a matter of fact, we should probably feel a greater loathing for a man who could torment a beast for his pleasure than for one who should ill-use one of his equals.” For such cruelty is held to indicate, as a rule, a baser nature. A murderer, though generally speaking a man of bad character, is not of necessity cowardly or mean; he may not improbably show some courage, and possibly even some sensibility to the nobler emotions. The tormenter of animals, on the other hand shows callousness of nature, a pleasure in giving pain for the sake of giving pain, which has about it something to be described as devilish. . . . John Foster declared it to be a great sin against moral taste to mention ludicrously, or for ludicrous comparison, circumstances in the animal world which are painful and distressing to the animals that are in them; the simile, for instance, “Like a toad under a harrow.”—Jacox.
Lit. “knoweth.” The Authorised Version gives the right application, but the words remind us that all true sympathy and care must grow out of knowledge. The righteous man tries toknowthe feelings and life even of the brute beast, and so comes to care for it.“Tender mercies.”Better “the feelings, the emotions” all that should have led to mercy and pity towards man. The circle expands in the one case, narrows in the other.—Plumptre.
When the pulse of kindness beats strong in the heart the warm stream is sent clean through the body of the human family, and retains force enough to expatiate among the living creatures that lie beyond. . . . Cruelty is a characteristic of the wicked in general, and in particular of antichrist—that one, wicked by pre-eminence, whom Christ shall yet destroy by the brightness of His coming. By their fruits ye shall know them. The page of history is spotted with the cruelties of papal Rome. The red blood upon his garments is generally the means of discovering a murderer. The trailing womanish robes of the papal high priest are deeply stained with the blood of the saints. The same providence which employs the bloody tinge to detect the common murderer has left more lasting marks of Rome’s cruelty. The Bartholomew massacre, for example, is recorded in more enduring characters than the stains of that blood which soaked the soil of France. The pope and his cardinals rejoiced greatly when they heard the news. So lively was their gratitude that they cast a medal to record it on. There stands the legend, raised in brass and silver—“Strages Huguenotorum” (the slaughter of the Huguenots)—in perpetual memory of the delight wherewith that wicked antichrist regarded the foulest butchery of men by their fellows that this sin-cursed earth has ever seen. That spot will not out with all their washings.—Arnot.
It is better to be the beast of a righteous man than the son of a wicked man; nay, it is better to be the beast of a righteous man than to be a wicked man. For the righteous will do right unto his beast; the merciful man hath sense of mercy wheresoever is sense of misery, and while in mercy he regardeth the life of the beast that is beneath him, he is made like unto God, who is so far above him. But the wicked man’s tender mercies are “mercies of the cruel,” or else his tender mercies are cruel, hurting as much as severe cruelty; and therefore many times a wicked father’s fond affection is the utter undoing of a petted child, andsparing pity, where evil should be chastised, is the breeding nurse of mischief which cannot be helped. The fond mercies whereby the wicked favoureth himself in sloth and idleness, whereby he pleaseth himself with pleasures and delights, whereby he pampereth himself with delicate and luscious meats, whereby he restraineth not his lusts and desires—what are they but cruelties whereby he tormenteth his body with sickness and quickly killeth it, and whereby he wilfully destroyeth his soul.—Jermin.
The worldly care of a high prosperous man may seem very tender to those dependent on him and towards others; but the very tenderness of an impenitent example is the higher snare, the tender mercies of the wicked are cruel. . . . Religion has no austerities that make a true saint careless of the life or feelings even of hisbeast.On the contrary, it breeds the most pervading tenderness; whereas the wise worldling, however careful of his home and tender towards all who have any claim upon his care, yet in admitting that there is a hell, and neglecting all prayer for his household, and all example, except one that braves the worst, breeds children simply to destroy them.—Miller.
The tender mercies of the wicked are when base and guilty men are spared that should be smitten with the sword of justice. Pity of this sort is more cruel than cruelty itself. For cruelty is exercised upon individuals, but the pity, by granting impunity, arms and sends forth against innocent men the whole army of evil doers.—Lord Bacon.
We have been used to hear much of the benevolence of infidels and the philanthropy of deists. It is all a pretence. Self is the idol and self-indulgence the object, in the accomplishment of which they are little scrupulous about the means. Where self is the idol, the heart is cruel. While they talk of universal charity, they regard not the cruelty of robbing thousands of the consolations of religion. . . . While they speak of harmless gaiety and pleasure they would treacherously corrupt piety and pollute unsuspecting innocence.—Holden.
The word “regard” is of twofold application, and may either apply to the moral or the intellectual part of our nature. In the one it is the regard of attention; in the other it is the regard of sympathy or kindness. But we do not marvel at the term having been applied to two different things, for they are most intimately associated. They act and re-act upon each other. If the heart be very alive to any particular set of emotions the mind will be alert in singling out the peculiar objects which excite them; so, on the other hand, that the emotions be specifically felt the objects must be specifically noticed. . . . So much is this the case that Nature seems to have limited and circumscribed our power of noticing just for the purpose of shielding us from too incessant a sympathy. . . . If man, for instance, looked upon Nature with a microscopic eye his sensibilities would be exposed to the torture of a perpetual offence from all possible quarters of contemplation, or, if through habit these sensibilities were blunted, what would become of character in the extinction of delicacy of feeling? . . . There is, furthermore, a physical inertness of our reflective faculties, an opiate infused, as it were, into the recesses of our mental economy, by which objects, when out of sight, are out of mind, and it is to some such provision, we think that much of the heart’s purity, as well as its tenderness, is owing; and it is well that the thoughts of the spirit should be kept, though even by the weight of its own lethargy, from too busy a converse with objects which are alike offensive and hazardous to both. . . . But there is a still more wondrous limitation than this. . . . The sufferings of the lower animals may be in sight, and yet out of mind. This is strikingly exemplified in the sports of the field, in the midst of whose varied and animating bustle that cruelty, which is all along present to the senses, may not, for one moment,be present to the thoughts. . . . It touches not the sensibilities of the heart, but just because it is never present to the notice of the mind. The followers of this occupation are reckless of pain, but this is not rejoicing in pain. Theirs is not the delight of savage, but the apathy of unreflecting creatures. . . . We are inclined to carry this principle must further. We are not sure if, within the whole compass of humanity, fallen as it is, there be such a thing as delight in suffering for its own sake. But, without hazarding a controversy on this, we hold it enough for every practical object that much, and perhaps the whole of the world’s cruelty, arises not from the enjoyment that is felt in consequence of others’ pain, but from the enjoyment that is felt in spite of it. . . . But a charge of the foulest delinquency may be made up altogether of wants or of negatives; and just as the human face, by the mere want of some of its features, although there should not be any inversion of them, might be an object of utter loathsomeness to beholders, so the human character, by the mere absence of certain habits or sensibilities which belong ordinarily and constitutionally to our species, may be an object of utter abomination in society. The want of natural affection forms one article of the Apostle’s indictment against our world; and certain it is enough for the designation of a monster. The mere want of religion is enough to make a man an outcast from his God. Even to the most barbarous of our kind you apply, not the term of anti-humanity, but of inhumanity—not the term of anti-sensibility; and you hold it enough for the purpose of branding him for general execration that you convicted him of complete and total insensibility. . . . We count it a deep atrocity that, unlike to the righteous man of our text, he simply does not regard the life of a beast. . . . The true principle of his condemnation is that he ought to have regarded. . . . Our text rests the whole cause of the inferior animals on one moral element, which is in respect of principle, and on one practical method, which is, in respect of efficacy, unquestionable: “A righteous man regardeth the life of his beast.” Let a man be but righteous in the general and obvious sense of the word, and let the regard of his attention be but directed to the case of the inferior animals, and then the regard of his sympathy will be awakened to the full extent at which it is either duteous or desirable. . . . The lesson is not the circulation of benevolence within the limits of one species. It is the transmission of it from one species to another. The first is but the charity of a world; the second is the charity of a universe. Had there been no such charity, no descending current of love and liberality from species to species, what would have become of ourselves? Whence have we learned this attitude of lofty unconcern about the creatures who are beneath us? Not from those ministering spirits who wait upon the heirs of salvation. . . . Not from that mighty and mysterious visitant who unrobed Him of all His glories, and bowed down His head unto the sacrifice, and still, from the seat of His now exalted mediatorship, pours forth His intercessions and His calls in behalf of the race He died for. Finally, not from the eternal Father of all, in the pavilion of whose residence there is the golden treasury of all those bounties and beatitudes that roll over the face of nature, and from the footstool of whose empyreal throne there reaches a golden chain of providence to the very humblest of His family.—Chalmers.
He prayeth best who loveth bestAll things both great and small;For the dear God that loveth us,He made and loveth all.—Coleridge.
main homiletics of verse11.
Satisfaction from Tillage.
I. Satisfaction as the result of tillage depends—1.Upon the performance of a Divine promise.It is long ago since God gave Noah the promise that “While the earth remaineth, seedtime and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease” (Gen. ix. 22), and it has been so invariably fulfilled that men have come to forget upon whom they are depending—in whom they are exercising faith—when they plough the ground and sow the seed. God’s regularity in His performance has bred in men a contempt for the promise and the promise maker. Men speak of the laws of nature and ignore the fact that it is by the Word of the Lord that the “rain cometh down and the snow from heaven, and returneth not thither, but watereth the earth, and maketh it bring forth and bud, that it may give seed to the sower and bread to the eater” (Isa. lv. 10). But so it is. The promise is the power that set the laws in motion at first and that have kept them in motion ever since. There can be no tillage without dependence upon God either acknowledged or unacknowledged. The promise is an absolute one, and implies power in God to fulfil it to the end of time. It can never fail unless God’s power fail, or unless He break His Word; these are blessed impossibilities with Him. Therefore, so far as God is concerned theshallof the text is absolute. But it depends likewise—2.Upon man’s fulfilment of their duties.First, it is notalltillage that will satisfy a man with bread, the tillage must be painstaking and intelligent. The promise of God does not set aside the necessity for the man to be very laborious and to study carefully the nature and needs of the soil which he tills. Agriculture is a science which must be acquired—a man must learn how to till the ground. God claims to be man’s instructor in this matter (Isa. xxviii. 26). Then, again, it must behisland that he tills, not land taken by fraud or violence from another. Neither if a man tills the land of another as his servant is he always paid sufficient wages to be satisfied with bread. But this is the greed of man interfering with God’s ordination.
II. The promise suggests symbolic teaching.We may look at it in relation to the human spirit. As land must be ploughed and sown with painstaking intelligence if a man is to have the satisfaction of reaping a harvest, so the human soul must be the object of spiritual tillage if it is ever to yield any satisfaction to God or man. There is very much to be got out of the land, but no man can obtain the full blessing unless he cultivate it. So it is with the man himself. A human soul left to lie barren can never become as a “field which the Lord hath blessed.” 1. It must be prepared to receive the words of God. The “fallow ground” must be broken up, lest the sowing be “among thorns” (Jer. iv. 3), or the seed fall where it can find no entrance (Hosea x. 12; Matt. xiii. 4). 2. Good seed must be sown. The word of God (Mark iv. 14), that “incorruptible seed” by which men are “born again” (1 Pet. i. 23). 3. And the spiritual sower must be persevering and prayerful. It is true of natural tillage that “He that observeth the wind shall not sow; and he that regardeth the clouds shall not reap” (Eccles. xi. 4); it is equally so of soul-husbandry. The world, the flesh, and the devil will be always putting difficulties in the way of a man’s caring for his “own soul.” But these obstacles must be surmounted, and if the seed is watered by prayer God will assuredly send down the rain of the Holy Ghost. 4. And in spiritual tillage there is also a certainty of satisfaction. This also depends upon notoneDivine promise but upon many—upon the revelation of God as a whole. (Upon the opposite character—him “that followeth vain persons,” or vanity, instead of tilling his land or his spiritual nature—see Homiletics on chaptersvi. 11andx. 5, pages 79 and 147.)
outlines and suggestive comments.
We might have expected that the antithesis of the second clause would have ended with “shall lack bread,” but the real contrast goes deeper. Idleness leads to a worse evil than that of hunger.—Plumptre.
Vain persons or “empty people”—most signally the impenitent—for they are empty of all good. “That follows after empty people” is a fine characteristic of the impenitent man’s decline. Following others is the commonest influence to destroy the soul.—Miller.
Special honour is given to the work of tilling the land. God assigned it to Adam in Paradise. It is the employment of his eldest son. In ancient times it was the business or relaxation of kings. A blessing is ensured to diligence, sometimes abundant, always such as we should be satisfied with.—Bridges.
Of all the arts of civilised man agriculture is transcendently the most essential and valuable. Other arts may contribute to the comfort, the convenience, and the embellishment of life, but the cultivation of the soil stands in immediate connection with our very existence. The life itself, to whose comfort, convenience, and embellishment other arts contribute, is by this sustained, so that others without it can avail nothing.—Wardlaw.
The only two universal monarchs practised husbandry. . . . Some people think that they cannot have enough unless they have more than the necessaries and decent comforts of life: but we are here instructed that bread should satisfy our desires. Having food and raiment, let us be therewith content. There are few that want these, and yet few are content. . . . To be satisfied with bread is a happy temper of mind, and is commonly the portion of the man of industry, which not only procures bread, but gives it a relish unknown to men that are above labour.—Lawson.
Sin brought in sweat (Gen. iii. 19), and now not to sweat increaseth sin. . . .“But he that followeth vain persons,”etc. it is hard to be a good fellow and a good husband too.—Trapp.
Here is encouragement to those who travail in husbandry. They are of as good note with God for their service, if they be faithful, as others whose trades are more gainful, and better esteemed among men. The merchants, and goldsmiths, and others of such places, are not so often mentioned in Scripture as they be, nor animated with so many consolations as they are. The grand promises for blessing on their labour are made to them in special, and the rest must deduct their comforts from thence by proportion.—Dod.
In a moral point of view the life of the agriculturist is the most pure and holy of any class of men; pure, because it is the most healthful, and holy, because it brings the Deity perpetually before his view, giving him thereby the most exalted notions of supreme power, and the most fascinating and endearing view of moral benignity.—Sir B. Maltravers.
Ill fares the land, to hastening ills a prey,Where wealth accumulates and men decay;Princes and lords may flourish, or may fade;A breath can make them, as a breath has made:But a bold peasantry, their country’s pride,When once destroyed, can never be supplied.—Goldsmith.
main homiletics of the paragraph.—Verses12–14.
The Desire of Wicked Men and the Fruit of Righteousness.
I. Concerning wicked men we have—1.A blessed instance of their inability to do all they desire.Verse 12 speaks of their “desiring the net of evil men”—of their reaching out after larger opportunities of ensnaring their fellow-creatures than they have at their command at present. The desires and abilities ofgoodmen are not always equally balanced. They have more desire to be good and to do good than they have ability to be or to do. The first teachers of Christianity desired a “net” that should enclose all to whom they preached the gospel, and this has been the desire of godly men ever since. They desire a “net” in which to catch their fellow-creatures for their good, but their ability always comes short of their desires. This is a saddening truth, but there is no denying the fact. But “the net of evil men” desired by the wicked is one in which to entrap men to their hurt. In this case it is a matter of rejoicing that their desires and their ability are not balanced. If ungodly men had their desires fulfilled they would soon transform the world into a mirror in which they would see them reflected in every human creature. We ought ever to give thanks to God that wicked men lack power to do all they desire to do to good men, and that they cannot even go to the length of their aspirations even with other ungodly men. They hate each other often with deep hatred, and human and Divine law alone prevents the world from being turned into a hell by the fulfilment of their desires against each other. There are outstanding debts always waiting to be settled whenever a net can be found large enough to entrap the victim, but God’s providence is a larger net, and so arranges the events of human life that wicked men are often prevented from committing greater crimes then they do against each other. 2.Retribution falling upon them.A net is laid, and prey is ensnared, but it is he who desired to entrap his brother who “is snared by the transgression of his own lips” (ver. 13). It is as certain as that water will find its level that men who lay traps for others will be entrapped themselves (see chap.xi. 8). And this will come about not by another man’s laying a net for them but by their own plans being turned against them. Thus Haman made a snare for his own feet by the “transgression of his own lips” when he sought to persuade Ahasuerus that “it was not for his profit to suffer the Jews” (Esther iii. 8). He thought this net would enclose Mordecai, but it enwrapped himself in its meshes. So when Daniel’s enemies laid their plans against him. Many a time has a godly man had occasion to sing David’s song,“The heathen are sunk down in the pit that they made; in the net which they hid is their own foot taken”(Psa. ix. 15). It is a law of God’s government.“He that leadeth into captivity shall go into captivity”(Rev. xiii. 10). This is the “recompense which shall be rendered unto” the man who lays plans to injure others (ver. 14).
II. Concerning righteous men we have—1.A godly character springing from a root of piety.The principal thing to be aimed at in building a house is to get a good foundation; if the foundation be insecure, the house will be worthless. That which makes a healthy fruit-bearing tree is a healthy, strong root; however fair the branches may at present look, they will soon betray any disease at the seat of its life. The root of a man’s character is hisdesire;if the desire is righteous, he is a righteous—though not a perfect—man. As the wicked man was made by his evil desire, so the good man is made by his desires after that which is true and benevolent. 2.That which is yielded by such a root.(1)Deliverance.He is delivered from the net laid for him by the evil counsels of the wicked. His character is often the means of bringing himintotrouble, but the same character is a guarantee that he shall comeoutof it. The time of trouble is by permission or by appointment of God, and it is only for a limited time. Job and Joseph were both brought into trouble because their characters awakened the envy—the one of angelic, the other of human sinners; but their histories are left on record to show to all just men, who find themselves in similar circumstances from the same cause, what the “end of the Lord” is, and will be to them (Jas. v. 11). There must come a final and blessed deliverance from all trouble for those who yield the fruit of a holy life from the root of a holy character (Rev. xxi. 4). (2)Satisfaction(verse 14). One of thefruits of a righteous man will be his holy and wise speech—speech which blesses men in opposition to that “transgression of the lips” which is meant to injure them (verse 13). From this “fruit of the mouth” he shall be “satisfied with good”—he will have the reward of knowing that his words bless others, and this will be to him a source of satisfaction. Or his wise speech may be the means of bringing him material good and temporal honour.
outlines and suggestive comments.
Verse 12. Man is always restless to press onwards to something not yet enjoyed. The wicked emulate each other in wickedness, and if they see evil men more successful than themselves, desire their net (Psa. x. 8–10; Jer. v. 26–28).—Bridges.
The words are somewhat obscure, both in the original and in the translation. The meaning, however, seems as follows: The “net of evil men,” as in chap. i. 17, is that in which they are taken—the judgment of God in which they are ensnared. This they run into with such a blind infatuation that it seems as if they were in love with their own destruction. The marginal “fortress” (a meaning given to the feminine form in Isa. xxix. 7; Ezek. xix. 9) gives the thought that the wicked seek the protection of others like themselves, but seek in vain the “root of the just” (i.e.,that in them which is fixed and stable), alone yields that protection. The latter rendering is, on the whole, preferable.—Plumptre.
Some render the latter clause,He(i.e.,the Lord)will give a root of the righteous;that is, will enable them to stand firm.—Wordsworth.
The impenitent does not prefer to work the soil of his soul, as in the last verse, but is in hopes to gain by something easier; he likes to seize as in the chase, or as robbers do. He likes to seize without having produced or earned. But the righteous not only goes through solid processes of piety, but (another intensive clause, chap. xi. 14) earns for others, as well as for himself. While impenitence would take heaven as in a net, religion works for it, and, in so doing, “gives” or “yields.”—Miller.
The word “net” may be understood ofany meansby which the wealth and honours of the world may be acquired. Thus it is used in Habakkuk i. 13–17. The net described here is that of the oppressor, who regards his fellow-men as of any value only as he can render them conducive to his own benefit and aggrandisement, and who uses them accordingly, and when his oppressive powers prove successful vaunts himself in the power and the skill by which the means has been secured. There seems to be a special reference, in the verse before us, to illegitimate or fraudulent means. When “the wicked” see the devices of “evil men” succeed, they desire to try the same arts. . . . If, in any case, conscienceshouldremonstrate and restrain, and will not allow them to go quite so far, that yet envy, and regret their restraints. They stilldesirethe net, even when they can’t bring themselves to use it. They wish they could get over their scruples, and, in this state of mind, the probability is that by and by they will. The “root of the righteous” might be understood as meaning the fixed, settled, stableprincipleof the righteous, and the sentiment may be, and it is an important one, that,acting on rooted principle,the righteous may and will ultimately prosper. I incline, however, to think that “the net” signifies the varied artifice, cunning, and fraud employed to gain riches quickly, the root of the righteous may rather represent thesource of his revenue or income;and, in opposition to the art of making rich quickly, to excite the surprise and the envy of others, a steady, firmly-established, regularly; and prudently and justly-conducted business, bringing in its profits fairly and moderately, asa tree, deeply-rooted in the soil, draws thence its natural nourishment, and, “receiving blessing from God,” brings forth its fruit in due season. The two views are closely, if not inseparably, connected.—Wardlaw.
The wicked seek their good from without; the righteous have it within, their own root, deep and firmly sunk, supplying it.—Fausset.
He so furiously pursueth his lusts, as if he desired destruction; as if he would outdare God Himself; as if the guerdon of his gracelessness would not come time enough, but he must needs run to meet it. Thus thrasonical Lamech (Gen. iv. 23) thinks to have the odds of God seventy to seven. Thus the princes of the Philistines, whilst plagued, came up to Mizpeh against Israel, as it were, to fetch their bane (1 Sam. vii.).—Trapp.
Verse 13. The wordssaphah(lip) andlashon(tongue) occur, the first in verses 13, 19, 22, the second in verses 18, 19 in the chapter. The former occurs aboutforty-fivetimes in this book; and the words connected with them, such asstrife, wrath, slander, scorn,and their contraries,love, peace, truth,etc., are very frequent, showing the importance to be attached to the right government of the tongue.—Wordsworth.
Matters are so arranged, in the constitution of the world, that the straight course of truth is safe and easy; the crooked path of falsehood difficult and tormenting. Here is perennial evidence that the God of providence is wise and true. By making lies a share to catch liars in, the Author of being proclaims, even in the voices of nature, that He “requireth truth in the inward parts.” “The just shall come out of trouble;” that is the word; it is not said he shall never fall into it. The inventory which Jesus gives of what His disciples shall have “now in this time,” although it contains many things that nature loves, closes with the article “persecutions” (Mark x. 30). . . . Those who wave their palms of victory and sing their jubilant hymns of praise, were all in the horrible pit once.—Arnot.
All human conduct is represented by the lips (verse 6 and chap. xiv. 3). The tongue is a foremost business agent. The impenitent, though he may stand out very clear, and see no tokens of a net, yet, as his life is false his not seeing the snare shows only how the more insidiously he may be entangled in. While the righteous, though he may be born to the snare; originally contemned; and though he may be caught in the toils of great worldly evil, yea, of sin itself; yet out of the very jaw of the trap where he may have foolishly entered, he will in the end by helped to get out.—Miller.
They (the just) suffer sometimes for their bold and free invectives against the evils of the times, but they shall surely be delivered. . . . John Baptist, indeed, was, without any law, right, and reason, beheaded in prison as though God had known nothing at all of him, said George Marsh, the martyr. And the same may be said of sundry other witnesses to the truth, but then by death they entered into life eternal. . . . Besides that heaven upon earth they had during their troubles. . . . The best comforts are usually reserved for the worst times.—Trapp.
Verse 14. Albeit the opening of the mouth is a small matter; yet, when it is done in wisdom, it shall be recompensed by the Lord with great blessing. For such as use their tongues to God’s glory, and the edification of their brethren, instructing them and exhorting them from day to day, shall be loved by God and man, and taste many good things. Now, as good words, so good works shall be rewarded. For the recompense of a man’s hands shall reward him; not only shall the wicked be plagued for their evil doing, but the godly shall be blessed for their well-doing.—Muffet.
This is the whole question of capital and labour put in a nutshell.Allis not to be claimed by thehands, for there is the mouth that directsand orders.As muchis not to be claimed by thehands,for the Bible is a good, truthful book, and it claims for the mind more than for the muscle. (See this distinction in Eccles. x. 10.) “A man of the better sort,” with his education, and expensive capital, earns more, according to the inspired Solomon, than the “labouring man.” What he demands of the Christian gentleman is, that he shall make an estimate of all this, and, while he keeps himself “the earnings of the mouth,” he render carefully to the labourer the wages of his hands. We have no authority for this interpretation. We present it as unquestionably just. The translation it would be hard to give literally. But the words are about thus:“From the fruit of the mouth of a man of the better class, a good man will be satisfied; and the wage (lit. the work) of the hands of a common man he will render to him.”This fair, calculating spirit, in all questions between man and man, not tending to communism on the one hand and not yielding to tyranny on the other, is the true spirit of the inspired Gospel.—Miller.
There are “empty vines that bear fruit unto themselves” (Hosea x. 1). And as empty casks sound loudest, and base metal rings shrillest, so many empty tattlers are full of discourse. Much fruit will redound by holy speeches to ourselves—much to others. Paul showeth that the very report of his bonds did a great deal of good in Cæsar’s house (Phil. i. 14). . . . One seasonable truth, falling upon a prepared heart, hath oft a strong and sweet influence. Sometimes, also, although we know that which we ask of others as well as they do, yet good speeches will draw us to know it better by giving occasion to speak more of it, wherewith the Spirit works most effectually, and imprints it deeper, so that it shall be a more rooted knowledge than before.—Trapp.
main homiletics of verses15and16.
Two Examples of Foolishness and Wisdom.
I. The man who guides his life by his own self-conceit—rejecting the advice of others.No finite creature possesses sufficient wisdom within himself to direct his path through life. The largest and deepest rivers are dependent upon small streams to sustain their volume of water, and each little stream again must be fed from a source outside itself, and the springs which feed the streams have their origin in the ocean’s fulness. So the very greatest minds are in some things dependent upon minds which in many things are their inferior, and it is a mark of wisdom to acknowledge this, and to be willing to take advice of anyone who is able to give it upon matters in which they are better informed. Thus men are led to exercise a mutual dependence on each other, and all to depend upon Him whose wisdom is the parent of all finite counsel that is of any value. (1) A man who will not acknowledge and act upon this principle is a fool, because he practically shuts his eyes to a self-evident fact, and denies that he is a member of a race, the members of which are evidently intended to supply each other’s lack in such a manner as to form a mutually dependent body. It is in human society as it is in the individual human body—“the eye cannot say unto the hand, I have no need of thee: nor again the head to the feet, I have no need of you” (1 Cor. xii. 21), or if they do say so they only proclaim their great want of wisdom. (2) He is a fool because he declines to profit by the experience of men in the past. To recur to the simile of the human body, it is intended to live upon material outside itself, and a man is counted insane who refused to take food. So we are intended to profit by the experience of men who have lived before us, and it is quite as foolish to set it aside as useless tous as it is to refuse to eat in order to live. It is indeed like expecting to keep in health and strength by consuming one’s own flesh. No man does actually and in all cases refuse to profit by the wisdom and experience of others, but he is foolish in proportion as he does so. (3) He is a fool because he is so declared by the highest authority. God by His offers of guidance, by the very existence of the Bible, declares that men need counsel. (See upon this subject Homiletics on chap.iii. 7, 8, page 34.) The human soul is like a blind Samson, because of the blinding nature of sin relative and sin personal, and all its endeavours to find a right way without harkening to Divine counsel only result in stumbles and wounds, and finally, if persisted in, in moral ruin. All a man’s endeavours only increase his misery, until he take the counsel offered him by God. He is like a shipwrecked mariner suffering from raging thirst having drunk of the briny water, every draught only increases the disease, and nothing can save him but drinking of pure water. (4) This man is his own destroyer. It is bad to be ruined by the temptations of others, but there is this advantage, we can fall back upon the excuse of our first parents: “The woman gave me of the tree and I did eat,” or “the serpent beguiled me” (Gen. iii. 12, 13). But when a man’s rejection of counsel ruins him, he finds himself in a “blind alley,” from which there is not even the outlet of an excuse.
II. The passionate man.This is often the companion of self-conceit and is indeed a proof of it. If a man is unable to hold a restive horse well in hand, it proves that he has not taken lessons in horsemanship. If a man cannot steer a vessel in ordinary circumstances without running her upon the rocks, it shows that he has not learned the art of navigation. A man who cannot keep his anger from over-mastering him—who cannot keep a firm hold of the rudder of his own spirit—proclaims that he has not subjected himself to moral discipline, that he has disdained to learn the art of moral rulership. Such a man is a fool, because a man in passion is always despised by others, he often utters words which he would afterwards give much to recall, and generally ends by losing his own self-respect.
III. In contrast to this character stands the man who is in all respects the opposite—him whose character is sketched in the first clause of these verses, who “loveth instruction” (ver. 1) who acknowledges that “he is a stranger in the earth and needs Divine guidance” (Psa. cxix. 19), that “the way of man is not himself; it is not in man that walketh to direct his step” (Jer. x. 23.—See homiletics on chap.x. 8, page 151). Such a man is willing to listen to the advice of any who are capable of giving it, and his prudence in this matter is generally accompanied by an ability to “cover shame”—to take a reproof or an insult in silence. He has learned to take George Herbert’s advice—
“Command thyself in chief. He life’s war knowsWhom all his passionsfollowas he goes.”
outlines and suggestive comments.
Verse 15. All through our lost nature the truth of this proverb is visible. A man may be on the road to hell, but think that he is fair for heaven. A man may build by rapine, but think that he is the pink of fair dealing. A man is not a judge about himself. A Christian, therefore, will feel this, and while the impenitent is hard as to his own right, the Christian will be humble, and will be glad, in reasonable ways, to leave his duties to be advised upon by others.—Miller.
We have one great “Counsellor” Messiah, who is made unto us “wisdom” (Isa. ix. 6; 1 Cor. i. 30). Let us “hearken unto” Him (chap. i. 33).—Fausset.
And such a fool is every natural man (Job xi. 12); wise enough, haplyin his generation—so is the fox too—wise with such wisdom as, like the ostrich’s wings, makes him outrun others upon earth, but helps him never a whit towards heaven.—Trapp.
The worse any man is, or doth, the less he seeth his evil. They that commit the most sins have hope that they stand guilty of fewest; they that fall into greatest transgressions, imagine that their faults be the smallest; they that sink into the deepest dangers do dream of greatest safety; they that have longest continued in rebellion against God, of all others, for the most part are slowest to repentance. . . . St. Paul testifieth that when he was in the worst case, he knew nothing but that he had been in the best.—Dod.
Every man’s way is, and must be, in some degree, acceptable to himself, otherwise he would never have chosen it. But, nevertheless, whoever is wise, will be apt to suspect and be diffident of himself. Let men’s abilities be ever so great, and their knowledge ever so extensive, still they ought not, and without great danger and inconvenience cannot, trust wholly and entirely to themselves. For those abilities and that knowledge easily may be, and often are, rendered useless by the prejudices and prepossessions of men’s own minds. Nothing is more common than for men’s appetites and affections to bribe their judgments, and seduce them into erroneous ways of thinking and acting. They are often entangled and set fast, not through the want of light and knowledge, not through any defect of their heads, but through the deceitfulness of their hearts. In many cases where they could easily direct other men, they suffer themselves to be misled, and are driven into the snare by the strength of inclination, or by the force of habit. . . . This acquired darkness, this voluntary incapacity, as well as the wont of counsel thereby occasioned, nowhere appears more frequently, or more remarkably, than in the transaction of our spiritual concerns, and what relates to the discharge of our duty. “The way of Man,” says our royal author, “is right in his own eyes,” though the end “thereof be the ways of death.” When we have wandered out of the road, and almost lost ourselves in bye-paths, we can make ourselves believe that we have continued all the while in the highway to truth and happiness. . . . But, however lightly we may esteem the helps and directions of men, shall we not attend to the counsels of Our Heavenly Father, and the admonitions of the Most High? Can we have more regard to what is “right in our own eyes” than to what is right in His?—Balguy.
Verse 16. “Covereth,” with the mantle of patience and charity, instead of exasperating himself, and losing self-control by dwelling on the indignity of the word or deed, and the worthlessness of the injurer. He does not publish the act to the discredit of the other, but consults for the reputation of the other, lest he should add sin to the injury suffered.—Fausset.
Truly iswrathcalledshame.For is it not ashamethat unruly passions should, as it were, trample reason under foot, disfigure even the countenance, and subjugate the whole man to a temporary madness? (Dan. iii. 19.)—Bridges.
A fool hath no power over his passions. Like tow, he is soon kindled; like a pot, he soon boils; and like a candle whose tallow is mixed with brine, as soon as lighted he spits up and down the room. “A fool uttereth all his mind” (chap. xxix. 11). The Septuagint renders it “all his anger.” For, as the Hebrews well note in a proverb they have, “A man’s mind is soonest known in hispurse,in hisdrink,and in hisanger.” But “A wise man covereth shame” by concealing his wrath, or rather by suppressing it when it would break forth to his disgrace, or the just grief of another. This was Saul’s wisdom (1 Sam. x. 27); and Jonathan’s (1 Sam. xx. 34); and Ahasuerus’s, when, in a rage against Haman, he walked into the garden. The philosopher wished Augustine,when angry, to say over the Greek alphabet.—Trapp.
The meaning of the Holy Ghost is not here to condemn all kinds of anger, for it is one of the powers of the soul which God created as an ornament in men, and godly anger is a part of God’s image in him, and a grace commended in Moses, Elijah, etc., and our Saviour Himself, and he that is always altogether destitute of this doth provoke God to be angry with him, for want of zeal and hatred of sin; but it is apassionateanger that is here reproved, which is not a power of the soul, but an impotency. He that conceiveth the other is anagent,and doth a service to God; but he that is moved with this is apatient,and sin hath in that case prevailed against him.—Dod.
main homiletics of the paragraph.—Verses17to19,and verse22.
Wounding and Healing.
I. The mischief that may be done by a lying tongue.1.In a legal matter.It is the duty of a witness to testify exactly what he knows, and no more nor less. If a man speaks deceitfully he may bring much misery upon the innocent, whom his straightforward testimony would have acquitted. And he may do this by withholding truth as well as by uttering direct falsehood. The first is “showing forth deceit” as well as the last. 2.In common conversation.The word “speaketh,” in verse 18, is “babbleth,” and seems to point to those who are great talkers, and who are not careful what they say. (See Homiletics on chap.x. 19–21, page 168.) In both these cases words may inflict a more deadly wound than a sword. If spokento a manthey may break his heart, if spokenof himthey may kill his reputation, which no sword of steel can touch, and which to the best men is more precious than bodily life. A lying or even ababblingtongue can pierce a much more vital organisation than flesh and blood—it can enter the human spirit, and hurt it in its most sensitive part; or by slander it can destroy all the joy of a man’s earthly life. And as a sword can in a moment sever the spirit and the body of a man, and work such ruin and misery as can never be done away with, so a lying tongue may by one word, or one conversation, do mischief that can never be undone. The sword of steel can divide human friends locally; but it cannot sever their love; it tends rather to increase and brighten the flame; but a word of slander may do all this, and estrange those who were bound in the tenderest ties, until the God of Truth shall bring the truth to light. Though the lying tongue is comparatively “but for a moment,” yet in a moment it can deal a thrust that will last as long as life. It can open a wound whence will flow out all the joy of life, as the heart’s blood flows from a mortally wounded man.
II. Its judgment and its destiny.It is an abomination in the sight of a God of Truth, and, therefore, its life is comparatively short—it is “but for a moment” compared with the eternal duration of truth. A lying man or devil is the very antipodes of the Divine character. All truthful men instinctively shrink from a liar as the sensitive plant withdraws from the human touch. How much more must he be held in abhorrence by Him who is a “God of Truth, and without iniquity” (Deut. xxxii. 4). Christ characterises lying as the cardinal sin of the greatest sinner in the universe (John viii. 44). It was his lying tongue that “brought death into the world, and all our woe,” and so spoiled the Paradise which God had prepared for man. How then can lying be any other than an abomination to Him? But, because it is so, its doom is fixed. It is destined to destruction by the victory of truth, as the night is destroyed by the overcoming light of day. (On this subject see also Homiletics on chap.x. 18, page 166.)
III. The blessed results of a truthful and wisely-governed tongue.1.it will “show forth righteousness.”A man who speaks the truth shows forth righteousness in two ways—(1)in his own character.He reveals himself to be a righteous man. He gives a living example of uprightness and integrity. (2)He helps on righteousness in the world.By being a faithful witness he furthers the ends of justice and righteousness—he helps on the just administration of the law. 2.It will heal wounds inflicted by the untruthful tongue.In nature we have a two-fold exhibition of power. The hurricane comes and breaks the branches of the tree, and strips off its leaves; but a more beneficent power clothes it again with beauty. So the tongue of a fool strips a man of what made life beautiful to him—takes away his good name, or breaks bonds of close friendship—but wise and kind words have a healing power in them—they help to cheer the wounded spirit, and enable the bowed head to lift itself again. Such a tongue of healing had the Divine Son of God, who came “to heal the broken in heart” (Isa. lxi. 1), and to restore the friendship between God and man, which was first broken by the slandering tongue of the devil—that great slanderer of God to man, and of man to God (Gen. iii. 5; Job i. 10). To Him the“Lord God gave the tongue of the learned, that He might know how to speak a word in season to him that was weary”(Isa. l. 4). The tongue of all true servants of God is an instrument of healing, for they are enabled to tell to their fellow-men “words whereby they may be saved” (Acts iv. 12).
IV. God’s estimation of it and its destiny.It is “God’s delight,” verse 22. Whatever gives delight to a noble and benevolent man must be a blessing to humanity, and everything will delight him that tends to minister blessing to the world. This is pre-eminently true of the good God. Truth is the great need of the race—truth in word and deed and thought. To this end Christ came into the world “to bear witness of the truth” (John xviii. 37), because that alone is the cure for the world’s woes. Then every man who istruemust bless humanity and consequently delight God. A good father rejoices to see his own excellencies of character appear in his son, and the Father of the good likewise delights to see His children copy Him in “dealing truly.” (See also on chap.xi. 1, page 190.) And because it is God’s delight it will last for ever. Truth of any kind will be established in the course of time. If a man proclaim a scientific truth, however much he may be laughed at and disbelieved at first, his “lip,” or his words, will be established in the end. In the words of Galileo, when he uttered the truth, that the earth moved round the sun, have long since been “established.” Time only is needed for any truth to take root-hold—it can never be overturned, whether it be physical or moral truth. Many truths which were scoffed at by most men, when they were first promulgated, are now regarded as truisms by almost everybody. And the lips that uttered them are now established and held in honour. Such men, for instance, as Cromwell and Milton, when they declared that the right of private judgment in religious matters, the freedom of the press, etc., were the right of every man, are now established in the estimation of this nation, and the truths which they uttered are regarded by all Englishmen as undoubted facts. “This,” says F. W. Robertson, “is man’s relation to the truth. He is but a learner—a devout recipient of a revelation—here to listen with open ear devoutly for that which he shall hear; to gaze and watch for that which he shall see. Man can do no more. He cannot create truth; he can only bear witness to it; he can only listen and report that which is in the universe. If he does not repeat and witness to that, he speaks of his own, and forthwith ceases to be true. . . . Veracity is another thing. Veracity is the correspondence between a proposition and man’s belief. Truth is the correspondence of the proposition with fact.” It is to such witness-bearers—especially to those who witness concerning moral truth—that the promise of the text applies.