outlines and suggestive comments.
“Evil”is rapacious in its gains. Each inch“evil”holds. It never lets back any advance. It is versatile to tempt, and ruins with many instruments while the good, however, have just the opposite lot. They gain by every advance. Each act that is holy in their lives is rewarded by better acts and higher holiness on through their whole probation,—nay, eternally! The pit is bottomless. But evil never ceases to hound sinners and make them worse.—Miller.
The reprobation here is very striking. “Evilpursuethsinners.” It follows them every step. It keeps pace with the progress of time. Each moment it comes nearer. Silent and unperceived it tracks them through their whole course. Insensibly it gains upon them; and at last—it may be suddenly and when least expected—it seizes and destroys them.—Wardlaw.
Not the smallest good, even “a cup of cold water to a disciple” (Matt. x. 42), or honour shown to his servants (Matt. x. 41; 1 Kings xvii. 16–23) shall “lose its reward” (Heb. vi. 10). And if a single act is thus remembered much more “a course, a flight held out to the end” (2 Tim. iv. 7, 8). How manifestly is this the constitution of grace; that when perfect obedience can claim no recompense (Luke xvii. 10), such unworthy, such defiled work should be so honoured with an infinite overwhelming acceptance.—Bridges.
To be out of the hands of evil is not to be free from it; for it still pursueth sinners, and it ceaseth not until it be gotten to the place where they are. . . . For, as St. Augustine saith, that God doth not forthwith avenge sinners is His patience, not His negligence. Wherefore it is to be feared lest by how much He stays the longer that we may repent, by so much He will punish us the more, if that we will not amend.—Jermin.
Caius—Agrippa having suffered imprisonment for wishing him emperor—when he came afterwards to the empire, the first thing he did was to prefer Agrippa, and give him a chain of gold as heavy as the chain of iron that was on him in prison. Those that lose anything for God He seals them a bill of exchange of a double return.—Trapp.
main homiletics of verse22.
An Inheritance Incorruptible.
I. A good man has always spiritual inheritance to leave his children.He has always his own holy character and example. And this is often of great service to them in a material point of view. Men who have obtained fame in the world leave their children the inheritance of a famous name, which is often a fortune in itself. The son or daughter of a famous man can command positions of worldly advantage which are closed against the children of obscure parents. But while a famous father can leave his fame as an inheritance to his children he cannot ensure to them the possession of the genius by which he gained it. Talent is not hereditary, and it often happens that a very gifted father has very common-place children. But moral worth—a godly character—is an inheritance that not only makes a son respected in the world for his father’ssake, but is very likely to make him also a partaker of the same godliness. A good man’s character is not hereditary, but it is very apt to propagate other characters of the same kind. This inheritance of a good man is an incorruptible inheritance. No inheritance of lands or money are entirely out of reach of the changes and chances of human life, but the example, and the memory, and the blessings which have come from a godly parentage, make an inheritance which, like the heavenly one, “fadeth not away.” It is the best possible safeguard that a father can leave his children against the temptations of the world, the flesh, and the devil. The remembrance of what belief in the Gospel did for a holy father has saved many a son for drifting on the quicksands of infidelity. There have been times in the history of many a child of godly parents, when such an anchor has been the only one which has held them from “making shipwreck of faith” (1 Tim. i. 19). The character of a good man is such an indisputable fact, and is so entirely unexplainable on any other ground than that of the existence of a supernatural and Divine power, that it constitutes an unanswerable argument for the truth of revelation. And so with every other form of evil that assails men. The inheritance which Christ has left to his disciples—to His spiritual children—is Hischaracter.This has produced and reproduced its own kind through all the ages since His sojourn upon earth. This has held them to the faith in the dark days of persecution. And when the infidel himself has come face to face with it, even he has been compelled to acknowledge the intrinsic worth of the children’s portion. This holy life, lived among sinful men, has been the “unsearchable riches” (Ephes. iii. 8) of one Christian generation after another, for more than eighteen centuries, and it is by virtue of this inheritance that good men have been enabled to transmit to their posterity their own godly lives and examples.
II. A good man may have a material as well as a moral inheritance to bequeath.He may possess both character and substance. But the fact that a man is good is no guarantee that he will have any worldly wealth to leave behind him. If Lord Bacon’s assertion be correct, that “Prosperity is the blessing of the Old Testament, and adversity the blessing of the New,” he is quite as likely to die poor as rich. Still there is often a blessing of some amount of material riches given to honest labour, and probably there are far more godly men in proportion to their number, who acquiresomeinheritance to leave behind them, than there are godless men. (See onverse 11, etc.)
III. Good men sometimes inherit wealth which has been gathered by bad men.It is not a universal rule, but it may be oftener fulfilled than we are aware of. It may be inherited by generations of wicked men and at last come into the hands of a just one. That it should be so is seen to be a wise and good law of providence. 1.Because a good man will make a far better use of “the mammon of unrighteousness.”He will use it to minister to both the bodily and spiritual needs of his fellow-creatures as well as his own. 2.Because the laid-up wealth of the wicked has often been obtained by defrauding the good.God does not always cause it to be repaid to the identicalpersonswho were thus defrauded, but He may often cause it to be restored to identicalcharacters.This proverb must be taken to assert the straightforward motion of the wheels of providence, although by reason of their “great height” (Ezek. i. 18),—their vast circumference—they take a long time to go round.
outlines and suggestive comments.
The usurer lightly begets blind children that cannot see to keep what their father left them. But when the father is gone to hell for gathering, the son often follows for scattering. But God is just.—T. Adams.
That the wealth of the sinner is laid up for the just appears to have been aprominent feature of the Old Dispensation (chap. xxviii. 8; Job xxvii. 16, 17), and it will be openly renewed in the latter-day glory of the Church (Isa. lxi. 6).—Bridges.
This is the direct promise of heaven (Psa. ciii. 17; Prov. xxii. 6). That it ever fails, must be by palpable neglect. A man may be saved himself, and lose his children; but the Bible speaks of this as the parent’s fault (1 Sam. iii. 13; Prov. xiii. 24), and brands it as the great curse upon the earth (Mal. iv. 6). While the sinner not only cannot send down his wealth, but cannot himself possess it. It is a curse to him. It will be used for the saints (Matt. xxv. 28).—Miller.
It is quite clear that in this and other passages an inheritance is regardedas a good,and that no blame is attached to “the good man” who leaves it to his children. The principle expressed in the latter clause is the same as that laid down by the apostle,“All things are yours,”and, among other things, “the world.” That may most truly be called mine, from which I derive the greatest possible benefit it can be made to yield. It would be strange, indeed, were I to wish anything else, or anything more. . . . The wicked man calls his wealthhis own.But it isGod’s.God is the friend of His children, and holds that property, like everything else, for their good; so that it istheirsby beingHis.—Wardlaw.
Personal goodness profiteth for posterity. God gives not to His servants some small annuity for life only, as great men used to do, but “keepeth mercy for thousands” of generations “of them that fear Him.” The opposite is not perpetually and universally true of every wicked person, . . . but, together with their lands, they bequeath their children their sins and punishments, which is far worse than that legacy of leprosy that Joab left his issue (2 Sam. iii. 29).—Trapp.
An expression of trust like that in Eccles. ii. 26, that in the long run the anomalies of the world are rendered even.—Plumptre.
main homiletics of verse23.
Land and Its Tillers.
I. That untilled land(seeCritical Notes)possesses a latent power to produce food.There are many things in nature in which there exists a latent power to minister to man’s needs; but his hand must be put forth to arouse the sleeping power. There is heat in coal to warm him, but he must kindle the coal before it will put it forth. So in the earth, there are stores of life-giving power wrapped up in its bosom, but the hand of man must till it before it will yield him food. And it will yield food to the poor man as well as to the rich; his hard toil will be rewarded by receiving bread for his labour.
II. That though much food is to be got out of the land by the poor man, yet more is to be got out of it by the rich.This is implied in the contrast, though it is not directly expressed.—(SeeFausset’s Notein the Comments.) The poor man cannot spend so much upon his land as the rich man can. He can give little beside hard labour, while the man who possesses wealth can call in every appliance to increase the fruitfulness of the land. It is well known that the more liberally a land is farmed the more abundant will be the crop.
III. Yet want of judgment—i.e.,a sense of justice, often leads a rich man to neglect to cultivate his land so as to increase its power of yielding food.All landowners are responsible to God for a right use of His earth. Holding in their hands, as they do, the power of making food abundant or scarce, they have much for which to give an account to Him whose stewards they are. When they turn into hunting-grounds and parks for their own exclusive use acres of land which, if cultivated, would yield much food, and thus lighten the burdens of their poorer fellow-creatures, they “destroy it for want of judgment,” or “justice.”
outlines and suggestive comments.
By the rule of interpretation by the contrast of opposites, and by supplying the wanting member in one clause from its opposite expressed in the other clause, the sense is, “But there is food (wealth) possessed by rich men that is destroyed for want of honesty in its acquisition and its employment.” The poor man’s (honest) labour forms the contrast to the rich man’s “want of justice” in his acquisitions. Thenewlytilled land of the poor forms the contrast to the rich man’s possessions held for some time.—Fausset.
What is the practical or extended application? If talents lie inactive, or if their activity is not wisely directed, a rich harvest isdestroyed for want of judgment.The same ruin flows from a neglect of religious advantages. The harvest of grace withers into a famine. Slothful professor! rouse thyself totillthe ground; else thou wilt starve for want offood.Then let thy roused energy be directed by asound judgment;for want of which, the fruits of industry, temporal, intellectual, and spiritual, will run to waste.—Bridges.
There seems an interesting connection between the former verse and this. Talk ofinheritances!says the poor man, with his scanty means and daily hard toil;wehave no inheritance, eitherfromour fathers, orforour children: all is homely with us, and likely to remain so. Well, says Solomon, the poor man is not without his consolations, even of a temporal nature,“much food is in the tillage of the poor.”The maxim is not to be confined to the one kind of labour specified, but extends equally to all the different modes in which the poor make their daily bread. The poor peasant, who cultivates his plot industriously and by “the sweat of his brow,” will, through the Divine blessing, procure thereby an ample supply offoodfor himself and his family, and industry and tidy economy will make the cottage fireside and table snug and comfortable, and its lowly tenants will enjoy plenty, though in a plain and homely form. On the other hand, how often in the case of those who obtaininheritancesmay the poor see the saying verified, “There is that is destroyed for want ofjudgment.” By prodigality, by bad management, they waste their fortunes. Their lands are extensive, but unproductive; or if productive, the product is mis-spent and squandered; it goes, no one can tell how. To such persons the homely comfort of the poor is a just object of envy; far more, in many cases, than the wealth of the rich is to the poor.—Wardlaw.
The proverbial sense is, that a little is made much by God’s blessing and pains, and that much is made little by wickedness and carelessness.—Jermin.
main homiletics of verse24.
The Child and the Rod.
I. Pain is a necessary instrument in human training.The rod is to be included in the means of education. Some natures need an experience of pain to quicken theirmentalcapabilities. Sometimes children are like untilled land (seever. 23), they have large capabilities lying dormant, which will not awaken unless they are subjected to severe discipline and punished for their shortcomings. And what is necessary in intellectual training is also necessary in moral training. Children must be made to feel that pain is the outcome of transgression, and evil habits must if possible be crushed while in the bud. They can be overcome then at the expense of far less suffering than when they have taken firmer hold, and the pain is as nothing compared with that which the habits themselves will inflict if they are allowed to go on through life andenthrall the soul entirely. A thorn which has but just entered the skin can be extracted with a very small amount of suffering, even by an unskilful hand; if left for a few days it may produce a festering wound; if not extracted at all, it may end in mortification. The fear of suffering is also a greatpreventiveof sin. The Great Father of men uses it as an instrument to dissuade men from breaking His laws. He warns them, over and over again, of the suffering which they will bring upon themselves if they disobey His commands and their experience of the suffering that has followed sin in the past often leads them to avoid it in the future. And what is effectual in the training of men is effectual also with children. They will often avoid the repetition of an act which they know has brought them punishment before and will do so again. This fear of pain is not the highest motive for abstinence from wrong-doing, but in both the child and the man it may be the foundation of an upbuilding of character which shall by-and-by go on growing in goodness without this instrumentality.
II. That infliction of pain is compatible with the highest love, and is often a token of it.The author of the Epistle to the Hebrews tells us that God scourges His children whenever He sees that they need it. And yet they have become His children only by the exercise of His own Infinite love. But we know that He chastens not for His pleasure, but for our profit (Heb. xii. 10); that He has love and wisdom enough to see the “far-off interest of tears.” So it is the father or mother, who truly loves his or her child, who is willing to undergo the present suffering of inflicting pain in order to ensure a future blessing to their children. “You only have I known of all the families of the earth;thereforeI will punish you for your iniquities” (Amos iii. 2). What is true of the Divine parent is true also of the human. It follows—
III. That the neglect of chastisement is a proof of the want of real love.“He that spareth his rodhatethhis son.” What should we think of a father who would see his child bleed to death rather than bind up the wound, because in so doing he would inflict some present bodily pain upon the child, and some mental suffering upon himself? Or of the physician who would not use the knife to stop the progress of mortal disease because the patient shrinks from the incision, and he himself is averse to the sight of blood? We should say they were destroyers of life which had been entrusted to them to preserve. But what shall we say of a parent who is so fond of his child that he cannot inflict pain upon him now for deeds that, if repeated until they become habits, will ruin him for time and for eternity? Such sickly sentimentalism in a parent makes him unworthy of his name, and turns him who should have been his child’s highest earthly blessing into his direst curse. Many inmates of our gaols are there because they have been the victims of this so-called love; and when God sums up their misdeeds a large portion of the guilt will fall elsewhere than on the child cursed by such a parent.
outlines and suggestive comments.
Fond parents think it love (that spares the rod), but Divine wisdom calls it hatred.—John Howe.
The discipline of our children must commence with self-discipline. Nature teaches us to love them much. But we want a controlling principle to teach us to love them wisely. The indulgence of our children has its root in self-indulgence.—Bridges.
The phrase “betimes,” or “early in the morning,” admonisheth parents to procure the means of their children’s welfare before all other matters; and, as it were, as soon as they rise out of their beds. The Lord be merciful to us for the neglect of this duty; for if we have any worldly business to do we go first about that, and then teach and instruct our children at our leisure.O reckless carelessness about the chiefest matters! Oh that as we use to feed our children in the morning so we could once be brought to instruct them also betimes.—Muffet.
Justice must be observed in the correction of children. 1. That there is a fault committed. 2. That the fault so committed deserveth punishment. 3. That the punishment do not exceed the quality of the fault, which will otherwise seem to rage and revenge rather than to chastise for amendment.—Spencer.
To spare the rodin the first clause being opposed tochasteningin the second, by the rod must be meant not only that particular instrument of punishment, but everything besides that may prove the means of our correction and amendment. And by chastisement is here intended every means of correction, every means of effecting what we intend by chastening, whether it be reproof, restraint of liberty, disappointment of our children’s wills, or corporal punishment. Bylovingandhatingis not here meant the exerting actually those passions in the heart, for then the text would be untrue, but the acting agreeably to thereason,and not theblindnessof those passions; the producing such effects as are in God’s account, and in wise men’s too, and in our own when freed from partial prejudices; the consequences and fruits of love and hatred acting regularly, such as are commonly esteemed the effects of those two causes, whether they indeed proceed from them or no. For if we are to reckon of love or hatred by the effects, then it is easy to discern when parents hate their children, namely, when, through neglect or fondness, they permit them to enter on a course of ruin, and so let them fall into such miseries as the utmost hatred of their inveterate enemies could neither wish nor make them greater, whatever love there may be at the bottom. A mother is as much a murderess who stifles her child in a bed of roses as she that does it with a pillow-bear(pillow-case).The end and mischief is as great, though the means and instrument be not the same.—Bishop Fleetwood.
He that spareth the rod from his son maketh him to behis rod,wherewith he whips himself, and wherewith God whips both of them. It is better thy son should feel thy rod than thou feel the sorrow of his wicked life. And do nothatehim in not correcting of him, lest hehate theeby thy not correcting of him, and God shew His hatred against both by His wrath upon you.—Jermin.
The Koh-i-noor diamond, when it came into the Queen’s possession, was a mis-shapen lump. It was very desirable to get its corners cut off and all its sides reduced to symmetry; but no unskilful hand was permitted to touch it. Men of science were summoned to consider its nature and capabilities. They examined the form of its crystals and the consistency of its parts. They considered the direction of the grain, and the side on which it would bear a pressure. With their instructions, the jewel was placed in the hands of an experienced lapidary, and by long, patient, careful labour, its sides were ground down to the desired proportions. The gem was hard, and needed a heavy pressure; the gem was precious, and every precaution was taken which science and skill could suggest to get it polished into shape without cracking it in the process. The effort was successful. The hard diamond was rubbed down into forms of beauty, and yet sustained no damage by the greatness of the pressure to which it was subjected. “Jewels, bright jewels,” in the form of little children, are the heritage which God gives to every parent. They are unshapely and need to be polished; they are brittle and so liable to be permanently injured by the pressure; but they are stones of peculiar preciousness, and if they were successfully polished they would shine as stars for ever and ever, giving off, from their undimming edge, more brilliantly than other creatures can, the glory which they get from the Sun of Righteousness. Those who possess these diamonds in the rough shouldneither strike them unskilfully nor let them be uncut. . . . Prayer and pains must go together in this difficult work. Lay the whole case before our Father in heaven; this will take the hardness out of the correction, without diminishing its strength.—Arnot.
Correction is a kind of cure, saith the philosopher (Arist.Ethic.lib. ii.), the likeliest way to save the child’s soul; where, yet, saith Bernard, it is the care of the child that is charged upon the parent, not the cure, that is God’s work alone.—Trapp.
In order to form the minds of children, the first thing to be done isto conquer the will.To inform the understanding is a work of time, and must, with children, proceed by slow degrees, as they are able to bear it; but the subjecting of the will must be done at once,and the sooner the better;for, by neglecting timely correction, they will contract a stubbornness and obstinacy which are hardly ever conquered, and not without using such severity as would be as painful to me as to the child. I insist upon the conquering of the will betimes, because this is the only strong and rational foundation of a religious education, without which both precept and example will be ineffectual. But when this is thoroughly done, a child is capable of being governed by the wisdom and piety of its parents till its own understanding comes to maturity, and the principles of religion have taken root in the mind.—Mrs. S. Wesley.
It ishisrod that must be used, the rod of a parent, not the rod of a servant.—Henry.
main homiletics of verse25.
Want and Satisfaction.
I. The limited truth of the assertion in relation both to the righteous and the wicked.Read in the light of personal experience, and in the light of history, it is foundtrue,and is foundnot truein the case of the righteous. Elijahate to satisfactionbeside the brook Cherith, while many of his idolatrous countrymen sufferedwant.But Paul was often in hunger (2 Cor. xi. 27), while Nero lived in luxury. Christians have died from hunger, and others have had all their bodily wants supplied all their lives, and sometimes by most remarkable providential interpositions. Godliness is often profitable in this sense for the “life that now is” (1 Tim. iv. 8), but not always, and wickedness often brings a man literally to the condition of the prodigal when he would “fain have filled his belly with the husks that the swine did eat;” but many a wicked man, like him of the parable (Luke xvi. 19), have “fared sumptuously every day” from their cradle to their grave. To take our text as absolutely true of material food would be to contradict the testimony of Scripture itself.
II. Its absolute truth in relation to both characters.1.That wickedness gives a man no real satisfaction is a fact of experience.Men have testified over and over again that while they lived in sin they knew nothing of real heart-satisfaction and rest, and have borne witness to the words of St. Augustine, who spoke from experience when he said, “Thou hast made us for thyself, and the heart is restless till it finds rest in Thee.” A man who feeds upon unwholesome food is always in want, because that upon which he feeds is not suited to meet the demands of his physical frame, so it is with the soul of a godless man. 2.The history of the world testifies that it is so.The unrest of the ungodly is the explanation of much of the ambition, of many of the selfish schemes of some men, as well as the voluntary asceticism, the self-imposed sufferings of others. The key to both is that they have spent“money for that which is not bread, and their labour for that which satisfieth not”(Isa. lv. 2). The teaching of Christ confirms it. Want was the condition of the prodigal; he wanted the bread which hisfather’s home and table alone could supply. “Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, ye have no life in you” (John vi. 53). On this subject seeDr. Arnot’s remarkson verse 12 in the comments on that verse. 3.That there is satisfaction in sainthood is declared by Christ, and testified to be true by all His followers.The bread upon which a renewed man feeds is the Divine Word—the thoughts of God in the abstract, and the personal thought or wordJesus Christ.“As the living Father hath sent Me and I live by the Father, so he that eateth Me shall live by Me” (John vi. 57). And life is but another word for satisfaction. “He that believeth on Me, as the Scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water” (John vii. 38). Millions of men and women in all circumstances, both poor and rich in worldly wealth, have set their “seal that God is true” (John iii. 33) when He invites men to “hearken diligently unto Him, and eat that which is good, and let their souls delight themselves in fatness” (Isa. lv. 2).
outlines and suggestive comments.
One of the confidences of the wicked is that he, at least, has his pleasure in this world. The inspired Solomon denies it. He himself has left us an experience (Eccles. i). The righteous man seeks righteousness and peace, and these things do satisfy him. He seeks them, not as the world does, under a mistake, but for what they really are. He seeks them more and more as he knows them better, and shall be seeking them and enjoying them though eternal ages.“But the wicked,”even in his“belly,”wants. His delights, even of the more carnal sort, are not to be directly gazed at. If they are, they vanish. He cannot trust himself to theorise over any solid pleasures. So hollow are they that he would not live over again the history of the past, and so poor that he grows tired of enjoying them.—Miller.
Have he more or less, he hath that which satisfies him. Nature is content with little, grace with less. If Jacob may have but “bread to eat and raiment to put on” it sufficeth him; and this he dare be bold to promise himself. Beg his bread he hopes he shall not, but if he should, he can say with Luther (who made many a meal of a broiled herring) “Let us be content to fare hard here: have we not the bread that came down from heaven?”—Trapp.
To have to eat is the common mercy of God, who openeth His hand and feedeth all things living. To have enough to eat is a great mercy in itself, and greater than man’s nature, which hath never enough of sinning anyway deserveth; but to besatisfiedwith that which is enough is a peculiar property bestowed on the righteous. The belly of the wicked wanting enough to eat in some degree is punished for feeding too greedily on the husks of sin. Wanting all food is more hardly punished, and it may be for the hardness of their hearts in resisting all instruction; but that it shallwantthough it have enough, this is a severe punishment of wickedness, though thought to be the least. The wise man doth not speak of the want of themouthof the wicked as showing that the mouth should have sufficient, and yet the belly be punished with want in not being satisfied.—Jermin.
homiletic treatment of the chapter as a whole.
“The true Christian education of children.” (1) Its basis: God’s Word (vers. 1, 13, 14); (2) Its means: Love and strictness in inculcating God’s Word (vers. 1, 18, 24); (3) Its aim: Guidance of the youth to the promotion of his temporal and eternal welfare (vers. 2 sq. 16 sq.)—Lange’s Commentary.
Critical Notes.—1. Wise woman,or “woman’s wisdom.”2. He that walketh,etc., or, “He walketh in his uprightness who feareth Jehovah, and perverse in his ways is he that despiseth Him”(Delitzsch.)3. Rod,or “sceptre.” Zöckler reads, “In the mouth of a fool is a rodforhis pride.” Stuart, “Haughtiness is a rod,” etc.5.Miller here translates, “He who witnesses things correctly, does not lie; but of a deceived witness the very breath is lies” (Seehis commentson the verse).6.Rather, “The scorner has sought wisdom,” etc.7.Stuart translates the latter clause, “forthou hast not discerned,” etc.; Miller, “andthou shalt not know,” etc.8. Deceit,or “deception.”9.Many translators read this verse, “The sacrifice,” or “the sin-offering, makes a sport of,” or “mocks fools.” So Zöckler, Elster, Ewald, Stuart, Wordsworth, etc. Miller translates, “Sin makes a mock at fools.”Among,or “to.”10.Zöckler reads the latter clause, “Let no stranger,” etc. Miller renders the whole verse, “A knowing heart is a bitterness to itself; but with its joy it does not hold intercourse as an enemy.”11. Tabernacle,“tent.”13. The heart is sorrowful,or “will be” (perchance).14. Filled with,i.e.,“satisfied with.” Stuart translates the latter clause, “Away from him is the good man,”i.e.,he will keep aloof from the backslider.16. Rageth,“is presumptuous,” or “haughty.”21. Poor,or “suffering”(Delitzsch).24.Or, “It is a crown to the wise when they are rich, but the folly of fools remains folly”(Delitzsch).28.Miller translates, “In agreatpeople.”30. A sound heart,“a quiet heart.”Envy,“passion,” “perturbation.”32. Driven forth,or “thrust lower”(Miller).Delitzsch translates, “When misfortune befals him, the wicked is overthrown, but the righteous hath hope even in his death.”34.The Hebrew word forreproachmeans also “mercy.” Hence Gejer and Miller translate “Mercy for nations is the sin-offering,” the wordsinbeing often used to express the sin-offering.35.Miller reads, “The kindness of a king is a wise servant, but his wrath becomes one that bringeth shame” (Seehis comments).
main homiletics of verse1.
The House Builder and the House Destroyer.
I. A woman’s special sphere of work—her house.In this word is included all that in any way relates to the home life. Woman’s relation to it is three-fold. 1.The house—properly so-called—the interior of the building, is under her especial care.It is her temple of service, she is its priestess. As the female priestess in the Roman temple and the Hebrew priest in the temple of God were responsible for the internal order of their temples, so is every woman responsible for the order, the cleanliness, and comfort of the house of which she is the social priestess. It isherhouse, and in it she is expected to perform duties to which she is not called in any other house. Her oversight and presence, if not her actual labour, are indispensable to the proper arrangement of everything in it. 2.The affairs or business of the house is her special care.It is for her to preside over the domestic economy of the house—over that which we callhousekeeping.All transactions of this nature seem naturally to fall within her jurisdiction, and it looks odd and out of place to see them in other hands. 3.She is specially related to the life of the house.If she is a mother, she, above all others, has the charge of the children, her opportunities for influencing them are greater than those possessed by the father. Her life is always before them. Her words are treasured up and repeated by them. If she is a mistress, the servants are under her special jurisdiction and guidance.
II. The wise woman is a social architect.She “builds her house.” 1.Building implies a plan.No man sets about building a house without first having a plan, which is well considered in proportion to the wisdom of the builder. No argument-builder, with any wisdom, enters into an argument without first considering what he is going to do, and how he is going to do it, in order, if possible, to arrive at an unanswerable conclusion. So, to build a house in the sense of the text, there must be a plan of action. Every wise woman has an end in view in the government of her household. She has plans in relation to each department. She knows what she purposes to do before shebegins to do anything. 2.Building implies personal exertion on the part of the architect.All his work is not done when he has drawn the plan and issued his orders. He must see that they are executed. He must, if needful, show how they are to be carried out. In times of emergency the general of an army must—like Napoleon at the Bridge of Lodi—engage himself in a hand-to-hand fight with the enemy. So will a wise woman. She does not always say, “Go,” but sometimes, “Come.” She does not say, “Thatis the way,” when “Thisis the way” is necessary. She never contents herself with saying, “Do this,” without assuring herself thatit isdone. 3.Building implies a union of diverse materials to form a complete whole.Many and diverse materials are brought together to build a house. It would be impossible to erect a building of usefulness and beauty of one material alone. So a wise woman brings together many different elements, and blends them in due proportion, in order to make the home-life true, and beautiful, and good. Her wisdom is shown in developing the abilities and capacities of each member of the household, so that each may contribute to the strength and comfort of the whole. Upon the female head of the house, more than upon anyone else, depends the unity, peace, and concord of this temple of living stones.
III. An unwise woman, who is at the head of a house, caricatures her position by her conduct.Her position implies that she is a builder-up. Her conduct has the effect of pulling down. A clown upon a kingly throne is not more out of place than a foolish woman who bears the name of mistress, wife, and mother. The reins are in her hands, but she does not know how to guide the chariot; the materials are in her possession but she has no skill to use them. She is not only no centre of unity, she is a source of discord; she not only cannot build the house herself but she makes it impossible for anybody else to do anything towards it. She is not only no “crown to her husband,” but she is “rottenness to his bones” (chap. xii. 4).
outlines and suggestive comments.
A good wife is heaven’s last best gift to a man; his angel of mercy; minister of graces innumerable; his gem of many virtues; his casket of jewels; her voice, his sweetest music; her smiles, his brightest day; her kiss, the guardian of his innocence; her arms, the pale of his safety; the balm of his health, the balsam of his life; her industry, his surest wealth; her economy, his safest steward; her lips, his faithful counsellors; her bosom, the softest pillow of his cares; and her prayers, the ablest advocates of heaven’s blessings on his head.—Jeremy Taylor.
The following is a translation of a Welsh Triad:—A good wife is modest, void of deceit, and obedient; pure of conscience, gracious of tongue, and true to her husband; her heart not proud, her manners affable, and her bosom full of compassion for the poor, labouring to be tidy, skilful of hand, and fond of praying to God; her conversation amiable, her dress decent, and her house orderly; quick of hand, quick of eye, and quick of understanding; her face benignant, her head intelligent, and provident, neighbourly, gentle, and of a liberal way of thinking; able in directing, providing what is wanting, and a good mother to her children; loving her husband, loving peace, and God.—New Handbook of Illustration.
“House”meansall interests.“Has built” is preterite. If all interests are prosperous at present, it has been the work of the past. The second clause wisely returns to the future, which we commonly translate as the present, because the act is steadily running on, and includes both the present and the future.Wisdom in womanhas builther house,beginning a long time ago; but“folly”in woman is an affair of the present. If it had been at work long, it would have had no house to pull down. As entering upon thework of the wise, ungodly mothers tear down the house which generations of the righteous have been slowly building. The grand comment, however, is that this womanly wisdom or wise woman, like the woman of grace (chap. ix. 16), or woman of folly (chap. ix. 13) has an allegoric meaning. Women do much toward building up. But the text means more, that“wisdom,”as personified, is the only builder of a“house,”and“folly,”as impenitence, all that can pull it down.—Miller.
Only the characteristic wisdom ofwoman(not that of the man) is able to “build itself a house,”i.e.,to make possible a household in the true sense of the word; for the woman alone has the capacity circumspectly to look through the multitude of individual household wants, and carefully to satisfy them; and also because the various activities of the members of a family can be combined in a harmonious unity only by the influence, partly regulative, and partly fostering, of a feminine character, gently but steadily efficient. But where there is wanting to the mistress of a house this wisdom attainable only by her, and appropriate only to her, then that is irrecoverably lost which first binds in a moral fellowship those connected by relationship of blood—that which makes the house, from a mere place of abode, to be the spiritual nursery of individuals organically associated.—Elster.
The fullest recognition that has as yet met us of the importance of woman, for good or evil, in all human society.—Plumptre.
With calm, clear eyes, deep insight, ready sympathy; active, without bustle; alert, without over-anxious vigilance; ignorant perchance of æsthetic rules, yet with subtle touches transforming into a fine picture the home-spun canvas, and with soft fairy music blending into harmony the noises of the day; apathetic about stocks and shares, and far-off millions; but with a keen appreciation of new sovereigns and no disdain for sixpences; a mere formalist, if professing interest in city improvements and parochial reforms, but as touching torn curtains and threadbare carpets much exercised in spirit; sure that the commotions of Europe will all come right, but shedding bitter tears at any outburst of juvenile waywardness, and praying earnestly, “Oh, that Ishmael may live before thee!” with small belief in the transcendental philosophy, and allowing that much may be said on both sides, but in the interpretation of the Ten Commandments positive, unreasoning, absolute; in theology hopelessly confounding the theology of the schools, and in an innocent way adopting half the heresies, but drinking direct from the fountain that living water which others prefer, chalybeate, through the iron pipe, or ærated from the filtering pond, and in a style which Calvin or Grotius might equally envy teaching the little ones the love of the Saviour; the angel of the house moulds a family for heaven, and by dint of holy example, and gentle control, her early and most efficacious ministry goes farther than any other to lay the foundations of future excellence, and train up sons and daughters for the Lord Almighty.—Dr. Jas. Hamilton.
St. Ambrose noteth that when God asked Abraham, “Where is thy wife, Sarah?”—He was not ignorant where Sarah was; but that He asked the question that by Abraham’s answer, “Behold, in the tent,” He might teach women where they ought to be—namely, in the house, and not so much in the house as in the affairs of the house, making ready provision to entertain God as Sarah was.—Jermin.
The modest virgin, the prudent wife, or the careful matron, are much more serviceable in life than petticoated philosophers, blustering heroines, or virago queens. She who makes her husband and her children happy, who reclaims the one from vice and trains the other to virtue, is a much greater character than ladies described in romance, whose whole occupation is to murder mankind with shafts from their quiver or their eyes.—Goldsmith.
main homiletics of verse2.
Fearing and Despising the Lord.
I. A wholesome fear.“The fear of the Lord.” When we fear to grieve or offend a person because of his or her goodness the fear does not spring from dread of their power, but from our high estimate of their character. It may exist where there is no power to injure. Strong men have sometimes had this fear for little children. There is also a fear which may spring from a conception of both goodness and power. It is the feeling which a child has for a good parent. There is a consciousness of the parent’s goodness, and also a consciousness of his power to enforce his authority. In proportion as these elements are combined in relation to human creatures the fear which men have for them is wholesome—is salutary. Benevolence alone tends to weaken the fear—to lessen the reverence. Power alone is likely to produce hatred as well as fear. But when benevolence is linked with power it looks doubly attractive. The fear which a good man has for God arises from a conception of both the Infinite power and Infinite love of the Divine Father. If the first were wanting it would lack reverence; if the latter it would be a fear that “hath torment.”
II. The proof that a man possesses this wholesome fear.“He walksuprightly.” Fear is a feeling of the mind. It can only be proved to exist when it brings forth action. Uprightness of life is an unanswerable proof that a man speaks truly when he says that he fears the Lord. God asks for no greater (Gen. xvii. 1, 2). This demonstration does not consist in a single act of integrity, but in a constant succession of acts, in a habit of life. It is awalk.(On “walking uprightly,” see on chap.x. 9, 10, page 153.)
III. The character of a perverse man—of a man whose walk is not upright.He is a “despiser of God.” His life proves it, even if his words deny it. We despise that to which we do not attach a due value. All men who perversely refuse to accept God’s plan of salvationdespiseboth the “riches of His goodness and forbearance and long-suffering,” which are intended to “lead them to repentance” (Rom. ii. 4), and also that “power of His anger,” of which no man can form an estimate (Psalm xc. 11).
outlines and suggestive comments.
I. Grace and sin in their true colours.Grace reigning is a reverence of God. Sin reigning is no less a contempt of God; inthis,more than in anything, sin appears exceeding sinful, that it despises God, whom angels adore.II. Grace and sin in their true light.By this we know a man that has grace, and the fear of God, reigning in him, he makes conscience of his actions, is faithful to God and man. But on the contrary, he that wilfully follows his own way, is a wicked man, however he pretend to devotion.—Henry.
A man walking over a field has a certainlevelcourse (if there be such) that he naturally follows. If he walk notlevel,or if he turn constantly out of his way, men think him either drunk or mad. It is this reasonable instinct of our nature that our text embodies. We do not sayuprightness,but“levelness,”for it agrees with the idea of walking. Such meaning is, that folly is self-condemned; that if a man would put one foot before another, or mentally move as he himself thinks level and right, he would practically“fear”God; but that he drops out of his own “way,” and walks brokenly, and with change of gait. It is careless to definefearas anything besidefearitself. A holyfear,however, is not terror; and yet a being afraid more really and more tremblingly often than the sinner. It is remarkable that when men have escaped wrath they begin most healthily tofearit, and when men are faithlesseven to their own ways, they despise the most the law of the Almighty. This text, like many another, is pregnant. Pregnant texts are ambidextrous, and the alternative meanings, though distinct, are mutually embracing. Another sense is grammatical and equivalent in thought. It would read“His”levelness, andHisways, referring to Jehovah. It is only substituting capitals. It would mean,“He that walks in God’s level track fears Him; but he that is turned out of God’s way,”that is, he that has got out of the line for which he was made, instead offearing,as he might, chooses that horrid moment for despising God. He would rank this higher than an ambiguity; for God’s ways and man’s ways, when they arelevelnessand suited to our step, are the same blessed track, for we are created in the image of God.—Miller.
He that walketh so that the sincerity of his heart maketh the uprightness to behis,for a feigned uprightness is of the devil, not a man’s own. God is feared where goodness is embraced. And, as St. Basil speaketh, the despising of the laws is the reproach of the lawmaker.—Jermin.
Here is consolation to faithful men, though not void of infirmities, against the temptations of Satan, the calumniations of wicked men, and the fears of their own hearts. None are so much accused of contempt against God as those which are most religious. The devil seeketh to persuade them there is nothing in them but fraud. Sinful men, when they can charge against them no misdemeanours or lewdness of life, exclaim that they are hypocrites, and many doubts arise in their own souls by reason of the manifold imperfections of their lives. But are they desirous impartially to keep every commandment, if their power were answerable to their will? Do they endeavour to please God, though they cannot do it perfectly? Then they are upright in their ways, and walk in the law of the Lord; then God testifieth of them here, that they are of the number of them that fear Him, and elsewhere He testifieth that all those that fear Him they are blessed.—Dod.
main homiletics of verse3.
Speech a Rod.
I. Speech is a rod because it is emblematic of power.A rod is an emblem of position and authority. It represents more than it is. Speech is a sign of man’s superiority to animal creation. Words in themselves are not much, but they are mighty because of what they represent, viz., the soul of man. The sceptre of a king may not in itself be of much value, but it is of worth because of what it signifies.
II. Speech will be man’s destruction or salvation according to his character.The mouth of the fool represents the soul of the fool. We have before noted the unwisdom and danger of him who is too proud to receive instruction (see chap.xi. 1, page 192;xiii. 18, etc.). His proud boasting speech will by-and-by become the cause of his chastisement—a rod for his own back. And the godly wise speech of the wise will be the means of his preservation and honour (See on chap.xii. 5–8, page 255,vers. 17–19, page 274).
outlines and suggestive comments.
The fool’s rod of pride is histongue,wherewith he assails and strikes others. But it recoils on himself. The instrument of punishment is called a rod, not a sword, to denote the contumely with which the proud shall be visited.—Fausset.
Therod in the mouthis often sharper than the rod in the hand (Jer. xviii. 18). Sometimes it strikes against God (Exod. v. 2; Psa. xii. 3, 4; 2 Kings xix. 10); sometimes it is “the rod of His anger against His people” (Isa. x. 5) permitted (Rev. xiii. 5) yet restrained(Psalm cxxv. 3). Always in the end it isthe rodfor thefoolhimself (Psa. lxiv. 8).—Bridges.
The“mouth”is the great word in the Proverbs for our whole earthly agency. The word translated“rod”is the favourite emblem of sovereignty. A fool’s life-work or energy is his sovereignty, by which he would carve his way. But it is a“sceptre of pride.”His kingship is a notion of pride. But the“lips of the wise”do really win, and do really govern. They have a true sceptre which shall really guard them.—Miller.
The lips of the wise preserve them. 1.From doing wrong to others,in their loving mildness. 2.From suffering wrong from others,by a wary heedfulness. 3.From the rod of God’s anger,in a humble craving pardon for their errors. The former part of this verse St. Gregory applieth unto arrogant preachers, who desire more sharply to reprove their afflicted hearers, than sweetly to comfort them, for they study more how they may condemn evil things by blaming of them, than how they may commend good things by praising them. They always desire those things which, by fierce chiding, they may beat upon.—Jermin.
main homiletics of verse4.
The Clean Crib.
I. An empty and clean crib does not fulfil the end for which it was made.It was made for use; it was made to hold food for the ox, who earns, by his labour, the means of keeping it full. When God first created this world, and saw it lie before him in all its unsullied beauty, He said that itwas very good.But, beautiful as it was, it was not to remain simply beautiful—it was to fulfil a higher purpose: it was to be a dwelling-place for man. And God gave it into the hands of men to build cities in it, to dig quarries in it, to mar in many respects its first beauty and order, but to make it of more real worth as man’s dwelling, as his market, as his workshop. If man had never been compelled by hunger to put forth his hand and blacken its surface, and spoil some of its lovely landscapes, it would not have become what it now is, his training-school for a higher life. It would have been in perfect order and beauty, but it would not have fulfilled the purpose for which it was created. So with a large manufactory. No doubt it looks cleaner and fresher on the day that it comes from the hands of the builder than it does when its chimneys are pouring forth smoke and its floors are covered with grimy machinery, but if its owner were to build it simply to keep it clean by keeping it empty, he would be looked upon as a madman. So with the crib. So long as there are no oxen to use it, it can be kept empty and clean, but there is no use in having a crib unless it is put to its use.
II. If men want wealth they must not mind the labour and trouble of getting it.This seems to be the idea of the proverb. A clean crib can be kept, if there are no oxen to use it; but without oxen, in Solomon’s days (when wealth was chiefly gained by agriculture) there would be no increase. Many men would like to be rich, but they do not like the means by which alone they can obtain it. They would like to handle the golden coins, but they do not like to soil their fingers with honest toil to get it. They would like to gather in a harvest in the sunny autumn, but they do not like to plough and sow in the days of winter. They would like the increase which the ox would bring, but they do not like the trouble of cleaning his crib and caring for his wants. But this is not possible. The toil and the increase go together; the labour must come before the wealth, whether in relation to the body, the soul, or the spirit.
outlines and suggestive comments.
In its liberal meaning a household proverb, “Labour has its rough unpleasant side, yet it ends in profit.” But here, as elsewhere, there may be a meaning below the surface. The life of contemplation may seem purer, “cleaner,” than the life of action. The outer business of the world brings its cares and disturbances, but also “much increase.” There will be a sure reward of that activity in good works for him who goes, as with “the strength of the ox,” to the task to which God calls him.—Plumptre.
The literal sense of this verse seems to commend the care and pains of tillage. Or else we may take the words as shewing how the want of any needful instrument denieth the success of that which is desired, though other things be ready. But the words are more useful when taken by way of application. Wherefore, in God’s tillage, for “we are God’s husbandry” (1 Cor. iii. 9), the oxen are His ministers—they are, as Jerome speaketh, oxen that bear the yoke of the Lord after whose steps he that soweth seed is blessed; yea, God Himself is pleased to be joined in yoke with them, for they are labourers with God in His husbandry. They plough up the fallow ground by preaching and pressing repentance, they bring the corn into the barn by bringing home wandering sinners into the bosom of the Church; they tread out the grains from the chaff and straw by subduing the corruptions of nature, and separating it from the graces of God’s Spirit. Now, where these oxen are wanting, there the room will be empty, swept andcleanfor him to enter in, who quickly will fill it with the filth of the corruption of death. But, by the pains of the minister, much increase there is of corn in the field of the Lord—much increase is there of the seed of grace in the hearts of the people, and of the fruits of godliness in their lives.—Jermin.
The ox is the most profitable of all the beasts used in husbandry. Except merely forspeed,he is almost in every respect superior to the horse. He is longer-lived, scarcely liable to disease, steady, lives, fattens, and maintains his strength on what a horse will not eat, and when he is worn out in labour his flesh is good for food, his horns useful, and his hide almost invaluable.—A. Clarke.
For Homiletics on verse 5 see on chapterxii. 17, 19, page 274; also onverse 25of this chapter.
outlines and suggestive comments.
The man notwalking in His levelness(seeverse 2) shows by his staggering that he does not“witness things correctly.”(SeeCritical Notesfor Miller’s translation of this verse.) The grand truth is here broached that the man wholiesdoes not see correctly. This is a universal doctrine. Moreover,liesstand for all sin. All sin, therefore, flows from being deceived.A deep moral blindness is the source and measure of all possible transgression.Several proverbs depend for their significance upon this meaning, a“deceived”rather than adeceiving “witness.”—Miller.
He that for conscience sake doth speak the truth in common and small matters, he will also speak the truth in things of greater importance; and he that is not ashamed of a lie in his private dealing, he will also without shame bear false witness before a judge. Here, then, we be taught in the least things to ensure our tongues to speak the truth, so shall we be preserved from false-witness bearing, for the Lord would not have us daily with sin. . . . If we would not have Him punish our lesser frailties with greater sins—if we would not have Him punish our secret sins with open and notorious offences, then let us be afraid to tell a lie in the very lightest and most secret causes.—Greenham.
main homiletics of verse6.
Seeking, but Not Finding.
I. A contradictory character—a scorner in quest of wisdom.It would be strange to hear a man ask advice of a physician whose opinion he held in contempt, or to ask guidance of a traveller whose judgment and ability he despised. It would be obvious that the advice given or the rules laid down would not be followed. So a scorner, while he seeks wisdom, scorns the only method of becoming wise. He asks advice of those whom he despises, he inquires the way to wisdom, while he holds the road to it in utter contempt. The antithesis of the verse implies that he does not find wisdom because he lacks understanding—because he finds it above his comprehension. Two children may be equally ignorant of knowledge, but if one has the desire and the will to acquire it, and the other has not, what was hard to both at first will only continue hard to him who despises knowledge. So the scorner fails to find wisdom because he does not value it enough to make an effort to acquire it. The spirit in which he seeks is an effectual barrier against his finding.
II. A man of teachable spirit is the only one who will ever find wisdom.The man of understanding knows its value, and therefore scorns neither it nor the means of attaining it. Therefore, to him “knowledge” becomes “easy.” A clever man and a dull one may be pupils of the same master, but if the clever one thinks that he needs no instruction and the dull one feels his need, what was above the comprehension of both at first will become easy to the teachable scholar, while it will remain out of the reach of the self-sufficient one. Even a dull but willing pupil will learn faster than one who has intellectual ability, but lacks the docile spirit. A seeker of wisdom in any department of knowledge must become in relation to it as a child before his teacher; he must acknowledge his ignorance, and be willing to submit to the conditions of acquiring knowledge. The same spirit is indispensable for the attainment of moral wisdom. Those who wouldlearnof Christ must take hisyoke;those who would know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, must be willing to do His will (Matt. xi. 29; John vii. 17).
outlines and suggestive comments.
The Greeks sought after wisdom, but Christ crucified was foolishness to them. They were already too wise to admit of the preaching of the cross, and scorned a tent-maker who would inform them of new doctrines which had never entered into their own minds, and who would prove them by other methods than their favourite ones—eloquence and reasoning.—Lawson.
There are two descriptions of scorners. There are “scorners” oftruth,frompride of intellect;and there are “scorners” ofauthority,from thepride of self-will.They are nearly allied, and they are frequently united. It is the former that is chiefly meant here, seeing the subject isknowledgerather thanduty.—Wardlaw.
A page of Hebrew, what is it to a child? It is absolutely nothing. But the whole was easy to the Hebrew eye.“A scorner has sought wisdom.”Notice the past sense. Every scornerhas doneit. Take any impenitent man. We may be sure some day or other he has sought spiritual intelligence. But he has done it selfishly. Moreover, he has done it fitfully and feebly. He has groped. He has made a sort of blind man’s pass for knowledge, and has come back with the averment that there is no such thing. Light issimple, “easy;”literally,lightas opposed toheavy;light is obvious; nothing can be more so; but then, as the inspired man advises us, it is only“easy”to the“discerning,”or“understanding,”man.—Miller.
It is not by a one-sided action of the thinking power, but only by undivided consecration of the whole nature to God, which therefore involves, above all other things, a right relation of the spiritual nature to Him, that true knowledge in Divine things can be attained. The wise man, however, who has found the true beginning of wisdom, in bowing his inmost will before the Divine, not as something to be mastered by the understanding, but as something to be simply sought as a grace by the renunciation of the very self; he can easily on this ground, which God’s own power makes productive, attain a rich development of the understanding.—Elster.
Wisdom estrangeth herself from the scorner, as a gentlewoman hideth herself from a suitor whom she fancieth not. . . . As a loving spouse, when he cometh to the door, whom she affecteth, will show herself to him, and run to meet him, so the grace of God’s spirit offereth itself, and draweth near unto the humble and modest.—Muffet.
By knowledge we may understand, not the knowledge of the letter floating in the brain, and flowing even at the tongue’s end (which, indeed, is not worth the name of knowledge); but the true understanding of the word taught by the Spirit, which entereth into the heart, and worketh on the affections, frameth to obedience, and assureth of everlasting life. This, indeed, is healthful knowledge, which the scorners, though they seek, shall never obtain. And hereunto doth our Saviour give witness, when He saith:“Many shall seek to enter in, and cannot.”—Greenham.
The finding of wisdom is that which needeth help from others. More eyes than the eyes of one are requisite unto it. And, therefore, ascorner,who seeketh it with scorning of another’s help; yea, who scorneth not only the help of man, but of God also, how can he ever find it? If it be offered to him by another, he will not accept it, and if he seek it never so much in his own ways he shall not obtain it. It is, says Clemens Alexandrinus, to draw out threads and to spin nothing; and, therefore, whensoever he shall stand in need of it, he shall not find it, for wisdom and a scorner shall never meet. Butto him that understandethhis own defects and infirmities, to him that understandeth how to make use of other men’s abilities, and that in the seeking of wisdom, the assistance of God is chiefly to be sought, to him it is a short course to come to it; to him it is an easy matter to obtain it.—Jermin.
It is the constant profession of those who read the Bible that they are seeking truth. Their likeness is taken here from life. They seek wisdom, but do not find it. They want the first qualification of a philosopher, a humble and teachable spirit. There is a race of men among us at the present day who scorn bitterly against faith’s meek submission to God’s revealed will. The divinity, they say, is in every man; which means that every man is a god unto himself. It is, in its essence, a reproduction of the oldest rebellion. A creature discontented with the place which his Maker has given him strives to make himself a god. If men really were independent beings, it would be right to assert and proclaim their independence; but as matters really stand, this desperate kicking against authority becomes the exposure of weakness, and the punishment of pride. We are not our own cause and our own end; we are not our own lords. We are in the hands of our Maker, and under the law of our Judge. Our only safety lies in the submission to the rightful authority and obedience to the true law. The problem for man is, not to reject all masters, but accept the rightful one. . . . In these days, when the pendulum is often seen swinging from scepticism over to superstition, and from superstition back to scepticism again, we would do well to remember that there is truth between these extremes, and that in truth alone lies safety for all the interests of men. . . . I see two men near each otherprostrate on the ground and bleeding, while one man stands between them, with serenest aspect looking to the skies. Who and what are these? The two prostrate forms are superstition and unbelief. Superstition bowed down to worship his idol, and cut his flesh with stones to atone for his soul’s sin. Unbelief scorned to be confined, like an inferior creature, to the earth, and was ever leaping up in the hope of standing on the stars. Exhausted by his efforts he fell, and the fall bruised him, so that he lay as low as the neighbour whom he despised. He who stands between them neither bowed himself to the ground, nor attempted to scale the heavens. He neither degraded himself beneath a man’s place, nor attempted to raise himself above it. He abode on earth, but he stood erect there. He did not proudly profess to be, but meekly sought to find God. This man understands his place, and feels his need; to him, therefore, knowledge is easy. To him that hath shall be given. He has the beginning of wisdom, and he will reach in good time its glad consummation. “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom.”—Arnot.
There arefourthings that particularly unfit a man for such a task (the finding of wisdom), viz., a veryproud,or a verysuspicioustemper,false witorsensuality.The two last generally belong to the man whom we call a scorner, the first are essential to him and inseparable from him. . . .Pridemakes a man see sufficient in his own eyes for all manner of speculations and inquiries, and hence it comes that he, not being duly qualified for every search, is fain to take up with light and superficial accounts of things, and then, what he wants in true knowledge, to make up in downright assurance. By consequence it gives him just enough understanding to raise an objection, but not enough to lay it; which, as it is the most despicable, so it is also the most dangerous state of mind a man can be in. He that is but half a philosopher is in danger of being an atheist; a half physician is apt to turn empiric. In all matters of speculation or practice, he that knows but little of them, and is very confident of his own strength, is more out of the way of true knowledge than if he knows nothing at all. And in this character there is always a strange and unreasonablesuspicion,by which he doubts everything he hears, and distrusts every man he converses with. He is so afraid of having his understanding imposed upon in matters of faith that he stands aloof from all propositions of that kind, whether true or false. Which is, as if a man should refuse to receive any money because there is a great deal of counterfeit; or resolve not to make friendship with any man, because many are not to be trusted. A third part of a scorner’s character is afalse wit,a way of ridiculing arguments instead of confuting them, and afourthissensuality.That this, too, does for the most part accompany a contempt of religion, I appeal to the observation and experience of every man.—Bp. Atterbury.
He seeks it as a coward seeks his adversary, with a hope that he shall not find him; or as a man seeks his false coin, which he hath no joy to look upon. “What is truth?” said Pilate in a jeer to Christ, but stayed not the answer. “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?” said the carnal Capernaites (John vi. 52), and away then went—who, if they had stayed out the sermon, might have been satisfied on the point. . . . He that comes to the fountain to fill his pitcher must first wash it, and then put the mouth of it downwards to take up water. So he that would have heavenly knowledge must first quit his heart of corrupt affections and high conceits, and then humble himself at God’s feet, “everyone to receive His words” (Deut. xxxiii. 3).—Trapp.
main homiletics of the paragraph.—Verses7–9.
The Fool and the Prudent Man.
I. How to know a fool.The dead carcase that is above ground is its own evidence. No one needs to inquire what it is, or where it is. The pestilential atmosphere which surrounds it tells its own tale. So a fool is a self-evidencing person. His words proclaim his character. He says nothing that is worth saying. Nothing that can enlighten a man’s mind or better his nature is to be found in his conversation. “The lips of knowledge” are not with him. But there is not simply the absence of wisdom. He is not a negative character. No man’s soul can remain like an empty house; if wisdom is absent sin comes in and takes up the abode. Thefoolis also aknave.“The folly of fools is deceit,” and in this also he will sooner or later be his own evidence. Like particles of poisonous matter, hisdeceit,as well as his ignorance, will make its presence known. His words will sooner or later betray his untruthful character. He will also be known by hisprofanity.“Fools make a mock at sin.” The most perfect beings in God’s universe regard sin as a serious matter, knowing, as they do, the bitter fruits which spring from one sinful action. God Himself treats sin as a terrible and awful reality. Yet men are to be found who make light of it, and others so depraved as to laugh at that which God regards with abhorrence, and visits with retribution.