The words of Agur the son of Jakeh; the revelation: the man says to Ithiel, to Ithiel and Ucal:
Parallel Translations
-
The words of Agur the son of Jakeh; the revelation: the man says to Ithiel, to Ithiel and Ucal:
-
The words of Agur the son of Jakeh, even the prophecy: the man spake unto Ithiel, even unto Ithiel and Ucal,
-
The words of Agur the son of Jakeh; the burden. The man saith unto Ithiel, unto Ithiel and Ucal:
Cross-references (2)
Passages linked to Proverbs 30:1 in the Treasury of Scripture Knowledge, ordered by reader-vote popularity; verse text shown in World English Bible.
- Proverbs 31:1 The words of king Lemuel; the revelation which his mother taught him.
- 2 Peter 1:19-21 We have the more sure word of prophecy; and you do well that you heed it, as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns, and the morning star arises in your hearts: knowing this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is of private interpretation. For no prophecy ever came by the will of man: but holy men of God spoke, being moved by the Holy Spirit.
Cross-references from openbible.info (CC BY 4.0)
Explain this verse (22 sources)
Historical commentary, presented as a primary source — not an endorsement.
Private notes
Saved on this device only — never synced or sent anywhere.
Geneva Bible translators 1599 · Public Domain Who was an excellent man in virtue and knowledge…
Who was an excellent man in virtue and knowledge in the time of Solomon.
Which were Agur’s scholars or friends.
Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain.
John Trapp 1656 · Public Domain Pro 30:1 The words of Agur the son of…
Pro 30:1 The words of Agur the son of Jakeh, [even] the prophecy: the man spake unto Ithiel, even unto Ithiel and Ucal,
Ver. 1. The words of Agur the son of Jakeh.] The Vulgate renders, Verba Congregantis filii Vomentis, taking these proper names for appellatives, as if the penman of this chapter meant to tell us that he would here give us his sacred collectanies or miscellanies, such as he had taken up from the mouths of wisest men, who had vomited or cast them up, in a like sense as that painter in Aelian drew Homer vomiting, and all the other poets licking it up. {a} This Agur, whether he lived in Solomon’s days or Hezekiah’s, was an excellent man, as the word Gheber here used imports; Vir bonus et prudens, minus tamen clarus (as one saith of Jesse, David’s father), a godly, wise man, though nothing be elsewhere spoken of him in Scripture. Some think that, being requested by Ithiel and Ucal, two of his disciples, to give them a lesson, Socrates-like he answered, Hoc unum scio, quod nihil scio: This one thing I know, that I know nothing: "Surely I am more brutish than any man," sc., of myself, further than taught of God; for every man is a brute by his own understanding, as Jeremiah hath it. {Jer 10:8} But I rather incline to those that take Ithiel and Ucal for Christ, whose goodness and power - those two pillars of a Christian’s faith, as Jachin and Boaz were of Solomon’s temple - are by these two names deciphered, and whom he propounds as the matter of his prophecy. Now, because sense of misery must precede sense of mercy, neither can any be welcome to Christ, but "the weary and heavy laden"; therefore he first bewails his own brutishness - fetching it up as low as Adam fallen, {Pro 30:2} and aggravating it in that he had not yet acquired better abilities. {Pro 30:3} Next he flees to Ithiel and Ucal, by the force of a particular faith - Ithiel, God with me, and Ucal, God Almighty, through whom I can do all things. This, this was the right ready way of coming to Christ; and him that thus cometh he will in no wise cast out. {Joh 6:37} There is a good interpreter, {b} that, paralleling this text with Jer 9:23-24, reads it thus: A gathering together of the words of Agur, the son of Jakeh. Let the excellent man say, ‘Let God be with me, let God be with me, and I shall prevail.’
Read full note →
{a} Aelian, Hist. var.
{b} Muffet.
John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Matthew Poole 1685 · Public Domain Agur the son of Jakeh; a person so called,…
Agur the son of Jakeh; a person so called, as appears from the designation of his own and his father’s name, who lived either in Solomon’s time, or rather afterwards, and was famous in his generation for wisdom, and piety, and prophecy; and therefore his proverbs were thought fit to be added to those of Solomon, either by those men of Hezekiah, mentioned Pro 25:1, or by some other. But that this should be meant of Solomon may easily be supposed, but cannot be proved; nor is it probable, as being contrary both to the style of the whole chapter, and to the matter of some part of it, as Pro 30:7-9, which agrees not to Solomon; and to the laws of good interpretation, one of which is, that all words should be taken in their most natural and proper sense, when there is no evidence nor necessity of understanding them improperly and figuratively, which is the present case.
The prophecy; the prophetical instruction; for as the prophets were public preachers as well as foretellers of things to come, so their sermons, no less than their predictions, are commonly called their prophecies.
Read full note →
Unto Ithiel and Ucal; two friends, or disciples, and contemporaries of Agur, called by those names, who having a great and just opinion of his wisdom, desired his instructions. Others, concerning Ithiel and Ucal; which they understand of Christ, called
Ithiel, which signifies God with me, and answers to Immanuel, which is God with us; and
Ucal, which signifies power or prevalency. But if he had meant this of Christ, why should he design him such obscure and ambiguous names, as if he would not be understood? Why did he not call him by the name of Shiloh or Messiah, or some other Scripture title belonging and ascribed to him? Besides, this interpretation agrees not with the contents of this chapter, wherein there is only a short and occasional mention of Christ, but the chapter consists in a manner wholly of counsels and sentences of a quite other kind.
Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Matthew Henry 1710 · Public Domain Some make Agur to be not the name of…
Some make Agur to be not the name of this author, but his character; he was a collector (so it signifies), a gatherer, one that did not compose things himself, but collected the wise sayings and observations of others, made abstracts of the writings of others, which some think is the reason why he says (Pro 30:3), "I have not learned wisdom myself, but have been a scribe, or amanuensis, to other wise and learned men." Note, We must not bury our talent, though it be but one, but, as we have received the gift, so minister the same, if it be but to collect what others have written. But we rather suppose it to be his name, which, no doubt, was well known then, though not mentioned elsewhere in scripture. Ithiel and Ucal are mentioned, either, 1. As the names of his pupils, whom he instructed, or who consulted him as an oracle, having a great opinion of his wisdom and goodness. Probably they wrote from him what he dictated, as Baruch wrote from the mouth of Jeremiah, and by their means it was preserved, as they were ready to attest it to be his, for it was spoken to them; they were two witnesses of it. Or, 2. As the subject of his discourse. Ithiel signifies God with me, the application of Immanuel, God with us. The word calls him God with us; faith appropriates this, and calls him "God with me, who loved me, and gave himself for me, and into union and communion with whom I am admitted." Ucal signifies the Mighty One, for it is upon one that is mighty that help is laid for us. Many good interpreters therefore apply this to the Messiah, for to him all the prophecies bear witness, and why not this then? It is what Agur spoke concerning Ithiel, even concerning Ithiel (that is the name on which the stress is laid) with us, Isa 7:14.
Three things the prophet here aims at: -
Read full note →
I. To abase himself. Before he makes confession of his faith he makes confession of his folly and the weakness and deficiency of reason, which make it so necessary that we be guided and governed by faith. Before he speaks concerning the Saviour he speaks of himself as needing a Saviour, and as nothing without him; we must go out of ourselves before we go into Jesus Christ. 1. He speaks of himself as wanting a righteousness, and having done foolishly, very foolishly. When he reflects upon himself he owns, Surely I am more brutish than any man. Every man has become brutish, Jer 10:14. But he that knows his own heart knows so much more evil of himself than he does of any other that he cries out, "Surely I cannot but think that I am more brutish than any man; surely no man has such a corrupt deceitful heart as I have. I have acted as one that has not the understanding of Adam, as one that is wretchedly degenerated from the knowledge and righteousness in which man was at first created; nay, I have not the common sense and reason of a man, else I should not have done as I have done." Agur, when he was applied to by others as wiser than most, acknowledged himself more foolish than any. Whatever high opinion others may have of us, it becomes us to have low thoughts of ourselves. 2. He speaks of himself as wanting a revelation to guide him in the ways of truth and wisdom. He owns (Pro 30:3) "I neither learned wisdom by any power of my own (the depths of it cannot be fathomed by my line and plummet) nor know I the knowledge of the holy ones, the angels, our first parents in innocency, nor of the holy things of God; I can get no insight into them, nor make any judgment of them, further than God is pleased to make them known to me." The natural man, the natural powers, perceive not, nay, they receive not, the things of the Spirit of God. Some suppose Agur to be asked, as Apollo's oracle was of old, Who was the wisest man? The answer is, He that is sensible of his own ignorance, especially in divine things. Hoc tantum scio, me nihil scire - All that I know is that I know nothing.
II. To advance Jesus Christ, and the Father in him (Pro 30:4): Who ascended up into heaven, etc. 1. Some understand this of God and of his works, which are both incomparable and unsearchable. He challenges all mankind to give an account of the heavens above, of the winds, the waters, the earth: "Who can pretend to have ascended up to heaven, to take a view of the orbs above, and then to have descended, to give us a description of them? Who can pretend to have had the command of the winds, to have grasped them in his hand and managed them, as God does, or to have bound the waves of the sea with a swaddling band, as God has done? Who has established the ends of the earth, or can describe the strength of its foundations or the extent of its limits? Tell me what is the man's name who can undertake to vie with God or to be of his cabinet-council, or, if he be dead, what is his name to whom he has bequeathed this great secret." 2. Others refer it to Christ, to Ithiel and Ucal, the Son of God, for it is the Son's name, as well as the Father's, that is here enquired after, and a challenge given to any to vie with him. We must now exalt Christ as one revealed; they then magnified him as one concealed, as one they had heard something of but had very dark and defective ideas of. We have heard the fame of him with our ears, but cannot describe him (Job 28:22); certainly it is God that has gathered the wind in his fists and bound the waters as in a garment; but what is his name? It is, I am that I am (Exo 3:14), a name to be adored, not to be understood. What is his Son's name, by whom he does all these things? The Old Testament saints expected the Messiah to be the Son of the Blessed, and he is here spoken of as a person distinct from the Father, but his name as yet secret. Note, The great Redeemer, in the glories of his providence and grace, can neither be paralleled nor found out to perfection. (1.) The glories of the kingdom of his grace are unsearchable and unparalleled; for who besides has ascended into heaven and descended? Who besides is perfectly acquainted with both worlds, and has himself a free correspondence with both, and is therefore fit to settle a correspondence between them, as Mediator, as Jacob's ladder? He was in heaven in the Father's bosom (Joh 1:1, Joh 1:18); thence he descended to take our nature upon him; and never was there such condescension. In that nature he again ascended (Eph 4:9), to receive the promised glories of his exalted state; and who besides has done this? Rom 10:6. (2.) The glories of the kingdom of his providence are likewise unsearchable and unparalleled. The same that reconciles heaven and earth was the Creator of both and governs and disposes of all. His government of the three lower elements of air, water, and earth, is here particularized. [1.] The motions of the air are of his directing. Satan pretends to be the prince of the power of the air, but even there Christ has all power; he rebuked the winds and they obeyed him. [2.] The bounds of the water are of his appointing: He binds the waters as in a garment; hitherto they shall come, and no further, Job 38:9-11. [3.] The foundations of the earth are of his establishing. He founded it at first; he upholds it still. If Christ had not interposed, the foundations of the earth would have sunk under the load of the curse upon the ground, for man's sin. Who and what is the mighty He that does all this? We cannot find out God, nor the Son of God, unto perfection. Oh the depth of that knowledge!
III. To assure us of the truth of the word of God, and to recommend it to us, Pro 30:5, Pro 30:6. Agur's pupils expect to be instructed by him in the things of God. "Alas!" says he, "I cannot undertake to instruct you; go to the word of God; see what he has there revealed of himself, and of his mind and will; you need know no more than what that will teach you, and that you may rely upon as sure and sufficient. Every word of God is pure; there is not the least mixture of falsehood and corruption in it." The words of men are to be heard and read with jealousy and with allowance, but there is not the least ground to suspect any deficiency in the word of God; it is as silver purified seven times (Psa 12:6), without the least dross or alloy. Thy word is very pure, Psa 119:140. 1. It is sure, and therefore we must trust to it and venture our souls upon it. God in his word, God in his promise, is a shield, a sure protection, to all those that put themselves under his protection and put their trust in him. The word of God, applied by faith, will make us easy in the midst of the greatest dangers, Psa 46:1, Psa 46:2. 2. It is sufficient, and therefore we must not add to it (Pro 30:6): Add thou not unto his words, because they are pure and perfect. This forbids the advancing of any thing, not only in contradiction to the word of God, but in competition with it; though it be under the plausible pretence of explaining it, yet, if it pretend to be of equal authority with it, it is adding to his words, which is not only a reproach to them as insufficient, but opens a door to all manner of errors and corruptions; for, that one absurdity being granted, that the word of any man, or company of men, is to be received with the same faith and veneration as the word of God, a thousand follow. We must be content with what God has thought fit to make known to us of his mind, and not covet to be wise above what is written; for, (1.) God will resent it as a heinous affront: "He will reprove thee, will reckon with thee as a traitor against his crown and dignity, and lay thee under the heavy doom of those that add to his words, or diminish from them," Deu 4:2; Deu 12:32. (2.) We shall run ourselves into endless mistakes: "Thou wilt be found a liar, a corrupter of the word of truth, a broacher of heresies, and guilty of the worst of forgeries, counterfeiting the broad seal of heaven, and pretending a divine mission and inspiration, when it is all a cheat. Men may be thus deceived, but God is not mocked."
Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Whole Bible (1708–1710) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
John Wesley 1765 · Public Domain Jakeh - Who lived either in Solomon's time, or…
Jakeh - Who lived either in Solomon's time, or rather afterwards, and was famous in his generation for wisdom and piety. The prophecy - The prophetical instruction; for as the prophets were public preachers as well as foretellers of things to come, so their sermons, no less than their predictions, are commonly called their prophecies. And Ucal - Two friends and co-temporaries of Agur, who desired his instructions.
John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.
Adam Clarke 1810 · Public Domain Agur's confession of faith, 1-6.
CHAPTER XXX
Agur's confession of faith, 1-6.
Read full note →
His prayer, 7-9.
Of wicked generations, 10-14.
Things that are never satisfied, 15, 16.
Of him who despises his parents, 17.
Three wonderful things, 18-20.
Three things that disquiet the land, 21-23.
Four little but very intelligent animals, 24-28.
Four things that go well, 29-31.
A man should cease from doing foolishly, and from strife,
32, 33.
NOTES ON CHAP. XXX
Verse 1. The words of Agur the son of Jakeh] The words Agur, Jakeh, Ithiel, and Ucal, have been considered by some as proper names: by others, as descriptive characters. With some, Agur is Solomon; and Jakeh, David; and Ithiel and Ucal are epithets of Christ.
The Vulgate translates, Verba congregantis filii vomentis: visio, quam locutus est sir, cum quo est Deus, et qui Deo secum morante confortatus, ait. "The words of the collector, the son of the vomiter: the vision of the man who has God with him, and who is fortified by God dwelling with him, saith."
COVERDALE makes the following words a title to the chapter:
"The wordes of Agur the sonne of Jake.
"The prophecie of a true faithfull man, whom God hath helped; whom God hath comforted and nourished."
The whole might be thus translated, keeping near to the letter: -
"The words of the epistle of the obedient son." Or,
"The words of the collector, the son of Jakeh. The parable which הגבר haggeber, the strong man, the hero, spake unto him who is God with me; to him who is God with me, even the strong God."
The visioun that a man spake with whiche is God, and that God with him, wonyng confortid.-Old MS. Bible.
From this introduction, from the names here used, and from the style of the book, it appears evident that Solomon was not the author of this chapter; and that it was designed to be distinguished from his work by this very preface, which specifically distinguishes it from the preceding work. Nor can the words in Pr 30:2-3; Pr 30:8-9, be at all applied to Solomon: they suit no part of Solomon's life, nor of his circumstances. We must, therefore, consider it an appendix or supplement to the preceding collection; something in the manner of that part which the men of Hezekiah, king of Judah, had collected. As to mysteries here, many have been found by them who sought for nothing else; but they are all, in my view of the subject, hazarded and precarious. I believe Agur, Jakeh, Ithiel, and Ucal, to be the names of persons who did exist, but of whom we know nothing but what is here mentioned. Agur seems to have been a public teacher, and Ithiel and Ucal to have been his scholars; and what he delivers to them was done by prophesy. It was what the prophets generally term massa, an ORACLE, something immediately delivered by the Holy Spirit for the benefit of man.
Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Joseph Benson 1811 · Public Domain Pro 30:1. The words of Agur — Who this…
Pro 30:1. The words of Agur — Who this Agur was no one has ever yet been able to show: it is probable, however, that both he and Jakeh, his father, were well known in Israel at the time this chapter and the next were added to the preceding parts of the proverbs. Jakeh is thought to have lived either in Solomon’s time or soon after, and to have been famous in his generation for wisdom and piety; even the prophecy — The prophetical instruction; for as prophets were public preachers as well as foretellers of things to come, so their sermons, no less than their predictions, are commonly called their prophecies. Ithiel and Ucal — Two friends and cotemporaries of Agur, who desired his instructions.
Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Albert Barnes 1834 · Public Domain See the introduction to Proverbs. According to the different…
See the introduction to Proverbs. According to the different reading, there noted, the inscription ends with: “the man spake,” and the words that follow, are the beginning of the confession, “I have wearied myself after God and have fainted.”
Spake - The Hebrew word is that commonly used of the utterance of a divine oracle.
Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Charles Bridges 1846 · Public Domain THE two concluding chapters of this Book are an…
THE two concluding chapters of this Book are an appendix to the Proverbs of Solomon. Nothing certain is known of the writers; and it is vain to speculate, where God is silent. Far better is it to give the full interest of our mind and heart to the matter of instruction, than to indulge unprofitable curiosity respecting the writers. Our ignorance of the writers of many of the Psalms in no degree hinders their profit to us. We know their author, when the penmen are hid. It is enough for us to be assured, that they were "holy men of God," who wrote "as they were moved by the Holy Ghost." (2Pe 1:21 .)
Agur was doubtless one of the wise men found in many ages of the Old Testament Church. His words were a prophecy; — that is — divine instruction†1 given unto Ithiel and Ucal (Ithiel especially) probably two of his scholars, whose names are equally unknown to us. Perhaps they came to him for instruction, and he was led to express himself in the most humbling sense of his own ignorance. ’You come to me for instruction. But surely I am more brutish than any man; not having the advantages of learning wisdom (Amo 7:14-15 ), or the knowledge of the holy God (Dan 4:18 ), and of the holy revelation of his name.’
Read full note →
His language is indeed strong. Stronger could scarcely have been used. He confesses himself to be, not only brutish, as man is by nature;†2 but, though enlightened by heavenly teaching, more brutish than any man. Were these the words of truth? Or were they the affectation of modesty? Or was it false humility, dishonorably denying the work of God? He was now speaking from the mouth of God. And how could he dissemble in his name? He spake the truth as it really is, as consciousness could not but speak; as self-knowledge under divine teaching dictated. For let a man take "the candle of the LORD;" given him to "search all the inward parts of the belly" (Pro 20:27 ); and what a mass of vanity will he find there! Such folly mixed with his wisdom! such ignorance with his knowledge! that, instead of pluming himself upon his elevation above his fellow-men, he can but cry out in shame — Surely I am more brutish than any man! Whoever knows his own heart, knows that of himself, that he can hardly conceive of any one else being so degraded as himself.†3
Add to which — it is the child of God comparing himself with his perfect standard. And in the perception of his own short-comings, the most discerning clear-sighted penitent feels, that he can never abase himself as he ought before his God — He would lie low, lower still, infinitely lower, in the dust. Holy Paul, comparing himself with the spirituality of the perfect law, exclaims — "I am carnal, sold under sin." (Rom 7:14 .) Isaiah, in the presence of a holy God — cries out — "Woe is me, for I am undone; because I am a man of unclean lips." (Isa 6:5 .) Job in the manifestation of the power of God sinks into absolute nothingness and unworthiness. (Job 40:4 ; Job 42:6 .) David in the full view of the wisdom of God is made to see the perverseness of his own folly, and take up the very confession of Agur — "So foolish was I, and ignorant; I was as a beast before thee"!†4 The nearer our contemplation of God, the closer our communion with him, the deeper will be our self-abasement before him; like the winged seraphs "before the throne, who with twain cover their faces, and with twain cover their feet." (Isa 6:2 .) Well, therefore, may the wisest and holiest of men, though "renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him" (Col 3:10 ), take up the humiliating confession — Surely I am more brutish than any man — Genuine humility is the only path of wisdom. Unless a man stoops, he can never enter the door. He must become "a fool, that he may be wise."†5 And when he is humbled in his shame, then let him see the house of his God in its breadth and length (Eze 44:5 ); enjoying clearer, and panting still for clearer manifestations of the incomprehensible God.
But how reverently should we approach this divine presence! With what holy hands should we open his revelation! dreading a careless, light, and presumptuous spirit; yet withal cherishing those nobly ambitious desires for deeper and higher knowledge; yea — reiterating them before our God with that repetition, which to a carnal mind would be nauseating tautology; but which he who knows our hearts loves to hear, and will beyond our desires abundantly fulfill.
Footnotes:
†1 This was a frequent Scripture name for ordinary instruction. Pro 31:1-31 . 1Co 14:1, 1 Corinthians 3-4. 1Th 5:20 .
†2 Job 11:12. Psa 49:20 . Jer 10:14 .
†3 Compare Pro 14:10 . The following remarks of a profound divine will illustrate this subject - ’He that has much grace, apprehends, much more than others, that great height to which his love ought to ascend: and he sees better than others, how little a way he has risen towards that height. And therefore estimating his love by the whole height of his duty, hence it appears astonishingly low and little in his eyes - True grace is of that nature, that the more a person has of it, with remaining corruption, the less does his goodness and holiness appear, in proportion, not only to his past, but his present deformity, in the sin that now appears in his heart, and in the abominable defects of his highest and best affections.’ - Edwards on Relig. Affections, Part 3. Sect 6.
†4 Psa 73:1-22, ’a beast.’ The original is the plural of excellence conveying an intensitiveness, not easy to transfer acceptably into our idiom. Bp. Horsley gives it - ’I was as a brute before thee.’
†5 1Co 3:18 . There is a fine ray of wisdom in that consciousness of ignorance, that led Socrates to confess - ’I only know one thing - that I know nothing.’ Compare 1Co 8:2 .
Charles Bridges, An Exposition of the Book of Proverbs (1846) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary 1859 · Public Domain Gatherer, &c., or, as it is in the Latin,…
Gatherer, &c., or, as it is in the Latin, Congregans, the son of Vomens. The Latin interpreter has given us in this place the signification of the Hebrew names, instead of the names themselves, which are in the Hebrew, Agur, the son of Jakeh. But whether this Agur be the same person as Solomon, as many think, or a different person, whose doctrine was adopted by Solomon, and inserted among his parables or proverbs, is uncertain. (Challoner) --- Vomiter may denote David, who delivered many excellent canticles; Eructavit cor, Psalm xliv. De Dieu translates, "The words of him who is recollected the son of obedience." The author styles himself foolish, and asks for neither beggary nor riches, (ver. 2, 8.) which seems not to agree with Solomon; though there can be no doubt but this chapter is inspired. (Calmet) --- In effect, that great king might form this petition, being mindful of the instability of human greatness, and confess that of himself he was foolish. --- Vision. Hebrew massa (Haydock) generally implies something disagreeable, but here it is put for a collection of moral sentences. --- With, &c. Hebrew also, "to Ithiel, even unto Ithiel and Ucal," (Protestants; Haydock) friends of Agur, (Calmet) or his children, (Menochius) or rather Solomon speaks to all the faithful. We never find Agur mentioned as a canonical writer; and if he were, he would have been placed after Solomon. (Worthington)
George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).
Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures 1864 · Public Domain Chaps. 30 and 31
V. THE SUPPLEMENTS
Chaps. 30 and 31
Read full note →
First Supplement: The words of Agur
Chap. 30
a) Introduction: Of God’s word as the source of all wisdom
Pro_30:1-6
1 Words of Agur, the son of the princess of Massa.
The man’s saying: “I have wearied myself about God,
wearied myself about God—then did I withdraw!
2 For I am a beast and not a man,
and the understanding of a man I have not;
3 neither have I acquired wisdom,
nor gained knowledge of the Holy.
4 Who hath ascended to the heavens and descended?
who hath grasped the wind in his fists?
who hath wrapped the waters in a garment?
who hath fixed all the ends of the earth?
what is his name and what is his son’s name, if thou knowest?
5 Every word of God is pure;
a shield is He to them that trust in Him.
6 Add thou not to His words,
lest He rebuke thee and thou be made a liar.”
b) Various expressive numerical proverbs, relating to the golden mean between rich and poor, to recklessness, an insatiable disposition, pride and arrogance, etc
7 Two things have I entreated of thee,
refuse me not, before I die:
8 Deceit and lies keep far from me;
poverty and riches give me not;
cause me to eat the food allotted me;
9 lest I, being full, deny (God)
and say: Who is Jehovah?
and lest I, having become poor, steal
and take the name of my God in vain.—
10 Cause not the servant to slander his master,
lest he curse thee and thou suffer (be destroyed).—
11 (There is) a generation that curseth their father,
and doth not bless their mother;
12 (there is) a generation that are pure in their own eyes,
and are not washed from their filthiness;
13 (there is) a generation, how haughty are their eyes,
and their eyelids are lifted up;
14 (there is) a generation whose teeth are swords, and their jaw-teeth knives,
to devour the poor from the earth, and the needy from among men!—
15 The leech hath two daughters: give, give!
there are three (things) that are not to be satisfied;
four say not: enough!
16 The world of the dead, the barren womb;
the earth (which) is not satisfied with water,
and the fire that saith not: enough!—
17 An eye that mocketh at its father,
and despiseth obedience to its mother,
the ravens of the valley shall pluck it out,
and the young eagles shall eat it.—
18 Three things are too wonderful for me,
and four I do not comprehend;
19 the way of the eagle in the heavens,
the way of a serpent upon a rock,
the way of a ship in the midst of the sea,
and the way of a man with a maid.
20 Thus is the way of the adulterous woman:
she eateth, and wipeth her mouth, and saith:
I have done no iniquity!—
21 Under three things doth the earth tremble,
and under four can it not stand:
22 under a servant when he ruleth,
and a fool when he is satisfied with bread;
23 under a hated (rejected) woman when she is married,
and a maid when she succeedeth her mistress.
24 Four are the little things of earth,
and yet are they wise, quick of wit:
25 the ants, a people not strong,
that prepare in summer their food;
26 conies, a people not mighty,
that set their dwelling among rocks;
27 no king have the locusts,
and yet they go forth organized all of them;
28 the lizard layeth hold with her hands,
and dwelleth in kings’ palaces.—
29 There are three that make stately their walk,
and four that are comely in going:
30 the lion, mighty among beasts,
and that turneth not before any:
31 the greyhound, slender in its loins, or the goat,
and a king with whom there is no resistance (possible).—
32 If thou art foolish in exalting thyself,
and if thou devisest evil—(put) thy hand on thy mouth!
33 For the pressing of milk giveth forth cheese,
and pressing the nose giveth blood,
and pressing wrath giveth strife.
GRAMMATICAL AND CRITICAL
Pro_30:6.—[In תּוֹסְףְ we have the single instance in which daghesh lene is omitted after a silent sheva. See Green, § 22 b; 66 (2), a; Bött., § 325.—A.]
Pro_30:10.—[In אֲדֹנָו the suffix is of the form appropriate to the singular, as is not uncommon with pluralia tantum; Bött., § 886, 1, δ. In יְקַלֶּלְךָ the verb has the sense of a subj. pres. in a negative or final clause; Bött., § 981, 2.—A.]
Pro_30:15.—[The noun הוֹן, as a sort of independent accusative, becomes virtually an Interjection. Böttcher, § 510, 5, d.—A.]
Pro_30:17.—[לִיקְּהַת for לִיִקְהַת has a daghesh dirimens in the ק, the long Hhiriq being shortened; Green, § 14, a; 24, b; 57, 2, (3) a; Bött., § 399, b, 3; 458, 1, d.—A.]
Pro_30:25.—[נְמָלִים, a fem. noun construed as masculine; Green, § 200, e; Bött., § 715, e.—A.]
Pro_30:29.—[מֵיטִבֵי, where it occurs the second time, drops the characteristic as superfluous; Bött., § 171.—A.]
Pro_30:31.—[For אוֹ Bött. would read תְּאוֹ, the wild goat or antelope.]
EXEGETICAL
1. Preliminary Remark. If our reading and explanation of the superscription in Pro_30:1 is correct (see what is said immediately below, under No. 2), the contents of this Supplement, like that of the one following (Pro_31:1-9), can be accepted neither as from Solomon, nor from Hezekiah. For aside from the fact that it is quite as impossible that “Agur” as that “Lemuel” in Pro_31:1 is some allegorical substitute for the name of Solomon, as many of the olden commentators claim (e.g., Stöcker, J. Lange, etc., [so Jerome, Rashi, etc., earlier, and Wordsw., etc., more recently]), the name Massa clearly points to a land beyond the bounds of Palestine as the dwelling-place of the author or collector. The name must belong to the Massa mentioned in Gen_25:14; 1Ch_1:30 with Duma, as the name of a district or tribe in northern Arabia,—which from the direction of Jerusalem (according to Isa_21:11) was beyond Seir, and therefore in any case south-easterly from Palestine, and which we shall be obliged to regard as an Ishmaelitish kingdom, or an Israelitish founded by members of the covenant people of the Old Testament who had wandered from home. Delitzsch holds the former view (Article Sprüche Salomo’s in Herzog’s Real-Encyclopädie). His reasons are, that both sections, the “words of Agur” and the “words of Lemuel” contain numerous traces of an origin outside the Hebrew while yet Semitic (e.g., the insatiable “Aluka” or blood-sucker, Pro_30:15; the Divine name אֱלוֹהַּ, Pro_30:15; the expressions יִקְהָה, Pro_30:1; Pro_30:17; הוֹן “enough,” Pro_30:15-16; בִּר (בְּרִי), Pro_31:2; אֵין=אֵי, Pro_31:4; בְּנֵי עֹנִי, Pro_31:5, etc.); and because the reception into the canon of the prophecies of Balaam, and yet more that of the discourses of Job, a dweller in the land of Uz, which notoriously was never inhabited by Israelites, furnish proofs sufficiently weighty of the possibility of a transplanting into the soil of the sacred national literature of Israel, of the products of a religious literature originating beyond the bounds of Israel. The second of the views above mentioned Hitzig has endeavored to present as probable in his treatise on “the kingdom of Massa” (1844), already cited in § 12 of our Introduction, and likewise in pp. 310 sq. of his Commentary; and he has done it with arguments which we must deem more weighty than those adduced by Delitzsch, and whose decisive weight is admitted by Bertheau also. These arguments for the Israelitish character of the land of Massa, and of its rulers Agur and Lemuel, whose wise maxims are before us in our two Supplements, are briefly the following. 1) Agur confesses expressly in Pro_30:9 his faith in Jehovah the God of Israel. 2) The introductory words in Pro_30:1-6, as well as the utterances in Pro_30:7-8; Pro_30:14; Pro_30:22; Pro_30:32 of the same chapter, and in Pro_31:8-9, breathe forth that sense of justice and that humble subjection to the hand of God, which are peculiar to the theocratic reverer of the law who is of Israel, and such as appear in numerous other passages of our Book of Proverbs, of the Book of Psalms, the Prophets, etc. 3) The Massa of Gen_25:14; 1Ch_1:30, is indeed in these passages numbered among the sons of Ishmael, and therefore characterized as a district inhabited mainly by Ishmaelites; but later Arabian and Jewish authors (especially Benjamin of Tudela in his accounts of the city of Telmâs see Ritter’s Arabia, II. 406) describe the region of Massa and the Duma which is its near neighbor, as occupied by numerous Jews,—and already among the prophecies of Isaiah from the time of Hezekiah there is found a prophecy which relates to Duma (Isa_21:11-12), a “burden of Duma” which with great probability presents Hebrews as dwelling in this region. 4) The passage (1Ch_4:38-43) expressly records a migration that occurred in the days of Hezekiah to Mount Seir, and so quite into the neighborhood of Massa and Duma,—a migration of Israelites of the tribe of Simeon who had settled in the region of the remnant of the Amalekites, and therefore in northern Arabia; and moreover from Mic_1:15; Mic_2:8-10; Isa_28:12 there may be inferred as probable a considerable advanced movement of certain roving Israelites toward the South, as having occurred about that time. Therefore Agur and Lemuel might very probably be regarded as Arabian-Israelitish shepherd princes, or as kings (Emirs, Captains) of a colony of Israelites of the tribes of Simeon that had emigrated to northern Arabia,—and this Simeonite colony Massa, quite like Job’s “land of Uz,” should be conceived of as a district to a great extent if not chiefly occupied by kinsmen of the Old Testament people of God, who were believers in Jehovah. [Bött. in his Lehrb., has of course no occasion to enter into the details of this discussion. He does, however, § 29, 36, 37, refer to these chapters as probably largely of Simeonitish origin, and cites various words and constructions as plainly showing affinity with and the influence of the cognate Arabic and Aramaic dialects. Stuart (Comm. pp. 401–407) enters very elaborately into the examination of the arguments for and against the generally received conception and construction, and decides strongly in favor of Hitzig’s view, which our author adopts. Nearly every other English and American interpreter dismisses the subject with a few lines, quietly retaining the rendering of the E. V. possibly with slight modifications. Kamph. rejects this part of Hitzig’s theory while agreeing with it in many other points. Bleek admits its possible correctness.—A.]
2. The superscription to the discourses of Agur, Pro_30:1, according to the Masoretic punctuation is literally rendered: Words of Agur, the son of Jakeh, the divine utterance (prophetic utterance), the saying of the man to Ithiel, to Ithiel and Ucal.” Inasmuch as of the four proper names which these words include, according to this conception of them, one at least, Ithiel, appears also in Neh_11:7 as an Israelitish name of a man, and since Agur is not to be at all suspected as a Hebrew personal name, whether we interpret the word (with Herder and the majority) by “collector,” and so regard it a collateral form of אֹגֵר (Pro_10:5),—or whether with Hitzig, following the Arabic, we claim for it the signification “exile, the man living in a strange land,” this interpretation of this difficult passage, which was already given in the Chaldee version, and partially in the Syriac, and has been retained by most moderns, seems to excite no suspicion, if it be assumed that we are to regard Ithiel and Ucal as sons or pupils of Agur, and are to conceive of the whole as the communication, not indeed of a dialogue of the teacher Agur with these pupils (so e.g., Döderlein), but of a didactic address, or a “fatherly counsel” given to them. But this conception is lexically impossible. And 1) because neither “Jakeh” nor “Ucal” occurs elsewhere as a Hebrew proper name, nor can they even be satisfactorily explained as such (see Hitzig on this passage); [Fuerst taking Jakeh as an irregular participial form interprets it symbolically “one holding to the assembly of the wise;”—Gesen. more concisely “pious”]. 2) Because the remarkable doubling of לְאִיתִיאֵלּ can in no way be brought into harmony with the laws of the Hebrew modes of expression,—not even by the assumption of Herder and Umbreit that this is a solemn repetition produced “by the vehemence of parallelism.” 3) Because, finally, הַמַשָּׂא in the sense of “prophetic utterance, prophetic burden” would in connection with the following נְאֻם give a combination unknown in the whole prophetical literature of the Old Testament,—one to the justification of which neither Zec_9:1; Zec_12:1, nor any other passage whatsoever can be brought. [Kamph. while admitting that only a greater or less degree of probability can at the best be reached, meets this difficulty by separating the two nouns whose combination is pronounced unexampled. The first he connects with Agur, while admitting the term is elsewhere used only in strict prophecy. The second he regards as describing the “utterance” of “the man,” some friend or stranger, whose words are given in Pro_30:1-4, while Agur himself begins to speak in Pro_30:5. He fails to find any sufficient reason for taking מַשָּׂא as a proper rather than a common noun. Stuart argues that in.Pro_31:1מַשָּׂא must be a genitive limiting מֶלֶךְ, no other construction being grammatical; the noun must therefore be a proper noun, the name of the kingdom, and the noun must be presumed to be the same here.—A.]
The allegorizing interpretations are however likewise untenable, which have been attempted in various forms, taking the four proper names as either wholly or partially appellative. This was early done by the LXX and Vulg., the former of which appears to have regulated the text in a way wholly arbitrary, while the latter follows the text more closely, and renders Agur by congregans, Jakeh by vomens, Ithiel by cum quo est Deus, and Jucal by confortatus. Of modern expositors Ewald has taken at least the last half of the ver. in a similar way: Thus does the man speak to God-with-me, to God-with-me and I-am-strong. The אֻכָּל according to this view stands for אוּכָל, and in combination with the appellative Ithiel composes a single name. Instead of נְאֻם however we should need to read נַאַם. Since the objections expressed above, especially those which relate to the name Jakeh, and the doubling of the name Ithiel are not removed, and still others are added to them, there is nothing left but to alter the reading of the verse thoroughly. Of the various emendations which are possible and have been in part already attempted, that of Hitzig commends itself most strongly, which we have made the basis of the version given above.
According to this we should in the first place read בֶּן יְקָהָהּ מַשָּׂא “Son of her whom Massa obeys,” or again בֶּן יְקָהָהּ מ׀ (which is equivalent to בֶּן יִקְהָתָהּ מ׀) “Son of her whose dominion is Massa,” which in any case gives as the result “son of the ruler, the princess of Massa” (comp. No. 1.)
Furthermore we must then read twice לָאִיתִי אֵל, “I have labored, have wearied myself upon, about, with God,” i.e., have sought with difficulty and effort to conceive and comprehend Him in His nature (comp. נִלְאָה in Isa_26:12; and also passages like Job_9:7; Act_17:27, etc.) Finally the concluding word ואכל must either be pointed וָאֵכַל, “and have become dull, am wearied,” i.e., in seeking after God (thus Hitzig); or, which seems to be lexically easier, וָאֵכֶל (from כלה, evanuit) “and have withdrawn, have become faint” (comp. Psa_69:4; Psa_84:3; Job_19:27, etc.), which latter reading is the one followed by Bertheau [Kamph., S., etc.]. It is, indeed, true that even by these emendations the difficulties of the passage are not removed; and yet the meaning thus resulting for the second half of the Verse agrees admirably with the further utterances of the Introduction, especially with Pro_30:3-4. Moreover the οὐ παύομαι of the LXX which corresponds with the ואכל at the end confirms on the whole the interpretation given to that obscure expression (and that of Hitzig as well as that of Bertheau, which besides are not essentially different). And as respects the expression, which is, it is true, somewhat harsh, בן יקהה מ׀, an indirect confirmation of this appears in the fact that the rare word יִקְהָה “obedience” (comp. Gen_49:10) occurs again immediately below in Pro_30:17.
3. Pro_30:2-6. Continuation and conclusion of the Introduction.—For I am a beast and not a man, etc. To the confession given at the outset, that he has wearied himself in vain in fathoming the divine nature, there is here appropriately added the admission of the author’s ignorance, and his natural incapacity for higher spiritual knowledge. His vexation in view of the fact that his wisdom has come to shame in connection with God and things divine, finds vent for itself in strong expressions, which remind us of Psa_73:22; comp. also remarks above on Pro_12:1.—בַּעַר מֵאִישׁ is probably not “more stupid than any man” (as is commonly rendered, Ewald, Bertheau [E. V., De W., H., N., S., M., W., K.] etc.), but “brutishly stupid, unlike (away from) a man,” and so “a beast and not a man” (Hitzig). [We see no reason for preferring this to the common comparative rendering of מִן. A].
Pro_30:3. Nor gained knowledge of the Holy. For this last clause comp. remarks on Pro_9:10.
Pro_30:4. Who hath ascended to the heavens and descended? For the form of words here employed comp. Gen_28:12; also Joh_3:13; Rom_10:6-7. The ascending to heaven and descending thence, is like the “grasping the wind in the fists,” the wrapping up the waters, etc, an activity belonging exclusively to God, and characteristic of Him in His supermundane nature. That there is an activity of this sort, ruling the world and upholding the world, on the part of the invisible God, he knows; but who the in visible divine Ruler of all is, and how constituted, this has hitherto remained hidden from his view, and it is to this that his amazed inquiries relate, reminding us of Job_26:14; Isa_40:12, etc.—Who gathereth the wind in his fists?—so that he can at his pleasure restrain it and let it blow. בְּחָפְנָיו, lit. “in his two fists;” an expression employed probably because there are always two opposing currents of wind, of which now the one and again the other blows (comp. Ecc_1:6.) [There seems to be no occasion for going beyond the fact that fists usually exist in pairs, to find in the remoter facts of nature an explanation for a very natural phrase.—A.]—Who wrappeth the waters in a garment? The water is the upper mass of waters, wrapped in the clouds of heaven as in a capacious garment, and so kept back from pouring down upon the earth. Comp. Job_26:8; Psa_104:6 : and above, notes on Pro_8:28.—Who fixeth all the ends of the earth? By this is probably intended the bounds of the continents against the sea (Jer_5:22; Job_33:10-11.)—What is his name, and his son’s name, if thou knowest? In this question is contained the idea: No one knows God adequately in His inmost nature; none is able to attain a genealogical knowledge of Him and His family, in such way as may be done among men; especially is the question, what is true of His son, veiled in inscrutable mystery. That God has no son at all is plainly not implied in this remarkable question, which is left unanswered (in reply to Hitzig); but only this, that no one knows the name of this son,—that his nature and his relation to the other manifestations of God’s nature, e.g., to His hypostatic wisdom (Pro_8:22 sq.) is known to none. Agur therefore confesses here with sufficient distinctness the defectiveness of his knowledge of God the Son,—a fact which serves to confirm in the most welcome way our remarks on the passage Pro_8:22 sq. concerning the incompleteness, the embryonic imperfection of the doctrine of the Logos (or the Christology) of the proverbs in general. Both Geier who identifies the “Son” of our passage without qualification with God’s hypostatic wisdom, and J. D. Michaelis, who finds here ascribed to God with the clearness and precision of the New Testament an only Son, go too far and intermingle foreign ideas. [So Stuart: “To think of the Logos here, under the name of בֶּן would be ‘travelling very far out of the record.’ ” And yet we may well go as far as J. Pye Smith (Scripture Testimony, etc., I. 469) when he says: “The concluding clauses of this energetic passage are rationally and easily interpreted, if we admit that the ancient Jews had some obscure ideas of a plurality in the divine nature.” The objections to as much of an inference as this are forced and feeble. It is possible that the meaning may be only this: We know neither himself nor his,—while in human relations the man and his genealogy are objects of eager inquiry and extensive knowledge. But I the Messianic Psalms had already spoken of “the Son,” mysteriously, perhaps, and yet enough to supply germs of knowledge as well as of faith. See Holden, etc.—A.]—Strangely insipid and rationalizing is Umbreit’s view [held by Noyes, etc.], that by the Son is here intended the pupil of the philosopher who understands all the mysteries of the world and the world’s government!—Furthermore the LXX instead of בְּנוֹ must have read בָּנָיו for they render ἤ το ὄνομα τοῖς τέκνοις αὐτοῦ.
Pro_30:5-6. Instead of unprofitable puzzling about God and divine mysteries there is recommended the humble reception in faith of the only true divine revelation which affords light and peace, and needs no supplementing or perfecting on the part of man.—With 5 a comp. Psa_19:9; Psa_119:140; with a and b, Psa_18:31, where however יְחֹוָה takes the place of the divine name אֱלוֹהּ which is characteristic of our passage. In regard to this comp. above, remarks under No. 1.—Add thou nothing to His words. A similar warning with respect to the law as a revelation of the divine will fully sufficient in itself and adequate occurs in Deu_4:2; Deu_12:32; comp. also Rev_22:18.
4. Pro_30:7-10. Prayer of the poet to Jehovah for preservation from all that is false, and from the two extremes of poverty and riches (Pro_30:7-9), together with a warning against the vice of slander. This last forms with Pro_30:17 the sole exception to that mode of constructing the proverbs which elsewhere in the section, Pro_30:7-33, is consistently carried through, viz., the numerical. Comp. on these peculiar numerical proverbs or Middoth, the Introd., § 14, and remarks on Pro_6:16.—Two things have I entreated of thee. This double prayer is, as the 2d clause shows, a prayer not merely once offered, but the abiding utterance to God of the desire of the poet’s heart, his importunate request from Him continued to his death.
Pro_30:8. Deceit and lies keep far from me. “Deceit” (שָׁוְא) and “lying words” stand in the mutual relation of the devising of inward untruth and deceitful wickedness, and the false, lying utterance which springs forth from this as its necessary expression. No further justification is added for this first half of the prayer; the second, however, which relates to the golden mean between rich and poor, is more minutely explained and justified in Pro_30:8, c and Pro_30:9. [The idea “vanity” given in the E. V. and retained by H., M., W., etc., is a secondary meaning of the noun whose primary meaning according to Gesen. is “evil,” according to Fuerst “insecurity, or slipperiness.” It seems to be more than the unsubstantial, it is the positively deceitful that is here intended.—A.]—Cause me to eat the food allotted me, lit. “the food of my lot or portion,” i.e., the part or assignment that falls to me, so much as is intended and is needful for me, no more and no less. Comp. Pro_31:15; Gen_47:22; and also the ἄρτος ἐπιούσιος, the “daily bread” of the Lord’s prayer, Mat_6:11, which is equivalent at least in a general way.
Pro_30:9. Lest I being full deny, etc. Bold denial of the Holy One, and the mocking question “who is the Lord, or what can He do?” (comp. Psa_73:11; Job_21:14) appears in other passages likewise as the indication of pride developed by surfeiting and luxurious enjoyment in life; see Deu_8:12-15; Deu_32:15 sq.—And lest I be poor and steal (comp. Pro_6:30) and take the name of my God in vain. תפּש “to lay hands upon or seize hold of something” here denotes the wicked profanation of the divine name which consists in mockery, cursing and contumely with respect to it. For such offences as these the bitter necessities of hunger and poverty may according to Isa_8:21 produce (comp. Pro_19:3), and not merely false swearing by the name of God in denying the guilt of theft, which alone is usually thought of here.
Pro_30:10. Cause not the servant to slander his master. Usually rendered: “betray (or slander) not the servant to his master” (Vulg., Luther, Umbreit [E. V., De W., H., N., M.], etc.). But the Hiphil cannot have the same meaning as the Poel, Psa_101:5; it must mean “to cause one to slander, to excite one to calumny against another.” The warning is not against slander in itself, but against incitement to slander, and more specifically betraying servants into tattling and accusations against their masters (thus correctly Ewald, Bertheau, Hitzig, Elster [Kamph., S.], etc.).—Lest he curse thee, and thou be destroyed. The instigator to slander might easily hit upon the wrong person, a faithful, diligent servant, who instead of allowing himself to be misled, might rather curse the betrayer, and so bring merited calamity upon his head (comp. remarks on Pro_26:2).
5. Pro_30:11-14. An utterance expressive of execration, vehement abhorrence, concerning a people or a generation characterized by four forms of ungodliness (not quatuor genera detestabilia hominum, as J. D. Michaelis and others hold). The דּוֹר which is four times repeated, may be taken either as a vocative, “Oh generation!” (Ewald, Elster), or as a nominative, which then expresses simply the existence of a generation of the kind described, and is used in a certain sense for יֵשׁ דּוֹר (Luther, E. V., etc. “There is a generation”).—A generation that curseth their father, etc. Comp. Pro_20:20; Exo_21:17; and then with respect to Pro_30:12; Isa_4:4; with reference to Pro_30:13, Isa_10:12; Psa_131:2; Pro_6:17.—And their eyelids are lifted up! Hitzig finds in this exclamation, which appears at first to be only a rhetorically expanded parallel to “the loftiness of the eyes” in clause a, an allusion to the name עֲמָלֵק Amalek, which in the Arabic signifies “one looking with wide open eyes, a man with eyelids, lifted up or painted.” He therefore conjectures that the entire delineation of a reckless generation here before us refers to the people of the-Amalekites, whose deadly national hatred toward, the children of Israel (the “needy or poor,” Pro_30:14 b) and whose warlike love of plunder are described in Pro_30:14 especially. With the assumption that Agur is the prince of a colony of Simeonites, Massa, founded in the Amalekite territory (see remarks above, No. 1), this hypothesis would admirably agree, on account of 1 Chron. 4:53. And yet the conjecture is in itself too uncertain, and particularly too little established on the linguistic side.—With Pro_30:14 a comp. Psa_57:5; Psa_58:7; with b, Jer_5:17; Jer_30:16; Jer_50:17; Isa_9:12, etc. [Wordsw. with his fondness for allegorizing finds in these “four evil generations” an undoubted reference to spiritual mysteries, e.g., various offences within and. against the church.—A.].
6. Pro_30:15-16. Of four kinds of insatiable things.—The leech hath two daughters; Give, give! The rare name Aluka (עֲלוּקָה) the old versions (the LXX, Syimi., the Venet., Vulg.) render by βδέλλη, sanguisuga, with which, there should undoubtedly be taken into account the fact that galulkâ or galokâ in the Indian is; the name of the blood-sucker, and that essentially the same word (َבُז ) is in Arabic the designation of a ghostly demon (or according to Camus, possibly of a ravenous wolf). And this is the more confirmed by the fact that the Targ. on Ps. 12:9 speaks of “an Aluka going about in a circle, and sucking from men their blood,” and by this is undoubtedly meant a vampyre-like spirit, a ghostly monster of the nature of the ghouls of the Arabs and Persians, or the Indian dakini (which congregate in graveyards, and live on the flesh and bones of the corpses). An Indian origin of the conception described by “Aluka” is indicated also by the occurrence of a proverb closely related to our own, with reference to the insatiableness of four things, in the Hitopadesa (ed. Lassen, p. 66): “The fire is not sated with wood, nor the great sea with the streams; nor the god of death with all the living, nor the beautiful-eyed with men.” The similarity of this Indian maxim to our passage is clearly much more significant, than that of the Arabic proverb in Meidani, III. 64, where only “death not to be satisfied with creatures, and fire not to be satisfied with wood” make up the objects compared. The assumption of a derivation both of the name Aluka, and of the entire proverb in its essential substance from the old Indian literature need the less excite any well-founded suspicion, since Agur’s residence, Massa, doubtless lay quite near to the old highway of caravans leading from India and Persia to Petra and Teima, and on this Sabæan and other merchants will have brought, not only Indian articles of traffic, but Indian ideas and literary productions to the lands of South Western Asia (comp. Hitzig, p. 313). But the name Aluka and the proverb as a whole is conceived with substantial correctness by Döderlein and Zeigler, whom afterward Gesen., Umbreit, Hitzig, Bertheau, Delitzsch, and in general most of the recent interpreters have followed. [For illustration supplied by travellers in Palestine, see Thomson’s Land and Book, I. 368, and Wood’s Bible Animals, p. 646.—A.]
We must reject as untenable both Jarchi’s interpretation of “Aluka” by Sheol, hell (so rendered in alleged accordance with the Arabic), and Bochart’s assertion, that the word signifies fate, μοῖρα, insatiable destiny. In this latter view there is only so much of truth, that “Aluka” does indeed appear generalized to a conception of quite a comprehensive sort, so far forth, plainly, as “personified insatiableness, craving in its highest intensity” (Bertheau) is denoted by it. Therefore, it appears also as a female spirit, and has two daughters ascribed to it. These two “daughters of the blood-sucker” are in the first instance designated by a double “give,” in accordance with their character as craving, insatiable natures, and these are also expressly mentioned by name. For it is plainly these that are meant by the first two of the four insatiable things, which are named in vs. 16 a as “Sheol” and the “barren womb.” Hell, or the kingdom of the dead, is also in Isa_5:14, as well as above in Pro_27:20, personified as a spiritual power that with insatiable greediness gathers men to itself. The “closing of the “womb” (for עֹצֶר comp. Gen_16:2; Gen_20:18), i.e., the unfruitful womb of woman, in connection with which there is no conception and bearing of children, gives indications of itself, according to what is said in Gen_30:1 sq. of Jacob’s wives, likewise in an insatiable craving, in constant desire for sexual enjoyments. On this second example of insatiableness the most weight seems to be laid by the author of the proverb (comp. Pro_27:20). He does not, however, externally distinguish it specially, and assigns it a prominent place in the series of his enumerations only by making it together with “hell” emphatically the daughter of the blood-sucker, while the “earth” as a third, and the “fire” as fourth example he simply allows to follow in a subordinate place. The whole sentence evidently lacks the symmetrical, simply and clearly organized structure, which distinguishes the analogous Indian proverb above cited. Yet in this fact that just that which is the main thought, or the truth in the moral world among men which is to be illustrated by the associated similes from nature, the insatiableness of the craving of the barren woman, is pushed on to the second place, and so in a sense hidden (unlike the order in that Sanscrit proverb where the never satisfied “beautiful-eyed” are emphatically placed at the end), there is with the greatest probability involved a fully conscious intention of the author of the proverb, who wished by this artifice to give to his maxim the heightened charm of ingenuity, and to form, instead of a mere numerical proverb; a sharp enigmatical proverb (a חִידָה, comp. Introd., § 11, note 2). Of these numerical proverbs which are at the same time enigmas, our chapter contains several besides, especially Pro_30:18-20; Pro_30:24-28; and Pro_30:29-31. [As compared with the numerical proverbs that follow, the complexity and the more artificial character of the one before us at once arrests attention. They all have this in common, that whatever moral lesson they have to convey is less obvious, being hinted rather than stated, and in this view they may merit the name “enigmas.” In the one now under consideration insatiable desire and the importance of its regulation seem to be the remote object. In the development, instead of the “three things” and “four things” which repeatedly appear afterward, we have the “leech,” its two daughters, the three and the four. Some have regarded the two daughters as representing physical characteristics of the blood-sucker,—others as expressing by an Orientalism a doubly intense craving. Parallelism suggests making the first two of the four the two daughters apart from other considerations; other allusions of the Scriptures to the greediness of the world of the dead, justify the first, while the second alone belongs to human nature. We can see no other reason than this for making the second the most emphatic of the four as Z. is disposed to do.—Only the most unnatural theory of inspiration can take exception to the suggestion of a possible Indian origin for the substance and the external form of this proverb, its place and form here being secured by an appropriate and adequate influence of the Holy Spirit. The Book of Proverbs applies a very severe test to some theories of inspiration.—A.]
7. Pro_30:17. The punishment of him who sins against his parents;—an ethical maxim introduced without any close connection into the series of the “Middoth” in our section, as Pro_30:10 is above. Ewald would have the insatiableness of the birds of prey, which are to execute the judgment on the wicked man, regarded as the main idea of the proverb, connecting it with Pro_30:15-16. This element, however, is plainly too far in the background, and the main thought is rather his desert of curse and penalty who daringly tramples under foot the fifth commandment; and from this there is a sort of connection with Pro_30:11-14.—An eye.…the ravens of the valley (lit., brook) (comp. 1Ki_17:4-6) shall pluck it out, etc. [The נחל, the Arabic Wady, is, sometimes the torrent, sometimes the valley through which it flows. See full illustrations and citations in Stanley’s Palestine, p. 496.—A.]—The “raven” and the “eagle” (i. e., vulture) are named here as birds that feed upon carrion; the “sons of the eagle,” i.e., the young eagles, are named because it is especially upon sons, wayward sons, it is true, that the penalty is to be inflicted. The punishment itself, however, consists in strangling and leaving the bodies unburied, so that they become food for the fowls of heaven; comp. 1Sa_17:44; 1Ki_14:11; 1Ki_16:4, etc.—[With reference to the raven consult Wood’s Bible Animals, p. 445; and to the eagle or griffin vulture, p. 346.—A.]
8. Pro_30:18-20. Four incomprehensible things.—The way of the eagle in the heavens, etc.—Besides the ease with which the eagle, a large and heavy bird, soars high above in the air (comp. Job_39:27), this circumstance is also surely an object of the poet’s amazement, that it leaves behind no trace of its course; for the same thing is also true of the progress of the smoothly gliding serpent over the slippery rock, and also of that of the ship that swiftly ploughs the waves of the sea. Of the fourth of the ways here compared, the “way of the man with the maid” (or “in the maid”), i.e., of the mysterious way in which the man in sexual intercourse has fruitful connection with the maid, this failure to leave any trace behind seems indeed to be less true. And yet the author in this connection doubtless thinks not of pregnancy and the woman’s child-bearing as later results of sexual connection, but as Pro_30:20 shows, at first only of this, that the intercourse leaves behind it no traces immediately and directly apparent; man and wife, adulterer and adulteress, can the night following the accomplishment of the mysterious process be convicted of it by no one; the act is as little to be detected in them both as eating in him who after table has wiped his mouth (Pro_30:20, b, c). Moreover, the woman in Pro_30:19 is designated as עַלְמָה i.e., as virgo pubescens, as a young woman capable of sexual intercourse (comp. Gen_24:43; Isa_7:14; Song Son_6:8), undoubtedly for this reason, that she is to be put in contrast with the adulterous woman in Pro_30:20; in other words, the sexual intercourse between man and woman is to be described first in its pure and normal type (the first love of the bridegroom and the bride, comp. Gen_2:24; Eph_5:31-32; Joh_3:29), and only afterwards in its degenerate form as adultery. Furthermore, the “Alma” of our passage has been in many ways interpreted also of the Virgin Mary, e.g., by Ambrose, Lyra, Corn, a Lapide, and Fr. Grisenius (in Löscher’s “Unsch. Nachrichten,” Vol. 13, p. 503) [and also by Wordsw. in loco].—Dathe has very unnecessarily been disposed to regard Pro_30:20 as a spurious addition by a later hand. It is not even necessary (with Hitzig) to regard the Verse as a later addition coming from Agur himself, which he “had not originally had in view.”
9. Pro_30:21-23. Four intolerable things under which the earth trembles (not “the land,” as Luther, Umbreit, Bertheau, etc., render, weakening the sense). With Pro_30:21 comp. Amo_2:13; Amo_7:10.—Under a servant when he becometh ruler.—This is the first and most familiar example, by which the moral danger, and even the ruinous consequences of a sudden elevation of men from a depressed condition to an influential station and unwonted prosperity, are illustrated.—And a fool when he is satisfied with bread.—The “becoming surfeited” is usually attended by a becoming insolent (see Pro_30:9), especially in the case of a fool to whom not satiety but hunger is properly becoming (Pro_13:25; Job_27:14).
Pro_30:23. Under a hated woman when she is married. By the “hated woman” is meant, not one who is “odious,” “worthy of hate” (Rosenm., [E. V., H., N., S., M.,]), nor again a woman already married and only neglected and disparaged by her husband (Dathe, Umbreit,), but, as appears from the “when she is married, when she obtains a husband,” one who has remained waiting, the maiden (old maid) who at first could obtain no husband, but afterward when she has been married triumphs insolently, and deals harshly and contemptuously with her sisters or companions who are single (comp. Gen_29:31; Gen_29:33; Deu_21:15-17.) The same will be the conduct, according to clause b of a maid “when she becomes heir to her mistress,” i.e., undoubtedly, when she supplants her mistress in the favor of her husband, and so becomes his all-powerful favorite.
10. Pro_30:24-28. The four things that are small and yet wise (with respect to מְחֻכָמִים, made wise or quick of wit, comp. Psa_58:6; Psa_64:7). Four species of small animals are thus described, which in spite of their comparatively diminutive size and strength of body, yet by virtue of their diligence (Pro_30:25), shrewdness (Pro_30:26), harmony (Pro_30:27), and flexibility (Pro_30:28) serve as instructive emblems for the domestic, social and political life of men.—With Pro_30:25 comp. Pro_6:7-8.—For the “conies” (Z. “cliff-badgers”) in Pro_30:26, i.e., the hyrax Syriacus which live in companies in Syria, Palestine and Arabia Petræa (not the marmot, the mus sive dipus jaculus, comp. Linnæus, or the rabbit, as Luther renders the word, following the Chald. and the Rabbins), see Psa_104:18; Lev_11:5; Deu_14:7. [See Thomson’s Land and Book, I. 459, and also Wood’s Bible Animals, pp. 312–18; and for his illustration of the nature and habits of the ant of Palestine, pp. 616–22; for the locusts see pp. 596–604; and for the gecko, a species of lizard which he understands to be referred to in Pro_30:28 instead of the “spider,” see pp. 643, 534 sq. A.].—For the “organized going forth” of the locusts, in Pro_30:27, comp. especially Joe_2:2 sq., [and Thomson, Land and Book, II. 109]. Finally the lizard in Pro_30:28 is as its name signifies the poisonous spotted lizard (stellio, Vulg.) in regard to which the thing here made prominent is its sly entering into the interior of houses, and even into the palaces of the great. For this characteristic of the animal Bochart brings forward various testimonies, Hieroz., I. Pro_4:7, p. 1090, Frankfort Ed. [Gesenius, Fuerst, etc., favor this rendering, and Wood (ubi supra) describes and depicts the peculiar form of the feet by which the lizard, the Gecko, “layeth hold” even upon flat surfaces like the walls of apartments.—A.]
11. Pro_30:29-31. The four creatures that have a stately movement; three animals, and the king in his all-ruling dignity and power. The whole description really turns upon the last.
Pro_30:31. The greyhound, slender in its loins. This is the probable meaning of the difficult phrase זַרְזִיר מָתְנַיִם (according to the Jewish interpreters, Ewald, Bertheau, [E. V., S., M.,] etc.). For זַרְזִיר is plainly derived from the root זַר “to compress,” and therefore denotes a compact, slender animal; and the neighboring term seems to indicate the intention not to bring together exclusively examples of animal majesty of the high rank of the lion, but to give to the enumeration as a whole in a certain sense a ludicrous variety and an air of wit. The old versions (LXX, Vulg., Targ., etc.,) suggest the cock; with this meaning of the main noun the modifying term, however, does not at all agree, even though one were disposed to transform it into a Hithp. Part. מִתְנַיֵּם. Others, like Schultens, Gesen. (?), Umbreit, Elster, Hitzig [De W., K., Muffet, N.] take the זַרְזיִר in the sense of “that which is girded about the loins, or panoplied,” and therefore the war-horse,—a meaning however which is not surely demonstrable. [Starting with the same idea Wordsw. understands a “warrior,” and Wood an “athlete.” Fuerst’s rendering is “stag”].—And a king with whom no resistance (occurs). In this way (with the Vulg., the Rabbins, Geier, Michaelis, Bertheau, Ewald, [K., E. V., H., S., M.], etc.), we must interpret the words אַלְקוּם עִמּוֹ, although the אַל־מָוֶת of Pro_12:28 is a very doubtful parallel for this way of regarding אַלְקוּם as a compound of אַל and קוּם. For the identification of this noun with the Arabic ַַז דْ “the people” (Castellio, Pococke, Umbreit, [De W., N.], etc.), an argument might seem to lie in the fact that the meaning so reached, “the king at the head of his people,” agrees almost literally with the δημηγορῶν ἐν ἕθνει of the LXX, and the similar version of the Syriac. But to bring in an Arabic word, especially one compounded with the article al is here quite too unnatural. Hitzig’s emendation might better recommend itself, אֱלֹהים instead of אַלְקוּם, and all the more because it gives a very pertinent sense: “A king with whom God is.”
12. Pro_30:32-33. Warning against pride, haughtiness and love of strife, with an indication of three forms of evil resulting from these vices.—If thou art foolish in exalting thy self(comp. 1Ki_1:5) and if thou devisest evil. To these two hypothetical antecedent clauses, which do not present an antithesis (the foolish and rational—as Hitzig explains) but two different forms of human error: foolish self-exaltation and wicked plotting, the sentence “the hand on the mouth,” forms the conclusion, interjectional and imperative (comp. Job_20:5).
Pro_30:33 then justifies the warning by a significant intimation of three cases in which the foolish act of “pressing” (מִיץ) brings forth undesirable results,—strong cheese, flowing blood, sharp strife.—And pressing (forcing) wrath produceth strife. The last word supplies plainly the object of the whole discourse from Pro_30:32 onward. The dual אַפַּיִם stands doubtless intentionally (comp. Dan_11:20) to indicate that it is the wrath of two whose sharp pressing upon each other leads to the development of strife. [Thomson, Land and Book, I. 398, describing the Oriental mode of churning by squeezing and wringing a leathern bag or bottle that contains the milk, makes more apparent and vivid the meaning of this comparison. The dual אַפַּיִם is employed probably because nostrils usually exist in pairs, and the transition is easy from the physical organ, through the heavy breathing of passion, to the metaphorical sense “wrath.” Whether two or many are concerned in strife is not material.—A.]
DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL
As the confession of an Israelite, a believer in Jehovah in a strange land, one separated from his people of the ten tribes, who among Arabs and the sworn and mortal enemies of Israel, adheres firmly to the faith of his nation, this discourse of Agur is one of great doctrinal importance, and of no slight interest to the history of redemption. Its fundamental idea, which is put forward as a sort of programme, is contained in the six Verses of the introduction, and comes out most clearly in Pro_30:5 : Every word of God is pure; a shield is He to them that trust in Him. It is the truth, purity and saving power of the word of God alone, in contrast with the nullity and inadequacy of all human wisdom (Pro_30:2-5), that forms the starting point in the instructive discourse of this poet of wisdom, and to which all the manifold apothegms, numerical proverbs and enigmas which he combines in a varied series in Pro_30:7-33, sustain a closer or more remote relation.
While it appears at the first view that the flowers and fruits from the cornucopia of Agur’s wisdom, original and in part so rarely fashioned, are heaped up wholly without order, yet they all agree in this, that they depict the glory and all-sufficiency of the word of God, dissuade from adding to it by any human supplements (see in particular Pro_30:7), and most urgently commend the fulfilling and following it by a pious life. There is hardly a single commandment of the Decalogue that is not directly or indirectly repeated and emphasized in these maxims. Observe the relation of the prayer for the hallowing of God’s name (Pro_30:7-9), to the first and third commandments; the reference contained in Pro_30:11 and again in Pro_30:17 to the fifth commandment; the warnings against the transgression of the sixth commandment in Pro_30:14 as well as in Pro_30:32-33; the reproving and warning aim of Pro_30:18-20; Pro_30:23, in their bearing upon the seventh; the allusion to the eighth in Pro_30:9, and to the ninth in Pro_30:10; and finally the reference, reminding us of the tenth, in Pro_30:15-16, as bearing on the unsatiableness of evil desire (this “daughter of the blood-sucker” and sister of hell!). No one of these proverbs is wholly without an ethical value, not even the two numerical proverbs, Pro_30:24-31, which at the first view stand apart as incidental reflections on merely natural truths, but in reality hide under their ingenious physical drapery decided moral aims. For in Pro_30:24-28 four chief virtues of one’s social and political avocation are specified through an allusion to a like number of examples from the animal world (comp. exeg. notes, No. 10), and Pro_30:29-31 run into a delineation of the high dignity and glory of a king by the grace of God (in contrast with the insufferable tyranny of base upstarts, Pro_30:21-23).
It is true that the point of view taken in the author’s doctrinal and ethical knowledge nowhere rises above the level of the pure religion of the law. The law’s doctrine of retribution he holds with inexorable strictness and severity, as is indicated particularly in the fearful threatening prediction in Pro_30:17 against children who are disobebedient to their parents (γονεῦσιν ἀπειθεῖς, Rom_1:30). Against those who do not belong to the people of God of the Old Testament he appears to cherish prevailingly dispositions of hate and abhorrence, as the utterance in Pro_30:11-14, which is probably directed against such non-Israelitish people, shows (see remarks above on this passage). With respect to knowledge in the department of theology and Christology his point of view seems in no respect more elevated than that of the author of chaps. 1–9; for in Pro_30:4 he confesses that he knows nothing of the name of the Son of God, and he nowhere makes reference to the existence and efficiency of the hypostatic wisdom of God, not even where this would have been natural enough (e.g. in Pro_30:4-6). He need not be charged in addition with the intermingling of impure and superstitious notions from polytheistic religions, for the Aluka with its two daughters, in Pro_30:15, is evidently mentioned by him only with a symbolical design, as a personification of insatiableness (an evil lust that nothing can quell), and is by no means represented as an actually existing spectre, or demoniacal nature.1
HOMILETIC AND PRACTICAL
Homily on the entire chapter:—The all-sufficient power and the fullness of blessing in the divine word in contrast with the weakness of mere human wisdom: a) in general (Pro_30:1-6); b) with special reference to the glory and indispensable necessity of the Decalogue (Pro_30:7-33); comp. Doctrinal and Ethical notes.—Or again: To God’s word and law man is to add nothing (Pro_30:1-6), but he is also to take nothing away, not even one of its least commandments (Pro_30:7-33).—Stöcker: All true wisdom comes from God alone (1–7), not from human nature, which is rather exceedingly corrupt (11–17), and whose understanding is greatly weakened (18–24).
Pro_30:1-6. Melanchthon: Human wisdom is able to devise no means of preservation from the ignorance and spiritual weakness which naturally belong to us. But the Church in its divine revelation possesses a light which not only reveals to it the causes of its spiritual destitution, but also points out the means for its elevation and healing. Therefore this divinely revealed truth must be listened to by us, must be received in faith as well in its threatenings of punishment as in its consolatory contents, and be guarded from all corruption and perversion.—Luther (marginal comment on ver.2): Wise people know that their wisdom is nothing; fools know everything and cannot err.—Geier (on Pro_30:2-3): With the knowledge of himself and of the deep corruption that dwells in him the Christian must make the beginning in the contemplation of divine things.—[Arnot: It is a precious practical rule to look toward heaven while we measure ourselves.—Trapp: Godliness as it begins in right knowledge of ourselves, so it ends in a right knowledge of God.—Edwards: All true spiritual knowledge is of that nature that the more a person has of it the more is he sensible of his own ignorance].—Starke (on Pro_30:4-6): Whoever is engaged in the investigation and exposition of God’s word, let him take his reason captive to the obedience of faith, and not curiously scrutinize, that he may make divine mysteries comprehensible.—Stöcker (on Pro_30:5-6): On the glory of the divine word, especially its clearness, utility and perfectness.—Berleburg Bible (on Pro_30:6); How many counterfeiters there are who from their poor copper make additions to the royal gold currency of God’s word, and thereby debase it!—[Lawson: Our trust must be in the name of the Lord, as it is represented to us in the word of God; the seed and the ground of our faith in Him.—Muffet: It is treason to corrupt or falsify the prince’s coin; what high treason must it needs be then to counterfeit or corrupt the pure word of God!]
Pro_30:7-17. Comp. P. Gerhard’s poetical reproduction of Pro_30:7-9 : “Zweierlei bitt’ ich von dir,” etc. (Gesamm. geistliche Lieder, No. 41).—[Trapp: God heaps mercies on His suppliants, and blames them for their modesty in asking.—Arnot: Agur’s requests are specific and precise; the temporal interests are absolutely subordinated to the spiritual prosperity of the suppliant; and a watch is set against the danger to a soul which lies in extremes either of position or of character.—Bp. Hopkins: There is a seeking of worldly advantages which is not to be branded with the black mark of self-seeking; e.g. when we seek them with a due subordination to the higher and more noble ends of piety and holiness, such as that we may escape those temptations which possibly the want of them might expose us unto.—Flavel: How much better were it for thee to endure the pains of hunger than those of a guilty conscience.—Bates: To receive no hurtful impressions by great changes of condition discovers a habit of excellent grace and virtue in the soul].—Geier: Although poverty and riches of themselves can neither make us blessed nor damn us, yet both are wont incidentally and through the fault of men not rarely to bring after them consequences injurious to our spiritual welfare.—(On Pro_30:10): Keep thy tongue bridled, especially when it is disposed to rage against the needy and helpless; for though it is not right to curse thy neighbor, yet such curses when they have been uttered do not remain without effect, particularly if he who utters them is one who has been unjustly oppressed.—Starke (on Pro_30:11-14): The natural corruption of men is great; yet it is possible that they be purged from it by the blood of Jesus Christ; 1Co_4:11; 1Jn_1:7.—Unthankfulness (Pro_30:11), self-righteousness (Pro_30:12), pride (Pro_30:13), and unmercifulness (Pro_30:14) are usually associated as an unblessed quartette of sisters.—Wohlfarth (on Pro_30:15-16): Many are the evil spirits that go about among men to spread misfortune and ruin, the cruel spectre of avarice is one of the most formidable enemies of our race. Like the vampyre which in the night attacks sleepers and sucks their blood, this demon rages in palaces and cottages, etc.—(On Pro_30:17): What Agur here says by way of warning of ravens and vultures, etc., has already gone a thousandfold into literal fulfilment in a horrible way on children who are wayward and in consequence of their disobedience to parents sunk in the deepest spiritual need; who were either driven to self-murder, or died on the scaffold.
Pro_30:18-31. Luther (marginal, on Pro_30:19).: Love (the mystery of love, Eph_5:31-32) is not to be thought out or expressed.—Geier (on Pro_30:18-20); As it is with adulterers so it is with flatterers; they will never allow their vicious nature to be called by the right name.—(On Pro_30:21-23): It always causes manifold disquiet and misfortune, when they rule over others whom it would better befit to be subject to others.—(On Pro_30:24-28): Despise not things that at the first glance appear small and contemptible. Under a poor garment there is often a wise man hid; Dan_1:18-20.—(On Pro_30:29-31): In matters belonging to one’s office and public calling it is important to be courageous and firm, especially in times of need. It is not well then if one forsakes those over whom one is set; Sir_10:31.—[Lawson (on Pro_30:20): Do not imagine that the secrecy of sin is your security from punishment: it is the snare of your souls].
Pro_30:32-33. Luther (marginal, on Pro_30:32): Be not ashamed if thou hast chanced to err, and do not defend it. For to err is human, but to defend it is devilish.—Lange: Strut not with lust of the eyes, fleshly lust and insolence. Thereby thou only provokest the wrath of God, that will come down too heavily for thee; Sir_5:2 sq.—Berleburg Bible: He that would gladly shun strife must seek to avoid obstinacy and self-will. How many useless disputes in matters of religion might not in this way be escaped—[Edwards: Silence attends humility.—Muffet: He which falleth through pride should rise again to repentance].
Footnotes:
[1]The case appears to be otherwise with the spectre of the night לִילִית mentioned in Isa_34:14; comp. Delitzsch on this passage.
Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures (Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical), ed. John Peter Lange, English translation edited by Philip Schaff (1864–1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Daniel D. Whedon 1874 · Public Domain 1. The prophecy — המשׂא, (hammassa,) the utterance, the…
1. The prophecy — המשׂא, (hammassa,) the utterance, the oracle — oracular saying or discourse. It may also mean parable or proverb. It is the word occurring so often in the prophets rendered “burden.” Hitzig, followed by others, throwing away the Masoretic points, takes Jakeh out of the category of proper names and puts Massa into it, reading, “the son of her who was obeyed in Massa,” or whose domain is Massa. The name Massa is found among the children of Ishmael, (Gen_25:14,) and as Massa and Dumah are mentioned together, both there and in 1Ch_1:30, his supposed that the country of Massa adjoined that of Dumah, where there was probably a colony of Israelites of the tribe of Simeon. Comp. 1Ch_1:41-43.
Ithiel — Separated into two words, לאי תיאל, lei thiel, issupposed to make the sense, I have toiled for God, or after God, or, “to God with me.” — Miller.
Read full note →
Ucal — By a little change of points this word becomes, I have ceased, desisted from, or ended, (my toil,) or, according to Miller, “I am able.” Those who take Ithiel and Ucal to be proper names, believe them to be the pupils of Agur, and it is conjectured that the different parts of Agur’s discourse is in answer to questions proposed by these pupils, after the manner of the ancient schools — “hearing them, and asking them questions.” Luk_2:46.
Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges 1878 · Public Domain 1. the prophecy] Lit. the burden, as the word…
1. the prophecy] Lit. the burden, as the word is frequently rendered (e.g. Zec_9:1; Mal_1:1, where see notes in this Series). It may mean either burden from its weighty character, as a Divine announcement, or oracle, or prophecy, as being “taken up” (comp. Num_23:18) by the speaker.
The reading of R.V. marg. Jakeh of Massa, making Massa a proper name, is however preferred by some scholars. See Pro_31:1, note.
Read full note →
the man] a title of excellence (vir), used of himself as a prophet or teacher by Balaam, Num_24:3, and by David, 2Sa_23:1.
spake] or saith. The word is commonly used of Divine or oracular utterance, as in the frequent phrase, “saith, the Lord.”
lthiel and Ucal] He addresses himself to his favourite disciple, associating with him another scarcely less favoured, and through them to every one that has an ear to hear.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers 1878 · Public Domain 8. THE PROVERBS OF SOLOMON END HERE. THE REST…
XXX.
8. THE PROVERBS OF SOLOMON END HERE. THE REST OF THE BOOK IS COMPOSED OF THREE APPENDICES: (a) THE WORDS OF AGUR; (b) THE WORDS OF KING LEMUEL; AND (C) THE PRAISE OF A GOOD WIFE (Proverbs 30, 31).
Read full note →
APPENDIX (a).
(1) The words of Agur the son of Jakeh, even the prophecy.—Jewish interpreters have seen in these titles (but apparently without a shadow of reason) a designation of Solomon himself, the “convener” and instructor of assemblies (Ecc_1:1; Ecc_12:11), son of the “obedient” man after God’s own heart. But they in all probability belong to some otherwise unknown sage, whose utterances were thought not unworthy of being joined with those of the wise King of Israel himself. In support of this view 1Ki_4:30 may be adduced as a proof of the estimation in which the wisdom of foreign nations was at this time held. The book of Job also, which possibly now was added to the canon of Scripture, is certainly of foreign, probably of Arabian, origin. Some light may be thrown upon the nationality of Agur by the words translated in the Authorised version “the prophecy” (massâ). This is the term constantly employed to express the “utterance,” or, more probably, the message which a prophet “bore” to his hearers, often one of gloomy import (Isa_13:1, etc.). But the term is not very appropriate to the contents of this chapter, nor to the “words of King Lemuel,” in Proverbs 31, and the expression, “the prophecy,” standing quite alone, with no other words to qualify it, is very singular. For these reasons it has been proposed to translate the beginning of the verse thus: “The words of Agur the son of Jakeh the Massan,” i.e., a descendant of the Massa mentioned in Gen_25:14 as a son of Ishmael. This would place his home probably in North Arabia, and Lemuel would be king of the same tribe.
The man spake.—The word translated “spake” is most frequently used of the revelation of God to prophets, rarely (Num_24:3 and 2Sa_23:1) of the utterances of inspired prophets; never of the words of ordinary men.
Unto Ithiel, even unto Ithiel and Ucal.—These most probably were disciples of his. As their names may mean “God with me,” and “I am strong,” a fanciful delineation of their characters, in the style of the “Pilgrim’s Progress,” has been attempted by some writers. And a mystical interpretation of them, “You must have God with you, if you are to be strong,” may be found in Bishop Wordsworth’s Commentary. It has been proposed also, as is possible with a slight change in the pointing, to translate these words thus: “I am weary, O God, I am weary, and am weak,” or, “have made an end,” and to make them an introduction to Pro_30:2, which supplies the reason for this weariness, “For I am more brutish,” etc. Thus is described, it has been thought, the sinking at heart of one who has sought after God, and the more he has realised the divine excellence, has become the more conscious of his own nothingness. But this rendering is unnecessary, as the Authorised version gives a good sense.
A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Pulpit Commentary 1880 · Public Domain Vers. 1-33. Part VII FIRST APPENDIX TO THE SECOND…
Vers. 1-33. Part VII FIRST APPENDIX TO THE SECOND COLLECTION, containing "the words of Agur. A short introduction, teaching that the Word of God is the source of wisdom (vers. 1-6), is followed by apothegms on different subjects (vers. 7-33). Cornelius a Lapide offers the following opinion concerning this appendix, which no one can hesitate to say is well founded, if he attempts to give it a spiritual interpretation, and to discern mysteries under the literal meaning: "Quarta haec pars elegantissima est et pulcherrima, aeque ac difficillima et obscurissima: priores enim tres partes continent Proverbia et Paraemias claras, ac antithesibus et similitudinibus perspicuas et illustres; haec vero continet aenigmata et gryphos insignes, sed arcanos et perdifficiles, turn ex phrasi quae involute est et aenigmatica, tum ex sensu et materia, quae sublimis est et profunda.
The words of Agur the son of Jakeh, even the prophecy. This seems to be the correct rendering of the passage, though it has been made to bear very different interpretations. It is plainly the tide of the treatise which follows Wire Agur and Jakeh were is utterly unknown. The Jewish interpreters considered that "Agur son of Jakeh" was an allegorical designation of SolomonAgur meaning "Gatherer," or "Convener"; (see Ecc_1:1 Ecc_12:11) Jakeh, "Obedient," or "Pious," which thus would indicate David. St. Jerome somewhat countenances the alle gorical interpretation by translating, Verba Congregantis, filii Vomentis, "The words of the Collector, son of the Utterer." But what follows could not apply to Solomon; he could not say, "I have not learned wisdom" (ver. 3), or ask blindly after the Creator (ver. 4). Many have endeavoured to find Agur"s nationality in the word that follows, translated "the prophecy" (aCmj, hamassa). Massa "burden," is usually applied to a solemn prophetical speech or oracle, a Divine utterance, (Isa_13:1 Isa_15:1, etc.) and as this designation was deemed inappropriate to the character of this appendix, it has been thought that allusion is here made to a land of Massa, so called after a son of Ishmael, (Gen_25:14) who dwelt in the country of Edom or Seir, and whose inhabitants were among those children of the East whose wisdom had become proverbial. (1Ki_4:30) Others find Massa in the Hauran, or on the north of the Persian Gulf. The Venetian Version gives, Logoi Agourou uiewv Iakewv tou Masaou . But we have no satisfactory account of a country thus called, and its existence is quite problematical; therefore the ingenious explanations founded on the reality of this terra ignota need not be specified (see Introduction, pp. 21, etc.). Gratz has suggested that in place of hamassa should be read hammoshel, "the proverb writer;" but this is a mere conjecture, unsupported by any ancient authority. If, as seems necessary, we are compelled to resign the rendering, "of Masse," or "the Massan," we must fall back on the Authorized Version, and consider the term "oracle" as applied loosely and abnormally to these utterances of wisdom which follow. That they are not of the nature of Divine communications can be seen at once by consideration of their contents, which are mainly of human, and not of the highest type, and, though capable of spiritual interpretation, do not possess that uniqueness of purpose, that religious character and elevation of subject, which one expects in the enunciations of an inspired prophet. This view does not militate against their claim to be regarded as Holy Scripture; their place in the canon is secured by other considerations, and is not affected by our suspicion of the inappropriateness of the term applied to them; and, indeed, it may be that the very human element in these utterances is meant to be unsatisfying, and to lead one to look for the deep spiritual truths which underlie the secular surroundings. Agur is some poet or moralist, well known in Solomon"s time, probably one of the wise men referred to in Pro_24:23 (see below). The rest of the paragraph is of greater obscurity than the former portion. The man spake unto Ithiel, even unto Ithiel and Ucal. According to this rendering, the man is Agur, who is introduced as uttering what follows in ver. 2, etc., to Ithiel and Ucal, two of his sons, pupils, or companions. The name Ucal occurs nowhere else in the Old Testament; Ithiel is found once, in Neh_11:7, as the name of a Benjamite. Wordsworth regards the names as symbolical of the moral character of those whom the author designs to address, explaining the former as equivalent to "God with me," and the latter as denoting "consumed" with zeal, or "strong," "perfect." It is as if the writer said, "You must have God with you; yea, you must have God with you, if you are to be strong. You must be Ithiels, if you are to be Ucals." He refers to 1Co_15:10 2Co_3:5 Php_4:13. That the Masorites regarded these words as proper names is evident; lkau, indeed, can have no other application. The Syriac takes this view of the words; to the same opinion lean, more or less, the Jewish translators Aquila and Theodotion, Aben Ezra, Vatablus, Pagninus, and others, and it is the simplest and easiest solution of the difficulties which have been seen in the clause. But many modern commentators have declared against it; e.g. Hitzig, Zockler, Detitzsch, Bottcher, Nowack. The repetition of Ithiel seems unmeaning; one sees no reason why it should be repeated more than Ucal. The second verse begins with yKi, which, as Hebraists agree, cannot stand abruptly at the commencement of a discourse, but rather establishes something that has preceded. But if we take the words in dispute as proper names, no statement to be confirmed has been made. We are, then, constrained to take them in another sense. St. Jerome translates them, writing, Visio quam locutus est vir, cum quo est Deus, et qui Deo secum morante confortatus. The LXX (which in troduces vers. 1-14 of this chapter after Pro_24:23) gives, "Those things saith the man to those who believe God, and I cease;" toiv pisteuousi Yew being the translation of the doubled Ithiel, equivalent to "God with me," and lkaw (pauomai ) being considered to be a formation from the root hlk. Ewald takes the two words to be the name of one man, equivalent to "God with me, so I am strong;" in his own language, Mitmirgott sobinich stark; but his idea of a dialogue between the rich mocker (vers. 2-4) and the humble believer (ver. 5-14) is not well founded, though a late editor, Strack, agreeing, considers that the only possible interpretation of these verses (2-4) is to make the speaker utter them as the outcome of his unbelief and scoffing, to which Agur answers in ver. 5. Under all circumstances, it has seemed to many scholars best to surrender the notion of proper names, and, altering the vocalization, to interpret, "The oracle of the man, "I have wearied myself, O God, I have wearied myself, O God, or, as others say, "about God." The utterance commences here, and not at ver. 2. The repetition forcibly expresses the laborious and painful investigation of the seeker after truth. The final word, vocalized lkiaew, is rendered, "And I have withdrawn;" or, as Bickell, quoted by Cheyne, gives, vlo ukal, "I have not prevailed." We arrive thus at this interpretation: first comes the superscription, "The words of Agur," etc., "the oracle of the man;" then begins the utterance, which opens with the melancholy avowal that, though he had longed and striven to know God, his nature, his attributes, his working, he had failed in this object, and expended his labour in vain. Both Agur, and Lemuel who is named in Pro_31:1, seem to have been persons not of Israelitish nationality, but dwelling in the neighbourhood of Palestine, and acquainted with the religion and sacred literature of the chosen people (see ver. 5). It is by no means unlikely that they were of the race of Ishmael, from which stock many wise men had risen, and where wisdom was so cultivated as to have become proverbial. (see Jer_49:7 Oba_1:8) In what follows Agur shows himself as a philosopher and a critic, but at the same time a firm believer.
Read full note →
Vers. 1-4. The weary search for God.
If we read ver. 1 thus: "Words of Agur the son of the Princess of Masse. The man"s saying, I have wearied myself about God, wearied myself about God then did I withdraw!" we are led to the contemplation of one who has grown tired and despairing in a hopeless search for God.
I IT IS NATURAL FOR MAN TO SEEK GOD. Agur appears to have lived far away from the borders of the favoured land of Israel. If he was a Jew, he was one in exile, separated from the home of his people. If he was an Ishmaelite, he was even outside the covenant of Israel, and in that case we have the striking picture of an Arab of antiquity anticipating Mahomet in breaking from the idolatry of his fathers. Like Balsam, like Job, this resident in a heathen land looks up to the true God. St. Paul spoke to the Athenians of those who could "seek God, if haply they might feel after him, and find him"; (Act_17:27) and St. Peter could acknowledge God"s acceptance of all who look to him truly, no matter what race they might belong to. (Act_10:35) The natural search of the soul for God springs from certain great fundamental facts, viz.:
1. God is the Father of all men.
2. All men need God.
3. All men are separated from God by sin, and therefore must feel naturally at a distance.
The world needs God. But the world has lost God. Hence the natural search for God.
II THE NATURAL SEARCH FOR GOD RESULTS IN WEARINESS. This is not the weariness of protracted thinking, the reaction from high mental tension. It is worse than that; it is the weariness of a long and apparently fruitless search. Man cannot by searching find out God. God does not appear to respond to the inquiry of the seeking mind. Even to the wisest of the Greeks he was "an Unknown God". (Act_17:23) For God is not visible to the natural reason, nor is he ever seen excepting when he reveals himself. Now, there is no weariness like that of a long and hopeless search. The sickness of despair then begins to tire the soul. Such weariness drives men at last to abandon the vain pursuit. Agur said, "Then did I withdraw!" He gave up the inquiry. This is the refuge of agnosticism.
III THE GREATNESS OF GOD"S WORKS MAKES THE SEARCH FOR HIM A WEARINESS. How vast is his created universe! No man can reach up to the starry altitudes of heaven, or dive into the deep mysteries of antiquity, to find the scope and range of the Divine activity. The tremendous energy of nature overwhelms us. Science can investigate its laws, and in a measure make use of its forces; but they come out of a terrible darkness, and they transcend the control of so feeble a creature as man. Agur did not simply distress himself with his own fruitless thinking. He knew something of the history of philosophy, and yet he had not been able to find one inquirer who had solved the terrible enigma over which his own heart was breaking.
IV THE SEARCH FOR GOD Is SATISFIED IN THE REVELATION OF CHRIST. St. Paul said to the Athenians, "Whom therefore ye ignorantly worship, him declare I unto you". (Act_17:23) This is not an authoritative declaration of a dogma of Divinity.
1. The revelation of Christ is such that we can see it and understand it for ourselves. We can see that God is in Christ by observing the stamp of the Divine on his countenance the signs of God in his life and work. Then in knowing Christ we know God. (Joh_14:9)
2. Moreover, this revelation of God in Christ flashes a light on the huge mystery of the universe, and helps us to find God in nature.
3. The reconciliation between man and God, effected by the cross of Christ, removes the dark barrier of sin, which is the greatest hindrance to the soul in its search for God, and brings us into the presence of God, where we can behold "the beatific vision.
HOMILIES BY E. JOHNSON Vers. 1-6. Agur"s sayings: God"s Word the fountain of all wisdom.
These are the words, probably, of a believer in Jehovah who was a stranger in a foreign land. Among the sworn foes of Israel and her faith, we have in him an example of Puritan rectitude, of unflinching fidelity to conscience, that is highly instructive. The purity of God"s eternal truth, and the safety of all believers in him (ver. 5), this is his simple and sublime leading theme.
I THE BEING OF GOD AN UNUTTERABLE MYSTERY. (Ver. 1) In vain had he sought to explore the unfathomable secret of his essence, by searching to find out the Almighty unto perfection. It was higher than heaven what could he do? deeper than Hades what could he know? This was substantially the confession, expressed in different forms, of all the great prophets. Compare the accounts of Isaiah"s consecration, Jeremiah"s and Ezekiel"s. True religion is rooted in this sense of the Divine mystery. All piety is shallow without it. In every conscious feeling, thought, aspiration, we are but travelling on the edge of a great abyss, moving towards a horizon which still recedes. In our deeper moments we are all mystics, and there are times when all talk about God seems babble, and we would fain take refuge in the "sacred silence of the mind.
II THE INTELLIGENCE OF MAN DULL AND INADEQUATE IN RELATION TO DIVINE THINGS. (Vers. 2, 3) No words are too self-contemptuous to express the sense of the immense gulf which separates our thought from God. Applied to definable objects, our intelligence scents bright and piercing; applied to the Infinite Might and Wisdom and Purity, no better than the vacant gaze of the ox in the pasture. Look into those beautiful brown eyes; there is a depth of pathos in them, but no "speculation," no power to grasp the unity and law of things that print themselves in pictures on the retina. And what are we, though raised above the "creatures that lead a blind life within the brain," but helpless gazers into infinity? Well did Sir Isaac Newton and all the great seers of science realize this feeling. Their consummate knowledge was, viewed on another side, consummate ignorance. They had not thereby attained absolute wisdom, nor "won the knowledge of the Holy." There have been, indeed, modern philosophers who have proposed an "absolute philosophy;" but time has discovered the idleness of their "o"er-vaulting ambition," and made a fable of their folly.
III THE INACCESSIBLE IN NATURE RECOGNIZED. (Ver. 4) One of the first principles laid down by the great Goethe was Learn to distinguish between the accessible and the inaccessible in nature to your thought. For want of this, theologians on the one hand, scientists on the other, have rushed into presumption in seeking to wrest the inscrutable secrets of nature from the hand of God. The unknowableness of the first beginnings of things was recognized by the ancient thinker. The height of heaven, the movements of winds and waves, the changes of the earth"s surface, all may be brought under law; but the word "law" conceals the greater mystery the nature of the Lawgiver himself. God is not identical with law, any more than we are identical with speech. Law is but the partially understood speech of God to our intelligence. Examine all the sublime names which have been given to God in the course of revelation, in the process of religious thought; behind them all ties the unutterable and unthinkable Somewhat.
IV THE SELF-REVELATION OF GOD RECOGNIZED. (Ver. 5)
1. To say that God is utterly unknowable is as great an error as to say that he is perfectly knowable by the human understanding: Such an admission must cut at the root of religion. On the contrary, religion implies revelation. Because God has spoken to us, we may speak to him; because he has stooped to us, we may rise towards him. In manifold ways through nature, through inspired men, through the Son, through the conscience God "has spoken to the world." If this be denied, religion is an entire illusion.
2. The quality of his oral revelation. The writer is thinking of the oral and written Law. Because definite, articulate, it may be spoken of as the Word of God par excellence; but by no means are the indefinable and inarticulate revelations through nature to our spirit excluded. From every sight of beauty and every sound of music in the world we may derive unspoken messages of him "whose nature and whose name is Love." And God"s Word is pure. The refined silver of the furnace is a favourite image of this, its quality. From the alloy of duplicity, flattery, hypocrisy, it is free. God deals sincerely with us. And, therefore, it is purifying. We behold the true life of the soul in its mirror.
3. The practical blessing of trust in him. He who speaks to us is to be trusted. And in this trust in One who is eternal and infallible, pure arid true, we have security. The Law or Word which declares his will is like a broad hand stretched above us to command, and, in commanding, to protect, reward, and bless.
4. The duty of strict reverence and loyalty towards his words. (Ver. 6) Much they leave unsaid, which it is not for us to supply. The general lesson seems to be respect for that element of reserve and mystery which lies behind all that is or may be known. We may "lie" against God by saying more than he has actually said to us by any channel of knowledge. To exceed or exaggerate seems ever a readier temptation than to keep within the modest bounds of positive declaration. And certain penalties await all distortions of the truth of every kind; they work themselves out in the conscience and the course of history. J.
HOMILIES BY W. CLARKSON Vers. 1-6. Reverence and docility.
Whoever Agur may have been, it is certain that he was a sage who could express his thoughts in strong and trenchant language. If, as seems probable, these opening words had reference to the compliments or the questions of his disciples, we may glean, before we proceed further, three lessons by the way.
1. That rightful acknowledgment too easily passes into adulation.
2. That it is a very easy thing for the uninstructed to ask questions which the most enlightened cannot answer.
3. That true genius is modest, and knows well the hounds of its capacity. The main lessons are
I OUR DUTY TO DISCLAIM WHAT IS NOT TRUE CONCERNING US. Agur, using the language of hyperbole, energetically disclaims any such elevation as he was imagined to have attained (vers. 2, 3). Men will sometimes deny us the virtue or the wisdom which we may claim; but they will often offer us an honour which is not our due. We may be taken to be wealthier, or wiser, or stronger, or more generous, or more devout than we know ourselves to be. We should then distinctly and determinately decline to receive what does not belong to us. To accept it
(1) is dishonest, and any kind of dishonesty is sinful;
(2) is likely to inflate our minds with fond and vain conceptions, hurtful if not fatal to our humility;
(3) will sooner or later end in exposure and humiliation.
II THE GREAT OBLIGATION TO REVERENCE. (Ver. 4) We may know many things, but, when it is all told, what an infinitesimal fraction is this when compared with all that is unknown! What vast, what inexhaustible treasures of truth and wisdom are hidden, and must remain hidden, in the air, in the earth, in the sea! How little, then, can we understand of him, the Eternal and Infinite One, who reigns in the heavens! How unfathomable the depth of the riches, both of the wisdom and knowledge of God"! (Rom_11:33)
1. How foolish to expect to understand his purpose, whilst he is outworking it, either concerning our individual life or the destiny of our race!
2. How prepared we should be to accept what God has taught us respecting our nature, or our duty, or our prospects, or respecting his own nature and his will!
3. How unwise to attempt to add to his teaching by any inventions of our own! Not, indeed, that we are not to make new applications, and find out truer interpretations of his Word; but that we are not to think and speak as if we had sources of wisdom apart from his Divine communication.
III THE REWARD OF DOCILITY. (Ver. 5) To learn of God is:
1. To repair to the fountain of purity. Everything God has said to us tends to purity, to Freedom from a degrading selfishness, from a corrupting worldliness, and from an enslaving and a shameful sensuality. To fill our minds and hearts with his holy truth lifts us up into an atmosphere where our whole nature is elevated and refined, where we are capacitated for the vision and fitted for the presence and the home of God. (Mat_5:8 Heb_12:14)
2. To learn of God and to connect ourselves with him by faith in Jesus Christ is to be well shielded in the battle of our life. For it is to have
(1) strong, sustaining principles within us, and
(2) the active and efficient guardianship of God around us as we pass through the sorrows of our life, and mingle in its many conflicts, and discharge its varied and weighty duties. C.
The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary 1892 · Public Domain Pro_30:1. Agur. There have been many conjectures about this…
CRITICAL NOTES.—
Pro_30:1. Agur. There have been many conjectures about this person. Many consider that it is a figurative name, and some have adopted the old Jewish tradition that it is an allegorical designation of Solomon. “The name,” says Delitzsch, “means ‘the gathered’ ” (see chap. Pro_6:8; Pro_10:5), also “the collector,” or the word might mean, perhaps, “industrious in collecting.” The son of Jakeh, etc. Stuart and Zöckler adopt here the reading of Hitzig and others, and read “The son of her who was obeyed in Massa (or the princess of Massa): I have toiled for, or wearied myself about, God, and have ceased.” For their reasons the student is referred to their commentaries, where the subject is discussed at great length. Ithiel and Ucal signify respectively “God with me,” and “the son of the mighty,” and the common opinion is that they were Agar’s disciples. From the great differences between the language and style of the last two chapters of the book, and those which have preceded them, most scholars believe that they were written outside the land of Palestine. Zöckler thinks that “Agur and Lemuel might very properly be regarded as Arabian-Israelitish shepherd-princes or kings of a colony of Israelites of the tribe of Simeon that had emigrated to northern Arabia.” (See 1Ch_4:38-43; Mic_1:15; Mic_2:8; Mic_2:10.) Delitzsch suggests that they were “Ishmaelites who had raised themselves above the religion of Abraham, and recognised the religion of Israel as its completion.”
Read full note →
Pro_30:2. Brutish, i.e., without reason.
Pro_30:10. Stuart and Zöckler here read “Cause not a servant to slander his master.” Delitzsch agrees with the English version.
NOTE.—The following is Miller’s unique translation of the first four verses of this chapter with his reasons for the same, and the teaching which he sees in the passage. “It struck us that we would take the simple Hebrew and inquire its meaning. We would accept nothing as a proper name till we found it destitute of sense; and, following no intricate conceits, we would fail of a directer meaning before we went off into anything more difficult. It is astonishing how facile the result. We believe that all was the work of Solomon. We believe that there was no such man as Agur, except the great man Jesus Christ. We believe there was no such king as Lemuel. We believe everything is the work of Solomon as much as any other proverb. If it appear Arabic or extra-Hebraic no matter. Solomon gathered his materials over a wide surface. We believe it is distinctly what it says, The prophecy. We count it as all finished in the four first verses, and Jakeh and Ithiel, and Ucal and Muel in the next chapter (Pro_30:1-4). We would be quite willing to read that way, if, like Lo-ammi in the prophet, or Lo-ruhamah, words confessedly significant (Hos_1:8-9), it were thought euphonious or wise to give them without a translation. But what the Hebrews saw why not our people see? Certain it is that the words to a Hebrew were about as follow:—
“
1. Words of I-fear, Son of the Godly: The Prophecy:—
“The Strong Man speaks to God-with-me, to God-with-me and to I-am-able.
“
2. Forasmuch as I am more brutish as to myself, than a man of the better sort,
“and have not the intelligence of a common man.
“
3. and have not been taught wisdom and yet know the knowledge of holy things.
“
4. who has gone up to heaven and come down?
“who has gathered the winds in his fists?
“who has bound the waters in a garment?
“who has set firm all the extremities of the earth?
“what is his name, and what is his son’s name? Because, Thou knowest.
“Let us examine, first, the language, and then the result as to the sense. I-fear. This is the very simplest Hebrew. It actually occurs in Deuteronomy (Deu_32:27). The verb is the familiar one בוּר, which means primarily to turn out of the way. And this turning out of the way for danger is a prudent and innocent character of fear. Agur therefore, or I-fear, with the light we get afterward, marks himself as the Strong Man of the next clause; the Son of the Godly, because descended out of the loins of the Church (see Rev_12:5); and the Man—just as Muel (chap. Pro_31:1) is God and man—contemplating the low humanity of Christ, which is about to express its wonder at its amazing knowledge. Godly; from a root meaning to venerate: Jakeh is in the singular, and means the pious one; which keeps in view what is too often forgotten, that Christ was not the son of the abandoned, but, as His mother expresses it (chap. Pro_31:2), the son of my vows. The Prophecy; not needfully prediction, as in the present case, but an oracle, vision, or inspired elation of any kind. The words that follow constitute the prophecy for though the speech of the Man-Christ does not begin till the second verse, the very names in the next clause are predictive; and the most vitally so of the whole of the vision. The Strong Man; strong, though weak; strong because he sees in himself such wonderful conditions. The word strong is implied in the noun that is selected. Speaks; oracularly. It is the solemn, poetic, and in fact, rare expression. To-God-with-me. That the Man-Christ should address the Deity has innumerable precedents. If it were necessary, we could imagine the Human Nature as addressing the Divine Nature; for that really occurs in high Eastern vision, in the Book of Zechariah (chap. Pro_3:4; Pro_3:6-8). In lofty texts, like this, it is perfectly admissible. Christ speaks of His Divine Nature (Joh_3:13); and speaks of it as being where the Man Christ Jesus was not, viz., in Heaven. But the fourth verse of this chapter mentions both Father and Son; and therefore in this, which is so near it, it is not necessary to distinguish. The Strong Man speaks to the God which was with (Him), and calls Him Ucal, which means I-am-able. There was a powerful Divinity in Christ, and that He was wondering about. His mother repeats the wonder in the after case (chap. Pro_31:2). The whole is a grand Prophecy of Christ in the form of a grand inquiry. Agur makes it of Ithiel, That is, the Man, I-fear, goes searching into the God-with-me. There is an I-fear part and an I-am-able part, of His one Grand Person; and these parts speak even in the New Testament with the humility (Joh_5:19) and with the splendour (Joh_8:58) that belong to each. Forasmuch as; the simple particle because. I am more brutish, i.e. more the mere untaught animal. As to Myself, i.e. as to my human self; for it is the Strong Man that speaks. The emphasis is laid by the mere expression of the pronoun. Than a man of the better sort; than an educated, refined man, which Christ was not. And have not the intelligence of a common man. That is, he had not the education usually given to the more lowly. The commonness of the humanity is expressed again by the noun. And have not been taught wisdom. Here the emphasis is on taught. And yet know the knowledge of holy things. The meaning of the whole is, that he has singular light. He confronted the doctors in the temple, and, as a little child, was a miracle. Whence came this? This is what the prophecy represents as a surprise. Who has gone up to Heaven and come down? Somebody has. The Strong Man addresses this appeal to the God-with-me; and ends it significantly;—Who is it? Because Thou knowest. One word back in the third verse:—know the knowledge. We have not altered this, nor said have the knowledge, which would be better English, because this seems the intentional form. The words that Christ gave to His disciples, God gave to Him; and Christ, in saying so, would include all senses; the outer word; the inner word; the outward blessed revelation, and the inner teaching. He knew the knowledge; i.e., He discerned in perfect ways what the Spirit without measure was there to impart. Going up to heaven, gathering the wind, binding the waters, and setting firm the extremities of the earth, were the work of a Divinity. Some Divinity had been at work upon Him. He applies to the Able One, to the God with Him, to explain a low man’s wonderful knowledge, and then adds, as significant of the reply, Because Thou knowest.”
This extract is given here, not because we agree with Miller’s view of the passage, but as affording a specimen of the mode of interpretation which he adopts throughout the book.
MAIN HOMILETIC OF THE PARAGRAPH.—Pro_30:1-9
THE SOURCE OF TRUE HUMILITY
I. In proportion as men know God they confess they know Him not. A child looks above his head at the midnight sky and he concludes that the stars that he sees are only so many shining points which have no use beyond that of beautifying the heavens and giving a little light to our world. He does not think that there is any more to know about the stars, but this conclusion of his is based upon complete ignorance. How different is the attitude of the astronomer in relation to the stars. He has good reason to believe that each one is a sun like unto that which makes the centre of our own system of planets, and this enlarged knowledge enables him to form some idea of how much he has to learn about them, and so draws from him such a confession of ignorance as a child would never utter. He realises that what he knows is nothing in comparison with what there is to know, and it is his increased knowledge which makes him feel thus. So men who never reflect upon the nature or character of God have no conception of the height and depth of the knowledge of the Infinite, and hence have no conception of their ignorance concerning Him. It is only the man who has in some degree apprehended the greatness of his Maker that has any idea of how far he is from comprehending Him, and his consciousness of ignorance increases with his growth in the knowledge of God. Agur, who here declares that he has no “knowledge of the Holy,” and is “without understanding” on the highest and deepest subjects, was evidently a man who had endeavoured by searching to find out God, and his confession is the result of his knowledge and not of his ignorance. But what he knew only served to show him how much remained unknown.
II. Therefore humility is the great sign of high attainments in Divine knowledge, and those who know most will be the most able and willing to be taught more. Humility is the effect of the most thorough acquaintance with any subject, and of the most profound meditation upon it. When men utter their opinions in the spirit of self-conceit, and are lifted up by their acquirements, we must ascribe it to their ignorance and not to their knowledge. Those who have learned most are the most teachable scholars and the first to welcome instruction from whatever source it may come. If we were to tell a savage of the wonderful capabilities of electricity he would most likely look upon us with contempt, and refuse to believe our statements; but if we were to speak to an experienced electrician about some new theory or discovery in relation to it he would not turn from us in disdain simply because he was unacquainted with it, but would gladly welcome any new light upon the subject. This is pre-eminently the case in the knowledge of all that relates to the Divine Being. When He becomes the object and subject of study and contemplation—when a creature who had no existence a few years ago seeks to know Him who is God from everlasting to everlasting he finds himself embarked upon an ocean without a shore, and is compelled to exclaim: “Such knowledge is too wonderful for me, it is high, I cannot attain unto it.” (Psa_139:6.) His humble reverence will always be in proportion to the progress that he has made. He who knew as much about God and His dealings as any man who has ever lived, gave, as the result of his researches, that “His ways are past finding out,” and was led by it to ascribe to Him “glory for ever” (Rom_11:33-36); and all who have trodden the same path, either before or after him, have arrived at the same conclusion, and have acquired the same spirit of humility. And this is the spirit which makes a man willing and therefore able to receive a higher and deeper revelation. Because he knows that he has not “already attained”—that there is no comparison between what he knows and what there is to know—his mind is ever open to receive new instruction, and be welcomes any means by which he can advance a step nearer to that “light which no man can approach unto” and catch a fresh glimpse of Him “whom no man hath seen or can see.” (1Ti_6:16.)
III. The unsearchableness of God is no hindrance to practical godliness. If Agur could not know all that he desired about God, he knew enough to trust Him, and enough to make him desire to serve Him. He could from experience testify that God had spoken to men, and that His word was to be depended on, and that there was a reward to those who kept it. If God is unknowable in some aspects of His nature, godly men in all ages have found him a shield in danger, and a rock of certainty, upon which it is safe to rest. Although Agur could not ascend into heaven and read the secrets of the other world, he felt that he could strive to walk with God in this world, and the effect of a real conviction of the greatness and majesty of God is not to drive men from Him but to draw them near in holy living as well as in humble adoration.
OUTLINES AND SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS
Pro_30:2. This was true humility, that like true balm ever sinks to the bottom, when hypocritical, as oil, swims on the top … He that looks intently on the sun hath his eyes dazzled; so he that beholds the infinite excellencies of God, considers the distance, cannot but be sensible of his own naughtiness, nothingness. It is fit the foundation should be laid deep, where the building is so high! Agur’s humility was not more low than his aims lofty: “Who hath ascended up to heaven?” It is a high pitch that he flies, for he knew well that godliness, as it begins in a right knowledge of ourselves, so it ends in a right knowledge of God.—Trapp.
Pro_30:4. The discourse is philosophically accurate, as well as religiously devout. It is through the mutual relations of air, earth, and water, that the Supreme Ruler gives or withholds the food of man (Pro_30:8). These three, each in its own place and proportion, are alike necessary to the growth of grain, and consequently to the sustenance of life.… The earth is the basis of the whole operation … Alike in its creation and its arrangement, its material and its form, the final cause of the earth has obviously been the growth of vegetation and the support of life. But the earth could not bear fruit at any portion of its surface without the concurrence of water; and how shall the supply of this necessary element be obtained? “Who hath bound the waters in a garment?” Again the clouds and showers, the springs and streams, with one voice answer, God. So wide is the dry land, and so low lies the water in its ocean storehouse, that we could not even conceive how the two could be made to meet, unless we had seen the cosmical hydraulics in actual operation from day to day and from year to year. Here lies the earth, rising into mountains and stretching away in valleys, but absolutely incapable, by itself, of producing food for any living thing. There lies the sea, held by its own gravity helpless in its place, heaving and beating on the walls of its prison-house, but unable to rise and go to the help of a barren land.… In this strait—when the land could not come to the water and the water could not come to the land—a Mediator was found, perfectly qualified for the task. “Who hath gathered the wind in His fists?” The air goes between the two, and brings them together for beneficent ends. The atmosphere softly leans on the bosom of the deep, and silently sucks itself full. The portion so charged then moves away with its precious burden, and pours it out partly on the plains but chiefly on vertebral mountain ranges. Thus the continents are watered from their centres to the sea.—Arnot.
MAIN HOMILETICS OF Pro_30:5-6
THE WORD OF GOD
I. God has given man a knowledge of His character and will. Although, as we have just seen from the preceding verses, God is so great and incomprehensible in His nature, there is a knowledge of Him which is possible to man and which he possesses. This seems reasonable before experience. If a man built a vessel which he intended to send his son to navigate across an unknown sea, we should conclude beforehand that he would put a compass in the vessel. And we should likewise conclude before experience that a just God would not build a world, and call into existence a creature like man to dwell in it, without furnishing him with a compass by which to guide his life—a revelation and a law by obedience to which he can be blest and saved. And what might have been expected has come to pass. God has spoken, and has thus met human expectation and human need. Agur recognised this fact in the days of old, and we, to whom in these last days God has spoken by His Son (Heb_1:1), have a clearer revelation. In answer to Agur’s question, “Who hath ascended up into heaven, or descended,” we can bring the words of Christ, “No man hath ascended up to heaven but He that came down from heaven, even the Son of Man which is in heaven” (Joh_3:13), and in the record of His life and death obtain the fullest and clearest revelation of God that it is possible for Him to give and for us to receive.
II. The word of God is what of necessity it must be. The sun is in its nature light, and therefore rays of light must proceed from it. That which flows from it must of necessity be of the same nature as the sun whence it comes, and the fountain of natural light being pure the streams which flow from it must be pure also. When human words are a reflection of the human soul, and “out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh” (Mat_12:34), the spoken word must be of the same nature and character as the inward feelings. The purity of the outward word will be in proportion to the purity of the inner life. God is moral light—“In Him is no darkness at all” (1Jn_1:5)—therefore, rays of moral light must flow from Him; all that proceeds from Him must be, like Himself, perfectly free from all shadow of moral imperfection.
III. Because the word of God is what it is, it must be carefully preserved from human additions. It is manifest that nothing that man can add to what God has said can make His word more fitted to a man’s needs, any more than any intervention of man can make the sun more perfectly adapted to human vision. It is therefore a criminal act for any creature to add to the Divine Word by putting his own ideas on an equality with the revealed thoughts of God, and most foolish for him to expect them to have the same power on the heart and conscience as Divine words have. “The law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul” (Psa_19:7), and man must not tamper with its perfection. “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness. That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works” (2Ti_3:16-17). The fact that it comes from God is a guarantee that blessing will come from seeking to understand and obey it, and condemnation by seeking to improve it by human addition.
OUTLINES AND SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS
It is the saying of Tertullian, “This is the first thing which we believe, that there is nothing beside God’s word to be believed.” … At least it must not be taught or received, as added to His words, either as of equal authority with them, or as supposing any defect in them.… He therefore that addeth to God’s words, shall add unto his own words the just and sharp reproof of God upon them; and whatsoever any may think to find by the doing of it, he shall himself therefore be found a liar. Search them thou mayest to find the depth of them, explain them thou mayest that others may be able to find the meaning of them: but in searching, in explaining, let nothing be added that is contrary to them.… For what can he be but a liar that opposeth truth itself?—Jermin.
The learner is far in advance of his starting-point now. He set out in quest of knowledge to gratify a curious intellect; he ends it by finding rest for a troubled soul. He addressed himself successively to the air, and the water, and the earth; but they were all dumb. They sent back to him only the echo of his own cry. Turning next to the Scriptures, he finds what he sought and more. His darkness vanishes, and his danger too. No sooner has he learned that the word is pure than he learns that the speaker is gracious.—Arnot.
There is, perhaps, in the expression here a more immediate reference to the unmingled truth of God’s word. This suits the connection with what follows:—“He is a shield unto them that put their trust in him.” Scepticism and infidelity unsettle the mind. They leave it without confidence and without security. The mind under their influence is like a vessel that has drifted from its moorings, and has been left to drive out to sea, without rudder and without anchor,—unmanned, and at the mercy of the winds and waves and currents:—or, to keep nearer to the allusion in the verse under comment, it is like a soldier in the thick and peril of the battle without a shield, in danger from every arrow that flies, and every sword that is raised against him. They make their unhappy subject the sport and the victim of every delusive theory and every temptation of Satan. Hence such expressions as that of Paul to the Ephesians:—“Over all, taking the shield of faith, wherewith ye shall be able to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked.” God is the “SHIELD” of all who trust in Him. And it is the trust,—it is the firm faith in God,—that imparts the feeling of security. So, what is here said of God himself is said of His truth or faithfulness:—“His truth shall be thy shield and buckler.” God could not be “a shield,” though His power be almighty, unless He were faithful. It is His faithfulness that renders Him the object of trust. And when this view of God’s faithfulness is such as to impart perfect trust—the spirit, calm and tranquil, feels as if it were under the protection of an all-covering shield.—Wardlaw.
MAIN HOMILETICS OF Pro_30:7-9
THE MIDDLE WAY
I. A desire that our circumstances should be favourable to our godliness reveals a soul alive to the meaning of existence. The man who values his health more than his raiment, and is more anxious to keep his body in a fit condition to work than to clothe it in purple and fine linen, reveals that he rightly estimates the comparative value of the two, and values most that which is worth most. But no man attains to a right estimate of the comparative worth of all that belongs to him until he values his character more than all things else, and is willing to suffer the loss of all his other possessions in order to preserve that. He is a wise man who, in the choice of clothes, considers first what will conduce to health; but the highest wisdom is that which leads a man in choosing—so far as he is able—his position in life, to consider first of all what will be favourable to his soul’s welfare. Such a man reveals that he has made the all-important discovery that the chief end of man is to glorify God, and that he can do this only by a holy life. He therefore makes it the aim of his life to say in deed as well as in word “Hallowed be thy name;” for he has learned the lesson of the text, that anything less than perfect dependence upon God is a denial of Him, and any act of doubtful integrity is “taking His name in vain.”
II. A prayer that our circumstances may be thus favourable, reveals a soul conscious of its own weakness. There can be no doubt that a man’s confidence in God ought to be so strong as to remain unshaken in the most adverse circumstances, and his spirituality ought to be deep enough to remain uninjured in the greatest temporal prosperity, but this is but seldom the case. All sincere and humble servants of God acknowledge their proneness to yield to temptation, and the more vital their godliness, the more earnestly do they put up the petition, “Lead me not into temptation.” Paul could say without boastfulness, “I know both how to be abased, and I know how to abound. I can do all things through Christ that strengtheneth me” (Php_4:12-13), but there have been but few men who could say this with truth, and those who have been most like him in spirit have been the most ready to acknowledge the danger of being exposed to either extreme. A very robust man can keep in perfect health either in the arctic regions or in the torrid zone, but there is most safety in living in a region between these two extremes, and the wisest men acknowledge this, and unless duty calls them, prefer the latter to either of the former. So a man of God, although he hopes that he might be found faithful in any circumstances, reveals a right spirit of humility when he puts up the prayer of Agur. For he knows that the tempter of man is most skilful in using our circumstances against our godliness, and that both great wealth and extreme poverty are weapons which he can use with great skill.
OUTLINES AND SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS
Pro_30:7. Agur re-enforces his request. It was honest, else he would never have begun it; but being so, he is resolved to follow it. So Jacob would have a blessing, and therefore wrestles with might and slight; and this he doth in the night and alone, and when God was leaving Him, and upon one leg.… When poor men ask us two things we think we deal well if we grant them one. Few are Naamans that when you beg one talent will force you to take two. But God heaps mercies on his suppliants, and blames them for their modesty in asking.—Trapp.
Pro_30:8. We are not only to pray for the removal of sin, but for the removal of it at a great distance from us. As God removes it far away in pardon, the soul that abhors sin desires to have it far removed from the heart and life. Our Lord teaches us not only to pray against sin, but against temptation; for there is a strong inclination in the hearts of men to comply with temptations when they are presented to the soul. If a man has a bag of powder in his hands, he will certainly wish to keep at a distance from the fire.—Lawson.
Food convenient is obviously not a fixed measure. It implies, not a bare sufficiency for natural life, but a provision varying according to the calling in which God has placed us. “If Agur be the master of a family, then that is his competency, which is sufficient to maintain his wife, children, and household. If Agur be a public person, a prince or a ruler of the people; then that is Agur’s sufficiency, which will conveniently maintain him in that condition.” Jacob when “he had become two bands,” evidently required more than when in his earlier life “with his staff he had passed over Jordan.” (Gen_32:10.) What was sufficient for himself alone, would not have been sufficient for the many that were then dependent upon him. The immense provisions for Solomon’s table, considering the vast multitude of his dependants, might be only a competency for the demand (1Ki_4:22.) The distribution of the manna was food convenient—nothing too much, but no deficiency—“He that gathered much had nothing over; and he that gathered little had no lack.” (Exo_16:18.) And thus, in the daily dispensation of Providence, a little may be a sufficiency to one, while an overflowing plenty is no superfluity to another. Only let Christian self-denial, not depraved appetite, be the standard of competency.—Bridges.
Pro_30:9. Many in their low estate could serve God, but now resemble the moon, which never suffers eclipse but at her full, and that is by the earth’s interposition between the sun and herself.—Trapp.
For Homiletics on the subject of Pro_30:10 see on chap. Pro_24:28-29, page 689.
The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary (gen. ed. Joseph S. Exell; Funk & Wagnalls, c. 1892) — public domain (pre-1929). A full-Bible homiletical/sermon-outline anthology covering 65 of 66 books (2 John is absent from the source module). Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Sermon Bible 1900 · Public Domain Pro 30:24-28
Pro 30:24-28
I. "The ants are a people not strong," etc. (1) This is forecast. The ants know the time of their opportunity, and make the best of it. (2) Every man has a summer. "Now is the accepted time; now is the day of salvation."
Read full note →
II. "The conies are but a feeble folk," etc. The tenant is weak; the habitation is strong. Here is a puny, a very feeble folk, going up towards the great rock house. There is something very pathetic, very beautiful, in that—in weakness seeking the granite, in feebleness hiding itself in some pavilion of rock. There is a Rock provided for all weakness.
III. "The locusts have no king, yet they come forth all of them by bands"—a very beautiful and practical republic. They have no king, but every one of them has a little bit of kingliness in himself. Here I find co-operation. That is how it must be in business, in families, in Churches, in governments, in all great confederacies of life.
IV. "The spider taketh hold with her hands," etc. Does this mean skill? This skill will have its reward. Does it mean patience in working out elaborate and beautiful results? Then here is progress—getting into kings’ houses, into high places, into palatial position. "In all labour there is profit."
Parker, City Temple, 1871, p. 52.
I. You must learn of the ants to take thought about time to come. Youth and childhood are your summer. Now is the best time for laying up food for your souls.
II. You must learn of the conies to have a place of safety to flee to in time of danger. Your souls have many enemies.
You need the help of One who can keep you safe. Those boys and girls are wise who put their trust in Jesus Christ, and ask Him to take care of their souls. Jesus is the true Rock for children to flee to.
III. You must learn of the locusts to love one another, to keep together, and help one another.
IV. You must learn of the spider not to give up trying to be good because of a little trouble. Keep on trying not to do what is evil, and trying always to do what is good and pleasing to God.
Bishop Ryle, Boys and Girls Playing, p. 45.
References: Pro 30:24.—Outline Sermons to Children, p. 80. Pro 30:26.—Spurgeon, Evening by Evening, p. 327. Pro 31:1.—W. Arnot, Laws from Heaven, 2nd series, p. 392; E. Paxton Hood, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xxiii., p. 56. Pro 31:1-9.—R. Wardlaw, Lectures on Proverbs, vol. iii., p. 367. Pro 31:10-12.—E. H. Bradby, Sermons at Haileybury, p. 160. Pro 31:10-31.—W. Arnot, Laws from Heaven, 2nd series, p. 397; R. Wardlaw, Lectures on Proverbs, vol. iii., pp. 378, 400. Pro 31:26.—A. Rowland, Homiletic Magazine, vol. x., p. 129. Pro 31:30.—E. W. Shalders, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xiii., p. 35. Pro 31:30, Pro 31:31.—W. Arnot, Laws from Heaven, 2nd series, p. 407.
The Sermon Bible, ed. William Robertson Nicoll (1888–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
J. R. Dummelow 1909 · Public Domain The Words of Agur
The Words of Agur
The simplest way of treating the title is to read as follows: 'The words of Agur, son of Yakeh, of Massa.' Then we may proceed, with RM, 'The man saith, I have wearied myself, O God; I have wearied myself, O God, and am consumed; for I am too stupid to be a man.' Nothing is known of Agur or Yakeh, and we can only say of these proverbs that they are unlike any that have preceded, and are evidently of later date. The grouping of objects in twos, threes, and fours reminds us of Job_5:19; Psa_62:11; Amos 1, 2, and of later Jewish books, such as 'The Ethics of the Fathers' and the Talmudic treatise 'Horajoth.'
Read full note →
1-4. He lays no claim to the wisdom of which some boast: he does not profess to understand the 'Holy One' (RV), or to be Master of Nature (Job 38). The garment is the clouds.
5, 6. Men should attend to the word of revelation, which is pure as refined gold; they add to its teachings at their peril.
7-9. Two desirable things.
8. Each household slave had an allotted portion of food (Pro_31:15): God is here the head of the family, weighing out to me 'the bread of my portion' (RM).
9. When in great distress men often blaspheme (Isa_8:21; Rev_16:9). But the meaning may be that he dishonours the name of his God by stealing (Eze_36:20).
11-14. Four classes of detestable people.
15, 16. Read, 'The leech hath two daughters—Give, Give.' There is an Indian proverb: 'Fire is not satiated with wood, nor the ocean with streams, nor death with all the living, nor woman with man.'
17. The unburied corpse will be devoured by ravens of the wadi and by vultures (RM): eagles do not eat corpses.
18, 19. Four mysterious things: cp. Wis_5:10, Wis_5:11.
19. Maid] lit. 'young woman.'
20. This woman is an animal, in whom conscience has never been developed.
21-23. Four intolerable things.
23. The odious woman is the one who has long been rejected, but she secures a husband at last. A handmaid, etc.] Either she inherits from, or she supplants, her mistress: if the latter is meant, cp. Sarah's jealousy of Hagar.
24-28. Four animals, small but wise.
26. The creature improperly called coney here and at Lev_11:5; Deu_14:7; Psa_104:18 is the Syrian 'hyrax,' an animal about the size of a rabbit, which feeds on grass, and lives in companies in the clefts of the rocks.
27. By bands] cp. Joel 2.
28. The 'lizard' (RV) is so small that 'you can grasp it with your hands' (RM).
29-31. Four creatures of stately gait.
31. Instead of greyhound LXX has the 'cock.' The fourth creature can hardly be the king: the passage is corrupt.
33. Retain the same word throughout: pressing milk, pressing the nose, pressing strife. The 'curd' (not butter), which is a favourite and refreshing drink in the East, is made by shaking the milk about in a vessel of skin.
J. R. Dummelow, A Commentary on the Holy Bible (Macmillan, 1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Arno C. Gaebelein 1922 · Public Domain Some hold that Agur is another name for Solomon.…
VI. THE WORDS OF AGUR THE SON OF JAKEH
CHAPTER 30
Read full note →
Some hold that Agur is another name for Solomon. This opinion is also upheld by the Talmud, which speaks of six names which belonged to the King: Solomon, Jedidiah, Koheleth, Son of Jakeh, Agur and Lemuel. But this opinion cannot be verified, nor do we know who Agur the son of Jakeh was. The Septuagint and the Vulgate have translated the Hebrew words and formed a sentence out of them. “Agur” means “assembler” and Jakeh has the meaning of “pious,” so that some think that Agur means an unknown godly man who gathered these sayings and they were embodied in this book. We leave the name as it is, and believe that Agur, the son of Jakeh, is the name of the author of this chapter. “Whoever Agur was, he had a certain marked individuality; he combines meditation on lofty questions of theology with a sound theory of practical life. He was able to give valuable admonitions about conduct. But his characteristic delight was “to group together in quatrains visible illustrations of selected qualities or ideas” (R.F. Horton). The opening verse also tells us that he spoke to Ithiel (God with me) and Ucal (I shall be able). The Revised Version has a marginal reading instead of the two names Ithiel and Ucal: “I have wearied myself, O God. I have wearied myself O God, and am consumed.” We do not adopt this.
The structure of the chapter itself is different from the other chapters in this book. It begins with a prologue, containing his confession, in which he shows a spirit of deep abasement and acknowledgment of his own ignorance Pro 30:2-33).
This is followed by five questions concerning creation and the Creator and His Son Pro 30:4.
The questions are answered by God’s revelation. This is indicated in the next two verses Pro 30:5 and Pro 30:6.
Next comes a prayer by Agur the son of Jakeh Pro 30:7-33).
One proverb follows next in the tenth verse. After that come the so-called “quatrains,” six groups of proverbs each consisting of four things. Between the second and third group a single proverb is inserted Pro 30:17 and at the close of the chapter stands another proverb.
In the prologue he takes the low place, and in his confession manifests the deepest humility, with no taint of pride, thus illustrating the true humility enjoined in the proverbs of Solomon. Because he confessed that he had no understanding nor knowledge of the holy, the Lord gave him all what he lacked.
The questions he asks are concerning the Creator. “Who is He that hath ascended up into heaven and descended? Who hath gathered the wind in His fists? Who hath bound the waters in a garment? Who hath established all the ends of the earth? What is His Name, and what is His Son’s Name, if thou canst tell?” He knows there is a Creator. He cannot question the eternal power and Godhead, which alone can account for this ordered universe. He has not, like many thinkers, ancient and modern, dropped a plummet down the broad deep universe, and cried, No God. He knows there is a God; there must be an intelligence abled to conceive, coupled with power able to release this mighty mechanism. But Who is it? What is His Name or His Son’s Name? Here are the footsteps of the Creator; but where is the Creator Himself? (Expositor’s Bible) By searching God cannot be found out; the fullest answer is given in the New Testament. We are reminded of Joh 3:13. We know Him who has ascended, because He descended from heaven; Who is the Lord and Creator of all, now in God’s presence as the glorified man, and some day He who ascended into heaven will descend again.
That in the next place the Word of God is mentioned, that is the written revelation of God, is not without meaning. Man needs this revelation to know the Lord, and have the question answered which human speculation and scientific research can never answer. On account of the statement “add thou not unto His words” critics have surmised that the canon of the Old Testament must have been completed when this chapter was written. They have put the date long after the exile. But such a conclusion is unwarranted. God had commanded long before that nothing should be added to His words Deu 4:22). The prayer of Agur in Pro 30:7-9 is closely linked with the foregoing verses. He prays for deliverance from vanity and lies, that he may have a true and honest heart, so necessary for the reception of the truth of God; then he prays to have neither poverty nor riches. Poverty might induce to steal and take the name of God in vain, then His Word would be rejected by him; and riches would mean the same, as it might lead him to say, Who is the Lord?
The proverb in the form of a command in Pro 30:10 is isolated from the trend of thought in this chapter. The first quatrain comes next in Pro 30:11-14. Four times the word generation is used, describing the classes of people frequently mentioned in the preceding chapters of proverbs. Then follow four things which are insatiable. The climax is reached gradually. The horseleach (or vampire) has two daughters by name of “Give.” Even so is the poor heart of man; and there are three and four things of the same character; the unseen regions into which disembodied spirits are going day after day, year after year; the barren womb; the earth upon which rain descends yet is never filled with water, and the fourth thing, the fire, which never saith, it is enough, which consumes till nothing is left. These unsatiable things mentioned are symbolical of the condition of the natural man, always taking in yet always, restless and never satisfied. Then there are four things inscrutable: The way of the eagle in the air; the way of the serpent on a rock; the way of a ship in the midst of the ocean; and the way of a man with a maid Pro 30:18-33).
Four disquieting things are given in Pro 30:21-23. In Pro 30:24-28 the four little things, yet wise, are pictured. They are the ants, the conies, the locusts and the lizard (not spider as in the A.V.). Here are lessons for man: the sluggard, the fool, the evil man, and other characters touched upon in proverbs are put to shame by the sagacity of these little things. Four graceful things conclude these sayings: A lion, a greyhound, an he-goat and a king, against whom there is no rising up. So may the righteous man act. Bold as a lion, swift as the greyhound to carry out the Lord’s will in the Lord’s service, climbing the steeps like the he-goat, and always victorious like a king undefeated. We see that these statements of Agur have a definite bearing upon the entire book of Proverbs inasmuch as they restate and illustrate the different characters, such as the ungodly, the unwise, the fool, the sluggard, the proud, the righteous, the godly, the humble, etc., mentioned in the book. Agur’s message ends with a word of counsel to exercise self-restraint.
Arno C. Gaebelein, The Annotated Bible (1913–1922) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Paul E. Kretzmann 1924 · Public Domain God’s Word as the Source and Dispenser of all…
God’s Word as the Source and Dispenser of all Wisdom
v. 1. The words of Agur, the son of Jakeh, a wise man, otherwise unknown, some of whose maxims were added to the proverbs of Solomon as the first supplement, even the prophecy, the prophetic utterance: the man spake unto Ithiel, even unto Ithiel and Uchal, literally, according to the best texts: "I have steadfastly endeavored, I have constantly vexed myself, O God,"
Read full note →
v. 2. surely I am more brutish than any man, or, "for a man I am lacking in sense," for which reason he finds himself unable to fathom the divine nature, and have not the understanding of a man, that which a man should possess in order to have an insight into the attributes of the Lord.
v. 3. I neither learned wisdom nor have the knowledge of the Holy, since to know God is the center of all true wisdom. It is impossible for mere man to fathom the mysteries of the divine essence.
v. 4. Who hath ascended up into heaven or descended? Who hath gathered the wind in his fists? Who hath bound the waters in a garment? Who hath established all the ends of the earth? All these great acts of creation and preservation are fully understood by the Creator alone. What is His name, and what is His Son’s name, if thou canst tell? It is a most emphatic way of saying that no human being is able to uncover the secrets of God’s essence. Instead, therefore, of foolishly and vainly puzzling over the incomprehensible nature of God, the believers should turn to Him in simple trust of faith.
v. 5. Every word of God is pure, purified, rendered free from all impurities of human beings; He is a shield unto them that put their trust in Him, making Him their refuge at all times.
v. 6. Add thou not unto His words, since the revelation of God in the Bible is fully adequate and sufficient for the needs of all men, lest He reprove thee, convicting the intermeddler of his blasphemous conduct, and thou be found a liar, for all precepts and commandments of men become lies when intermingled with the Word of God and placed on a level with it.
v. 7. Two things have I required of Thee, in an earnest prayer; deny me them not before I die, the poet’s entreaty being for a constant enjoyment of these blessings during his whole life:
v. 8. Remove far from me vanity and lies, deceit and lying words, every form of transgression of the Eighth Commandment; give me neither poverty nor riches, both extremes being dangerous for the average human being; feed me with food convenient for me, literally, "of my lot or portion," as much as God found best to assign to him, as much as he needed,
v. 9. lest I be full, surfeited by an overabundance, and deny Thee, in the notion that he no longer needed the care of Jehovah, and say, Who is the Lord? such being the danger on the one side, or lest I be poor, in the abyss of severe want, and steal, and take the name of my God in vain, such mockery and blasphemy being found in the mouth of such as believe themselves ill-treated in this world or not properly recognized by the Lord.
v. 10. Accuse not a servant unto his master, by slanderous reports, lest he curse thee, for the wrong done to him, and thou be found guilty, obliged to pay the penalty of the transgression.
v. 11. There is a generation, a detestable class of people, that curseth their father and doth not bless their mother, thus becoming guilty of one of the most atrocious forms of ungodliness.
v. 12. There is a generation that are pure in their own eyes, proud in their own estimate of self, puffed up in their own conceit, and yet is not washed from their filthiness, they are blind against their own shortcomings and transgressions, Rev 3:17.
v. 13. There is a generation, O how lofty are their eyes! and their eyelids are lifted up, in haughty contempt of others.
v. 14. There is a generation whose teeth are as swords and their jaw-teeth, specifically the canines, as knives, to devour the poor from off the earth, and the needy from among men, without the slightest show of compassion. This insatiable oppression is now characterized by a hold comparison.
v. 15. The horse-leech hath two daughters, crying, Give, give! never being satisfied with what they have already gotten. There are three things that are never satisfied, yea, four things say not, It is enough:
v. 16. the grave, although the number of dead are placed into it in endless succession, and the barren womb, where conception and birth is not possible, the earth is not filled with water, though tons of rain fall in every shower, and the fire that saith not, It is enough, being known as the most insatiable of the ancient elements.
v. 17. The eye that mocketh at his father, pride and contempt being shown especially in the eye, and despiseth to obey his mother, in deliberate waywardness and disobedient scorn, the ravens of the valley shall pick it out, when the unburied corpse becomes carrion, and the young eagles shall eat it, such being the punishment of the Lord upon those who despise His representatives on earth and therefore set aside His authority.
Paul E. Kretzmann, Popular Commentary of the Bible (1921–1924) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
unfoldingWord translationNotes 2017 · CC BY-SA 4.0 Agur ... Jakeh ... Ithiel ... Ucal
Agur ... Jakeh ... Ithiel ... Ucal
These are the names of men. (See: How to Translate Names)
Read full note →
Agur son of Jakeh
This is the literal son of Jakeh, not a grandchild.
the utterance
"the message"
to Ithiel, to Ithiel and Ucal
"to Ithiel—that is, to Ithiel and Ucal"
Surely
"Certainly" or "There is no doubt that"
I do not have the understanding of a human being
The abstract noun "understanding" can be translated as a verb. AT: "I do not understand anything the way human beings are supposed to understand them" (See: Abstract Nouns)
nor do I have knowledge of the Holy One
The abstract noun "knowledge" can be translated as a verb. AT: "nor do I really know anything about the Holy One" (See: Abstract Nouns)
translationWords
son
declare
understand
wise
know
Holy One
unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.
Tyndale Open Study Notes 2022 · CC BY-SA 4.0 30:1a This superscription probably refers to the whole of…
30:1a This superscription probably refers to the whole of ch 30. • Agur son of Jakeh: Apart from this reference, Agur and Jakeh are unknown. If “from Massa” is the correct reading, then Agur was a non-Israelite (the tribe of Massa is known from Assyrian texts).
30:1b-3 Agur expresses his ignorance (cp. Ps 73:22, where the psalmist calls himself a senseless animal). The first step toward wisdom is acknowledging what we do not know.
Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.