Proverbs 24:7

24:7 Wisdom is unattainable ¹  for a fool;

in court ²  he does not open his mouth. ³ 

Proverbs 24:11-12

24:11 Deliver those being taken away to death,

and hold back those slipping to the slaughter. ⁴ 

24:12 If you say, “But we did not know about this,”

does not the one who evaluates ⁵  hearts consider?

Does not the one who guards your life know?

Will he not repay each person according to his deeds? ⁶ 

Proverbs 24:1

24:1 Do not envy evil people, ⁷ 

do not desire ⁸  to be with them;

Proverbs 19:4-7

19:4 Wealth adds many friends,

but a poor person is separated ⁹  from his friend. ¹⁰ 

19:5 A false witness ¹¹  will not go unpunished,

and the one who spouts out ¹²  lies will not escape punishment. ¹³ 

19:6 Many people entreat the favor ¹⁴  of a generous person, ¹⁵ 

and everyone is the friend ¹⁶  of the person who gives gifts. ¹⁷ 

19:7 All the relatives ¹⁸  of a poor person hate him; ¹⁹ 

how much more do his friends avoid him –

he pursues them ²⁰  with words, but they do not respond. ²¹ 

Proverbs 20:1

20:1 Wine ²²  is a mocker ²³  and strong drink is a brawler;

whoever goes astray by them is not wise. ²⁴ 

Proverbs 22:14-15

22:14 The mouth ²⁵  of an adulteress is like ²⁶  a deep pit; ²⁷ 

the one against whom the Lord is angry ²⁸  will fall into it. ²⁹ 

22:15 Folly is bound up ³⁰  in the heart of a child, ³¹ 

but the rod of discipline ³²  will drive it far from him.

Esther 4:13-16

4:13 he ³³  said to take back this answer to Esther: 4:14 “Don’t imagine that because you are part of the king’s household you will be the one Jew ³⁴  who will escape. If you keep quiet at this time, liberation and protection for the Jews will appear ³⁵  from another source, ³⁶  while you and your father’s household perish. It may very well be ³⁷  that you have achieved royal status ³⁸  for such a time as this!”

4:15 Then Esther sent this reply to Mordecai: 4:16 “Go, assemble all the Jews who are found in Susa and fast in my behalf. Don’t eat and don’t drink for three days, night or day. My female attendants and I ³⁹  will also fast in the same way. Afterward I will go to the king, even though it violates the law. ⁴⁰  If I perish, I perish!”

Job 29:9

29:9 the chief men refrained from talking

and covered their mouths with their hands;

Job 29:17

29:17 I broke the fangs ⁴¹  of the wicked,

and made him drop ⁴²  his prey from his teeth.

Psalms 82:3-4

82:3 Defend the cause of the poor and the fatherless! ⁴³ 

Vindicate the oppressed and suffering!

82:4 Rescue the poor and needy!

Deliver them from the power ⁴⁴  of the wicked!

Jeremiah 26:16-19

26:16 Then the officials and all the people rendered their verdict to the priests and the prophets. They said, ⁴⁵  “This man should not be condemned to die. ⁴⁶  For he has spoken to us under the authority of the Lord our God.” ⁴⁷  26:17 Then some of the elders of Judah ⁴⁸  stepped forward and spoke to all the people gathered there. They said, 26:18 “Micah from Moresheth ⁴⁹  prophesied during the time Hezekiah was king of Judah. ⁵⁰  He told all the people of Judah,

‘The Lord who rules over all ⁵¹  says,

“Zion ⁵²  will become a plowed field.

Jerusalem ⁵³  will become a pile of rubble.

The temple mount will become a mere wooded ridge.”’ ⁵⁴ 

26:19 King Hezekiah and all the people of Judah did not put him to death, did they? Did not Hezekiah show reverence for the Lord and seek the Lord’s favor? ⁵⁵  Did not ⁵⁶  the Lord forgo destroying them ⁵⁷  as he threatened he would? But we are on the verge of bringing great disaster on ourselves.” ⁵⁸ 

Jeremiah 26:24

26:24 However, Ahikam son of Shaphan ⁵⁹  used his influence to keep Jeremiah from being handed over and executed by the people. ⁶⁰ 

Jeremiah 38:7-10

An Ethiopian Official Rescues Jeremiah from the Cistern

38:7 An Ethiopian, Ebed Melech, ⁶¹  a court official in the royal palace, heard that Jeremiah had been put ⁶²  in the cistern. While the king was holding court ⁶³  at the Benjamin Gate, 38:8 Ebed Melech departed the palace and went to speak to the king. He said to him, 38:9 “Your royal Majesty, those men have been very wicked in all that they have done to the prophet Jeremiah. They have thrown him into a cistern and he is sure to die of starvation there because there is no food left in the city. ⁶⁴  38:10 Then the king gave Ebed Melech the Ethiopian the following order: “Take thirty ⁶⁵  men with you from here and go pull the prophet Jeremiah out of the cistern before he dies.”

John 7:51

7:51 “Our law doesn’t condemn ⁶⁶  a man unless it first hears from him and learns ⁶⁷  what he is doing, does it?” ⁶⁸ 

[24:7]  ¹ tc The MT reads רָאמוֹת (ra’mot, “corals”) – wisdom to the fool is corals, i.e., an unattainable treasure. With a slight change in the text, removing the א (alef), the reading is רָמוֹת (ramot, “high”), i.e., wisdom is too high – unattainable – for a fool. The internal evidence favors the emendation, which is followed by most English versions including KJV.

[24:7]  ² tn Heb “[city] gate,” a metonymy of subject, meaning what goes on in the gate – court cases and business transactions. So it is in these assemblies that the fool keeps quiet. The term “court” has been used in the translation for clarity. Some English versions do not emphasize the forensic connotation here: NCV “in a discussion”; NLT “When the leaders gather.”

[24:7]  ³ sn The verse portrays a fool out of his element: In a serious moment in the gathering of the community, he does not even open his mouth (a metonymy of cause, meaning “speak”). Wisdom is too high for the fool – it is beyond his ability.

[24:11]  ⁴ tn The idea of “slipping” (participle from מוֹט, mot) has troubled some commentators. G. R. Driver emends it to read “at the point of” (“Problems in Proverbs,” ZAW 50 [1932]: 146). But the MT as it stands makes good sense. The reference would be general, viz., to help any who are in mortal danger or who might be tottering on the edge of such disaster – whether through sin, or through disease, war, or danger. Several English versions (e.g., NASB, NIV, NRSV) render this term as “staggering.”

[24:12]  ⁵ tn Heb “weighs” (so NASB, NIV, NRSV) meaning “tests” or “evaluates.”

[24:12]  ⁶ sn The verse completes the saying by affirming that people will be judged responsible for helping those in mortal danger. The verse uses a series of rhetorical questions to affirm that God knows our hearts and we cannot plead ignorance.

[24:1]  ⁷ tn Heb “evil men,” although the context indicates a generic sense.

[24:1]  ⁸ tn The Hitpael jussive is from the verb that means “to crave; to desire.” This is more of a coveting, an intense desire.

[19:4]  ⁹ tn The Niphal imperfect probably should be taken in the passive sense (the poor person is deserted by his “friend,” cf. NAB, NIV) rather than as a direct middle (the poor person deserted his friend).

[19:4]  ¹⁰ sn This proverb simply makes an observation on life: People pursue wealthy folk hoping that they can gain something from the rich, but the poor are deserted even by friends, who fear that the poor will try to gain something from them.

[19:5]  ¹¹ tn Heb “a witness of lies.” This expression is an attributive genitive: “a lying witness” (cf. CEV “dishonest witnesses”). This is paralleled by “the one who pours out lies.”

[19:5]  ¹² tn Heb “breathes out”; NAB “utters”; NIV “pours out.”

[19:5]  ¹³ tn Heb “will not escape” (so NAB, NASB); NIV “will not go free.” Here “punishment” is implied, and has been supplied in the translation for clarity.

[19:6]  ¹⁴ tn The verb יְחַלּוּ (yÿkhalu) is a Piel imperfect of חָלָה (khalah) meaning “to seek favor; to entreat favor; to mollify; to appease”; cf. NIV “curry favor.” It literally means “making the face of someone sweet or pleasant,” as in stroking the face. To “entreat the favor” of someone is to induce him to show favor; the action aims at receiving gifts, benefits, or any other kind of success.

[19:6]  ¹⁵ tn Heb “the face of a generous man”; ASV “the liberal man.” The term “face” is a synecdoche of part (= face) for the whole (= person).

[19:6]  ¹⁶ sn The proverb acknowledges the fact of life; but it also reminds people of the value of gifts in life, especially in business or in politics.

[19:6]  ¹⁷ tn Heb “a man of gifts.” This could be (1) attributive genitive: a man characterized by giving gifts or (2) objective genitive: a man who gives gifts (IBHS 146 §9.5.2b).

[19:7]  ¹⁸ tn Heb “brothers,” but not limited only to male siblings in this context.

[19:7]  ¹⁹ tn Heb “hate him.” The verb שָׂנֵא (sane’) may be nuanced “reject” here (metonymy of effect, cf. CEV). The kind of “dislike” or “hatred” family members show to a poor relative is to have nothing to do with him (NIV “is shunned”). If relatives do this, how much more will the poor person’s friends do so.

[19:7]  ²⁰ tn The direct object “them” does not appear in the Hebrew but is supplied in the translation for the sake of smoothness.

[19:7]  ²¹ tn Heb “not they.” The last line of the verse is problematic. The preceding two lines are loosely synonymous in their parallelism, but the third adds something like: “he pursues [them with] words, but they [do] not [respond].” Some simply say it is a corrupt remnant of a separate proverb and beyond restoration. The basic idea does make sense, though. The idea of his family and friends rejecting the poor person reveals how superficial they are, and how they make themselves scarce. Since they are far off, he has to look for them “with words” (adverbial accusative), that is, “send word” for help. But they “are nowhere to be found” (so NIV). The LXX reads “will not be delivered” in place of “not they” – clearly an attempt to make sense out of the cryptic phrase, and, in the process, showing evidence for that text.

[20:1]  ²² sn The drinks are wine and barley beer (e.g., Lev 10:9; Deut 14:26; Isa 28:7). These terms here could be understood as personifications, but better as metonymies for those who drink wine and beer. The inebriated person mocks and brawls.

[20:1]  ²³ tn The two participles לֵץ (lets, “mocker”) and הֹמֶה (homeh, “brawler”) are substantives; they function as predicates in the sentence. Excessive use of intoxicants excites the drinker to boisterous behavior and aggressive attitudes – it turns them into mockers and brawlers.

[20:1]  ²⁴ sn The proverb does not prohibit the use of wine or beer; in fact, strong drink was used at festivals and celebrations. But intoxication was considered out of bounds for a member of the covenant community (e.g., 23:20-21, 29-35; 31:4-7). To be led astray by their use is not wise.

[22:14]  ²⁵ sn The word “mouth” is a metonymy of cause; it refers to the seductive speech of the strange woman (e.g., 2:16-22; and chs. 5, 7).

[22:14]  ²⁶ tn The comparative “like” does not appear in the Hebrew text, but is implied by the metaphor; it is supplied for the sake of clarity.

[22:14]  ²⁷ sn The point of the metaphor is that what the adulteress says is like a deep pit. The pit is like the hunter’s snare; it is a trap that is difficult to escape. So to succumb to the adulteress – or to any other folly this represents – is to get oneself into a difficulty that has no easy escape.

[22:14]  ²⁸ tn Heb “the one who is cursed by the Lord” (cf. NASB). The construction uses the passive participle in construct with Yahweh. The “Lord” is genitive of agency after the passive form. The verb means “be indignant, express indignation.” So it is talking about one against whom the Lord is angry.

[22:14]  ²⁹ tn Heb “will fall there.” The “falling” could refer to the curse itself or to the result of the curse.

[22:15]  ³⁰ sn The passive participle is figurative (implied comparison with “binding”); it means that folly forms part of a child’s nature (J. H. Greenstone, Proverbs, 238).

[22:15]  ³¹ tn The “heart of a child” (לֶב־נָעַר, lev-na’ar) refers here to the natural inclination of a child to foolishness. The younger child is meant in this context, but the word can include youth. R. N. Whybray suggests that this idea might be described as a doctrine of “original folly” (Proverbs [CBC], 125). Cf. TEV “Children just naturally do silly, careless things.”

[22:15]  ³² tn The word “rod” is a metonymy of adjunct; it represents physical chastening for direction or punishment, to suppress folly and develop potential. The genitive (“discipline”) may be taken as an attributive genitive (“a chastening rod”) or an objective genitive, (“a rod [= punishment] that brings about correction/discipline”).

[4:13]  ³³ tn Heb “Mordecai.” The pronoun (“he”) was used in the translation for stylistic reasons. A repetition of the proper name here is redundant in terms of contemporary English style.

[4:14]  ³⁴ tn Heb “from all the Jews”; KJV “more than all the Jews”; NIV “you alone of all the Jews.”

[4:14]  ³⁵ tn Heb “stand”; KJV, NASB, NIV, NLT “arise.”

[4:14]  ³⁶ tn Heb “place” (so KJV, NIV, NLT); NRSV “from another quarter.” This is probably an oblique reference to help coming from God. D. J. A. Clines disagrees; in his view a contrast between deliverance by Esther and deliverance by God is inappropriate (Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther [NCBC], 302). But Clines’ suggestion that perhaps the reference is to deliverance by Jewish officials or by armed Jewish revolt is less attractive than seeing this veiled reference as part of the literary strategy of the book, which deliberately keeps God’s providential dealings entirely in the background.

[4:14]  ³⁷ tn Heb “And who knows whether” (so NASB). The question is one of hope, but free of presumption. Cf. Jonah 3:9.

[4:14]  ³⁸ tn Heb “have come to the kingdom”; NRSV “to royal dignity”; NIV “to royal position”; NLT “have been elevated to the palace.”

[4:16]  ³⁹ tn Heb “I and my female attendants.” The translation reverses the order for stylistic reasons.

[4:16]  ⁴⁰ tn Heb “which is not according to the law” (so KJV, NASB); NAB “contrary to the law.”

[29:17]  ⁴¹ tn The word rendered “fangs” actually means “teeth,” i.e., the molars probably; it is used frequently of the teeth of wild beasts. Of course, the language is here figurative, comparing the oppressing enemy to a preying animal.

[29:17]  ⁴² tn “I made [him] drop.” The verb means “to throw; to cast,” throw in the sense of “to throw away.” But in the context with the figure of the beast with prey in its mouth, “drop” or “cast away” is the idea. Driver finds another cognate meaning “rescue” (see AJSL 52 [1935/36]: 163).

[82:3]  ⁴³ tn The Hebrew noun יָתוֹם (yatom) refers to one who has lost his father (not necessarily his mother, see Ps 109:9). Because they were so vulnerable and were frequently exploited, fatherless children are often mentioned as epitomizing the oppressed (see Pss 10:14; 68:5; 94:6; 146:9; as well as Job 6:27; 22:9; 24:3, 9; 29:12; 31:17, 21).

[82:4]  ⁴⁴ tn Heb “hand.”

[26:16]  ⁴⁵ tn Heb “Then the officials and all the people said to the priests and the prophets…”

[26:16]  ⁴⁶ sn Contrast v. 11.

[26:16]  ⁴⁷ tn Heb “For in the name of the Lord our God he has spoken to us.” The emphasis is on “in the name of…”

[26:17]  ⁴⁸ tn Heb “elders of the land.”

[26:18]  ⁴⁹ sn Micah from Moresheth was a contemporary of Isaiah (compare Mic 1:1 with Isa 1:1) from the country town of Moresheth in the hill country southwest of Jerusalem. The prophecy referred to is found in Mic 3:12. This is the only time in the OT where an OT prophet is quoted verbatim and identified.

[26:18]  ⁵⁰ sn Hezekiah was co-regent with his father Ahaz from 729-715 b.c. and sole ruler from 715-686 b.c. His father was a wicked king who was responsible for the incursions of the Assyrians (2 Kgs 16; 2 Chr 28). Hezekiah was a godly king, noted for his religious reforms and for his faith in the Lord in the face of the Assyrian threat (2 Kgs 18–19; 2 Chr 32:1-23). The deliverance of Jerusalem in response to his prayers of faith (2 Kgs 19:14-19, 29-36) was undoubtedly well-known to the people of Jerusalem and Judah and may have been one of the prime reasons for their misplaced trust in the inviolability of Zion/Jerusalem (see Ps 46, 76) though the people of Micah’s day already believed it too (Mic 3:11).

[26:18]  ⁵¹ tn Heb “Yahweh of armies.”

[26:18]  ⁵² sn Zion was first of all the citadel that David captured (2 Sam 5:6-10), then the city of David and the enclosed temple area, then the whole city of Jerusalem. It is often in poetic parallelism with Jerusalem as it is here (see, e.g., Ps 76:2; Amos 1:2).

[26:18]  ⁵³ map For location see Map5 B1; Map6 F3; Map7 E2; Map8 F2; Map10 B3; JP1 F4; JP2 F4; JP3 F4; JP4 F4.

[26:18]  ⁵⁴ sn There is irony involved in this statement. The text reads literally “high places of a forest/thicket.” The “high places” were the illicit places of worship that Jerusalem was supposed to replace. Because of their sin, Jerusalem would be like one of the pagan places of worship with no place left sacrosanct. It would even be overgrown with trees and bushes. So much for its inviolability!

[26:19]  ⁵⁵ tn This Hebrew idiom (חָלָה פָּנִים, khalah panim) is often explained in terms of “stroking” or “patting the face” of someone, seeking to gain his favor. It is never used in a literal sense and is found in contexts of prayer (Exod 32:11; Ps 119:158), worship (Zech 8:21-22), humble submission (2 Chr 3:12), or amendment of behavior (Dan 9:13). All were true to one extent or another of Hezekiah.

[26:19]  ⁵⁶ tn The he interrogative (הַ)with the negative governs all three of the verbs, the perfect and the two vav (ו) consecutive imperfects that follow it. The next clause has disjunctive word order and introduces a contrast. The question expects a positive answer.

[26:19]  ⁵⁷ tn For the translation of the terms involved here see the translator’s note on 18:8.

[26:19]  ⁵⁸ tn Or “great harm to ourselves.” The word “disaster” (or “harm”) is the same one that has been translated “destroying” in the preceding line and in vv. 3 and 13.

[26:24]  ⁵⁹ sn Ahikam son of Shaphan was an official during the reign of Jehoiakim’s father, Josiah (2 Kgs 22:12, 14). He was also the father of Gedaliah who became governor of Judah after the fall of Jerusalem (Jer 40:5). The particle at the beginning of the verse is meant to contrast the actions of this man with the actions of Jehoiakim. The impression created by this verse is that it took more than just the royal officials’ opinion and the elders’ warnings to keep the priests and prophets from swaying popular opinion to put Jeremiah to death.

[26:24]  ⁶⁰ tn Heb “Nevertheless, the hand of Ahikam son of Shaphan was with Jeremiah so that he would not be given (even more literally, ‘so as not to give him’) into the hand of the people to kill him.” “Hand” is often used for “aid,” “support,” “influence,” “power,” “control.”

[38:7]  ⁶¹ sn This individual, Ebed Melech, is mentioned only here. Later he will be promised deliverance from destruction when the city falls because he had shown trust in God (see Jer 39:16-18).

[38:7]  ⁶² tn Heb “Ebed Melech, the Cushite, a man, an eunuch/official, and he was [= who was; a circumstantial clause] in the house of the king, heard that they had put Jeremiah…” The passive construction “Jeremiah had been put” has been used to avoid the indefinite subject “they” or the addition of “the officials.” For the translation of סָרִיס (saris) as “official” here rather than “eunuch” see the translator’s note on 29:2 and see also the usage in 34:19. For the translation of “Cushite” as Ethiopian see the study note on 13:23.

[38:7]  ⁶³ tn Heb “And the king was sitting in the Benjamin Gate.” This clause is circumstantial to the following clause; thus “while the king was…” Most commentators agree that the reference to sitting in the gate here likely refers to the same kind of judicial context that has been posited for 26:10 (see the translator’s note there for further references). Hence the translation uses “sitting” with the more technical “holding court” to better reflect the probable situation.

[38:9]  ⁶⁴ tn Heb “Those men have made evil all they have done to the prophet Jeremiah in that they have thrown him into the cistern and he will die of starvation in the place where he is because there is no more food in the city.” The particle אֵת (’et) before “they have thrown” (אֵת אֲשֶׁר הִשְׁלִיכוּ, ’et ’asher hishlikhu) is explanatory or further definition of “all they have done to” (i.e., the particle is repeated for apposition). The verb form “and he is sure to die” is an unusual use of the vav (ו) consecutive + imperfect that the grammars see as giving a logical consequence without a past nuance (cf. GKC 328 §111.l and IBHS 557-58 §33.3.1f).

[38:10]  ⁶⁵ tc Some modern English versions (e.g., NRSV, REB, TEV) and commentaries read “three” on the basis that thirty men would not be necessary for the task (cf. J. Bright, Jeremiah [AB], 231). Though the difference in “three” and “thirty” involves minimal emendation (שְׁלֹשָׁה [shÿlosha] for שְׁלֹשִׁים [shÿloshim]) there is no textual or versional evidence for it except for one Hebrew ms. Perhaps the number was large to prevent the officials from hindering Ebed Melech from accomplishing the task.

[7:51]  ⁶⁶ tn Grk “judge.”

[7:51]  ⁶⁷ tn Grk “knows.”

[7:51]  ⁶⁸ tn Questions prefaced with μή (mh) in Greek anticipate a negative answer. This can sometimes be indicated by using a “tag” at the end in English (here the tag is “does it?”).