Proverbs 10:10

10:10 The one who winks ¹  his ²  eye causes ³  trouble,

and the one who speaks foolishness ⁴  will come to ruin.

Proverbs 10:14

10:14 Those who are wise ⁵  store up ⁶  knowledge,

but foolish speech ⁷  leads to imminent ⁸  destruction.

Proverbs 10:31

10:31 The speech ⁹  of the righteous bears the fruit of wisdom, ¹⁰ 

but the one who speaks perversion ¹¹  will be destroyed. ¹² 

Proverbs 18:6-7

18:6 The lips of a fool ¹³  enter into strife, ¹⁴ 

and his mouth invites ¹⁵  a flogging. ¹⁶ 

18:7 The mouth of a fool is his ruin,

and his lips are a snare for his life. ¹⁷ 

Ecclesiastes 10:12

Words and Works of Wise Men and Fools

10:12 The words of a wise person ¹⁸  win him ¹⁹  favor, ²⁰ 

but the words ²¹  of a fool are self-destructive. ²² 

James 3:6-8

3:6 And the tongue is a fire! The tongue represents ²³  the world of wrongdoing among the parts of our bodies. It ²⁴  pollutes the entire body and sets fire to the course of human existence – and is set on fire by hell. ²⁵ 

3:7 For every kind of animal, bird, reptile, and sea creature ²⁶  is subdued and has been subdued by humankind. ²⁷  3:8 But no human being can subdue the tongue; it is a restless ²⁸  evil, full of deadly poison.

[10:10]  ¹ tn The term (קָרַץ, qarats) describes a person who habitually “winks” his eye maliciously as a secretive sign to those conspiring evil (Prov 6:13). This is a comparison rather than a contrast. Devious gestures are grievous, but not as ruinous as foolish talk. Both are to be avoided.

[10:10]  ² tn Heb “the eye.”

[10:10]  ³ tn Heb “gives.”

[10:10]  ⁴ tn Heb “the fool of lips”; cf. NASB “a babbling fool.” The phrase is a genitive of specification: “a fool in respect to lips.” The term “lips” is a metonymy of cause (= lips) for effect (= speech). The word for fool (אֶוִיל, ’evil) refers to someone who despises knowledge and discernment.

[10:14]  ⁵ tn Heb “wise men.”

[10:14]  ⁶ sn The verb צָפַן (tsafan, “to store up; to treasure”) may mean (1) the wise acquire and do not lose wisdom (cf. NAB, NIV, TEV), or (2) they do not tell all that they know (cf. NCV), that is, they treasure it up for a time when they will need it. The fool, by contrast, talks without thinking.

[10:14]  ⁷ tn Heb “the mouth of foolishness”; cf. NRSV, NLT “the babbling of a fool.” The term פֶּה (peh, “mouth”) functions as a metonymy of cause for speech. The genitive אֶוִיל (’evil, “foolishness”) functions as an attributive adjective: “a foolish mouth” = foolish speech.

[10:14]  ⁸ tn Heb “near destruction.” The words of the fool that are uttered without wise forethought may invite imminent ruin (e.g., James 3:13-18). See also Ptah-hotep and Amenemope in ANET 414 and 423.

[10:31]  ⁹ tn Heb “the mouth.” The term פֶּה (peh, “mouth”) functions as a metonymy of cause for speech.

[10:31]  ¹⁰ tn Heb “bears wisdom.” The verb נוּב (nuv) means “to bear fruit.” It is used figuratively of the righteous; they produce wisdom and righteousness. The term חָכְמָה (khokhmah, “wisdom”) represents the “fruit” that the righteous bear: “they bear the fruit of wisdom” (BDB 626 s.v.).

[10:31]  ¹¹ tn Heb “the tongue of perversions.” The noun תַּהְפֻּכוֹת (tahpukhot, “perversions”) functions as a genitive of content; it refers to what the tongue says – perverse things. The plural form depicts a plural of character. The term לָשׁוֹן (lashon, “tongue”) functions as a synecdoche of part (= tongue) for the whole person (= the speaker). The tongue is emphasized because this person is characterized by perverse speech. The term תַּהְפֻּכוֹת (“perversions”) refers to those who turn things upside down, overthrow, or pervert what is right.

[10:31]  ¹² tn Heb “will be cut off” (so NAB, NRSV, NLT); cf. KJV, NASB, NIV “cut out.” Their tongue will be cut off, a hyperbole meaning to bring to an end the evil that they speak.

[18:6]  ¹³ sn The “lips” is a metonymy of cause, meaning what the fool says. The “mouth” in the second colon is likewise a metonymy for speech, what comes out of the mouth.

[18:6]  ¹⁴ sn “Strife” is a metonymy of cause, it is the cause of the beating or flogging that follows; “flogging” in the second colon is a metonymy of effect, the flogging is the effect of the strife. The two together give the whole picture.

[18:6]  ¹⁵ tn Heb “calls for.” This is personification: What the fool says “calls for” a beating or flogging. The fool deserves punishment, but does not actually request it.

[18:6]  ¹⁶ tn Heb “blows.” This would probably be physical beatings, either administered by the father or by society (e.g., also 19:25; Ps 141:5; cf. NAB, NIV, TEV, NLT). Today, however, “a beating” could be associated with violent criminal assault, whereas the context suggests punishment. Therefore “a flogging” is used in the translation, since that term is normally associated with disciplinary action.

[18:7]  ¹⁷ tn Heb “his soul” (so KJV, NASB, NIV).

[10:12]  ¹⁸ tn Heb “of a wise man’s mouth.”

[10:12]  ¹⁹ tn The phrase “win him” does not appear in the Hebrew text, but has been supplied in the translation for clarity.

[10:12]  ²⁰ tn Or “are gracious.” The antithetical parallelism suggests that חֵן (khen) does not denote “gracious character” but “[gain] favor” (e.g., Gen 39:21; Exod 3:21; 11:3; 12:36; Prov 3:4, 34; 13:15; 22:1; 28:23; Eccl 9:11); cf. HALOT 332 s.v. חֵן 2; BDB 336 s.v. חֵן 2. The LXX, on the other hand, rendered חֶן with χάρις (caris, “gracious”). The English versions are divided: “are gracious” (KJV, YLT, ASV, NASB, NIV) and “win him favor” (NEB, RSV, NRSV, NAB, MLB, NJPS, Moffatt).

[10:12]  ²¹ tn Heb “lips.”

[10:12]  ²² tn Heb “consume him”; or “engulf him.” The verb I בלע (“to swallow”) creates a striking wordplay on the homonymic root II בלע (“to speak eloquently”; HALOT 134-35 s.v בלע). Rather than speaking eloquently (II בלע, “to speak eloquently”), the fool utters words that are self-destructive (I בלע, “to swallow, engulf”).

[3:6]  ²³ tn Grk “makes itself,” “is made.”

[3:6]  ²⁴ tn Because of the length and complexity of the Greek sentence, a new sentence was started here in the translation.

[3:6]  ²⁵ sn The word translated hell is “Gehenna” (γέεννα, geenna), a Greek transliteration of the Hebrew words ge hinnom (“Valley of Hinnom”). This was the valley along the south side of Jerusalem. In OT times it was used for human sacrifices to the pagan god Molech (cf. Jer 7:31; 19:5-6; 32:35), and it came to be used as a place where human excrement and rubbish were disposed of and burned. In the intertestamental period, it came to be used symbolically as the place of divine punishment (cf. 1 En. 27:2, 90:26; 4 Ezra 7:36).

[3:7]  ²⁶ tn Grk (plurals), “every kind of animals and birds, of reptiles and sea creatures.”

[3:7]  ²⁷ tn Grk “the human species.”

[3:8]  ²⁸ tc Most mss (C Ψ 1739^c Ï as well as a few versions and fathers) read “uncontrollable” (ἀκατασχετόν, akatasceton), while the most important witnesses (א A B K P 1739* latt) have “restless” (ἀκατάστατον, akatastaton). Externally, the latter reading should be preferred. Internally, however, things get a bit more complex. The notion of being uncontrollable is well suited to the context, especially as a counterbalance to v. 8a, though for this very reason scribes may have been tempted to replace ἀκατάστατον with ἀκατασχετόν. However, in a semantically parallel early Christian text, ἀκατάστατος (akatastato") was considered strong enough of a term to denounce slander as “a restless demon” (Herm. 27:3). On the other hand, ἀκατάστατον may have been substituted for ἀκατασχετόν by way of assimilation to 1:8 (especially since both words were relatively rare, scribes may have replaced the less familiar with one that was already used in this letter). On internal evidence, it is difficult to decide, though ἀκατασχετόν is slightly preferred. However, in light of the strong support for ἀκατάστατον, and the less-than-decisive internal evidence, ἀκατάστατον is preferred instead.