Proverbs 22:29

22:29 Do you see a person skilled ¹  in his work?

He will take his position before kings;

he will not take his position ²  before obscure people. ³ 

Proverbs 29:20

29:20 Do you see someone ⁴  who is hasty in his words? ⁵ 

There is more hope for a fool than for him. ⁶ 

Matthew 21:31

21:31 Which of the two did his father’s will?” They said, “The first.” ⁷  Jesus said to them, “I tell you the truth, ⁸  tax collectors ⁹  and prostitutes will go ahead of you into the kingdom of God!

Luke 7:44

7:44 Then, ¹⁰  turning toward the woman, he said to Simon, “Do you see this woman? I entered your house. You gave me no water for my feet, ¹¹  but she has wet my feet with her tears and wiped them with her hair.

[22:29]  ¹ sn The word translated “skilled” is general enough to apply to any crafts; but it may refer to a scribe or an official (R. N. Whybray, Proverbs [CBC], 134).

[22:29]  ² tn The verb form used twice here is יִתְיַצֵּב (yityatsev), the Hitpael imperfect of יָצַב (yatsav), which means “to set or station oneself; to take one’s stand” in this stem. With the form לִפְנֵי (life) it means “to present oneself before” someone; so here it has the idea of serving as a courtier in the presence of a king.

[22:29]  ³ sn The fifth saying affirms that true skill earns recognition and advancement (cf. Instruction of Amenemope, chap. 30, 27:16-17 [ANET 424]).

[29:20]  ⁴ tn Heb “a man,” but there is no indication in the immediate context that this should be limited only to males.

[29:20]  ⁵ sn The focus of this proverb is on someone who is hasty in his words. This is the person who does not stop to think, but acts on the spur of the moment. To speak before thinking is foolishness.

[29:20]  ⁶ sn Rash speech cannot easily be remedied. The prospects for a fool are better (e.g., Prov 26:12).

[21:31]  ⁷ tc Verses 29-31 involve a rather complex and difficult textual problem. The variants cluster into three different groups: (1) The first son says “no” and later has a change of heart, and the second son says “yes” but does not go. The second son is called the one who does his father’s will. This reading is found in the Western mss (D it). But the reading is so hard as to be nearly impossible. One can only suspect some tampering with the text, extreme carelessness on the part of the scribe, or possibly a recognition of the importance of not shaming one’s parent in public. (Any of these reasons is not improbable with this texttype, and with codex D in particular.) The other two major variants are more difficult to assess. Essentially, the responses make sense (the son who does his father’s will is the one who changes his mind after saying “no”): (2) The first son says “no” and later has a change of heart, and the second son says “yes” but does not go. But here, the first son is called the one who does his father’s will (unlike the Western reading). This is the reading found in (א) C L W (Z) 0102 0281 ˹ 33 Ï and several versional witnesses. (3) The first son says “yes” but does not go, and the second son says “no” but later has a change of heart. This is the reading found in B Θ Ë¹³ 700 and several versional witnesses. Both of these latter two readings make good sense and have significantly better textual support than the first reading. The real question, then, is this: Is the first son or the second the obedient one? If one were to argue simply from the parabolic logic, the second son would be seen as the obedient one (hence, the third reading). The first son would represent the Pharisees (or Jews) who claim to obey God, but do not (cf. Matt 23:3). This accords well with the parable of the prodigal son (in which the oldest son represents the unbelieving Jews). Further, the chronological sequence of the second son being obedient fits well with the real scene: Gentiles and tax collectors and prostitutes were not, collectively, God’s chosen people, but they did repent and come to God, while the Jewish leaders claimed to be obedient to God but did nothing. At the same time, the external evidence is weaker for this reading (though stronger than the first reading), not as widespread, and certainly suspect because of how neatly it fits. One suspects scribal manipulation at this point. Thus the second reading looks to be superior to the other two on both external and transcriptional grounds. But what about intrinsic evidence? One can surmise that Jesus didn’t always give predictable responses. In this instance, he may well have painted a picture in which the Pharisees saw themselves as the first son, only to stun them with his application (v. 32).

[21:31]  ⁸ tn Grk “Truly (ἀμήν, amhn), I say to you.”

[21:31]  ⁹ sn See the note on tax collectors in 5:46.

[7:44]  ¹⁰ tn Here καί (kai) has been translated as “then” to indicate the implied sequence of events within the narrative.

[7:44]  ¹¹ sn It is discussed whether these acts in vv. 44-46 were required by the host. Most think they were not, but this makes the woman’s acts of respect all the more amazing.