Amsal 10:16

10:16 The reward ¹  which the righteous receive ²  is life;

the recompense ³  which the wicked receive ⁴  is judgment. ⁵ 

Amsal 18:4

18:4 The words of a person’s mouth are like ⁶  deep waters, ⁷ 

and ⁸  the fountain of wisdom ⁹  is like ¹⁰  a flowing brook. ¹¹ 

Amsal 19:1

19:1 Better is a poor person who walks in his integrity ¹² 

than one who is perverse in his speech ¹³  and is a fool. ¹⁴ 

Amsal 27:21

27:21 As the crucible is for silver and the furnace is for gold, ¹⁵ 

so a person ¹⁶  is proved ¹⁷  by the praise he receives. ¹⁸ 

Amsal 28:6

28:6 A poor person ¹⁹  who walks in his integrity is better

than one who is perverse in his ways ²⁰  even though ²¹  he is rich. ²² 

Amsal 28:21

28:21 To show partiality ²³  is terrible, ²⁴ 

for a person will transgress over the smallest piece of bread. ²⁵ 

[10:16]  ¹ tn Heb “recompense” (so NAB); NASB, NIV “wages.” The noun פְּעֻלַּה (pÿ’ullah) has a two-fold range of meanings: (1) “work; deed” and (2) “reward; recompense” (BDB 821 s.v.). There is a clear correlation between a person’s conduct and its consequences. Rewards are determined by moral choices. What one receives in life depends on the use of gifts and a righteous character.

[10:16]  ² tn Heb “the recompense of the righteous.”

[10:16]  ³ tn Heb “harvest.” The term תְּבוּאַת (tÿvu’at, “harvest; yield”) is used figuratively here (hypocatastasis), drawing an implied comparison between the agricultural yield of a farmer’s labors with the consequences of the actions of the wicked. They will “reap” (= judgment) what they “sow” (= sin).

[10:16]  ⁴ tn Heb “the harvest of the wicked.”

[10:16]  ⁵ tn Heb “sin.” The term חַטָּאת (khatta’t, “sin”) functions as a metonymy of cause (= sin) for effect (= punishment). In contrast to the righteous who receive a reward, the wicked receive punishment for their sin (cf. NASB, NIV, NCV). See D. W. Thomas, “The Meaning of חַטָּאת in Proverbs X.16,” JTS 15 (1964): 295-96.

[18:4]  ⁶ tn The comparative “like” does not appear in the Hebrew text, but is implied by the metaphor; it is supplied in the translation for the sake of clarity.

[18:4]  ⁷ sn The metaphor “deep waters” indicates either that the words have an inexhaustible supply or that they are profound.

[18:4]  ⁸ tn There is debate about the nature of the parallelism between lines 4a and 4b. The major options are: (1) synonymous parallelism, (2) antithetical parallelism (e.g., NAB, NIV, NCV) or (3) formal parallelism. Normally a vav (ו) would begin an antithetical clause; the structure and the ideas suggest that the second colon continues the idea of the first half, but in a parallel way rather than as additional predicates. The metaphors used in the proverb elsewhere describe the wise.

[18:4]  ⁹ sn This is an implied comparison (hypocatastasis), the fountain of wisdom being the person who speaks. The Greek version has “fountain of life” instead of “wisdom,” probably influenced from 10:11.

[18:4]  ¹⁰ 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.

[18:4]  ¹¹ sn The point of this metaphor is that the wisdom is a continuous source of refreshing and beneficial ideas.

[19:1]  ¹² sn People should follow honesty even if it leads to poverty (e.g., Prov 18:23; 19:22).

[19:1]  ¹³ tn Heb “lips.” The term “lips” is a metonymy for what one says with his lips. The expression “perverse in his lips” refers to speech that is morally perverted. Some medieval Hebrew mss, the Syriac, and Tg. Prov 19:1 have “his ways” rather than “his lips” (e.g., Prov 28:6); cf. NAB.

[19:1]  ¹⁴ tc The Syriac and Tg. Prov 19:1 read “rich” instead of MT “fool.” This makes tighter antithetical parallelism than MT and is followed by NAB. However, the MT makes sense as it stands; this is an example of metonymical parallelism. The MT reading is also supported by the LXX. The Hebrew construction uses וְהוּא (vÿhu’), “and he [is],” before “fool.” This may be rendered “one who is perverse while a fool” or “a fool at the same time.”

[27:21]  ¹⁵ sn Once again this proverb uses emblematic parallelism. The crucible and the furnace are used to refine and thus reveal the pure metals. The analogy is that praise will reveal the person because others will examine and evaluate what an individual has done in order to make the public acclamation.

[27:21]  ¹⁶ tn Heb “and a man,” but the context does not indicate this is limited only to males.

[27:21]  ¹⁷ tn The verb “is proved” was supplied in the translation in view of the analogy. Many English versions supply “tested” for the same reason.

[27:21]  sn The proverb is saying that public praise is usually a good measure of the qualities and contributions of a person. The other side of it is that righteousness is often denounced, but the proverb is not addressing everything that people say.

[27:21]  ¹⁸ tn Heb “by [the] praise of him.” The pronominal suffix is an objective genitive, meaning “the praise about him” (= “the praise he receives”). Some commentators would take the suffix as a subjective genitive, meaning “the praise he gives”; this would mean people stand revealed by what they praise (D. Kidner, Proverbs [TOTC], 168). That does not seem to work as well with the emblem of the first line which indicates being tested. The LXX adds a couplet: “The heart of the transgressor seeks evil; but the upright heart seeks knowledge.”

[28:6]  ¹⁹ sn This chapter gives a lot of attention to the contrast between the poor and the rich, assuming an integrity for the poor that is not present with the rich; the subject is addressed in vv. 6, 8, 11, 20, 22, 25, and 27 (G. A. Chutter, “Riches and Poverty in the Book of Proverbs,” Crux 18 [1982]: 23-28).

[28:6]  ²⁰ tn The Hebrew term translated “ways” is in the dual, suggesting that the person has double ways, i.e., he is hypocritical. C. H. Toy does not like this idea and changes the form to the plural (Proverbs [ICC], 497), but his emendation is gratuitous and should be rejected.

[28:6]  ²¹ tn Heb “and he is rich.” Many English versions treat this as a concessive clause (cf. KJV “though he be rich”).

[28:6]  ²² sn This is another “better” saying, contrasting a poor person who has integrity with a rich person who is perverse. Of course there are rich people with integrity and perverse poor people, but that is not of interest here. If it came to the choices described here, honest poverty is better than corrupt wealth.

[28:21]  ²³ tn The construction uses the Hiphil infinitive הַכֵּר (hakken) as the subject of the sentence: “to have respect for [or, recognize] persons is not good” (e.g., 24:23; 18:5; Deut 1:17; Lev 19:15). Such favoritism is “not good”; instead, it is a miscarriage of justice and is to be avoided.

[28:21]  ²⁴ tn Heb “not good.” This is a figure of speech known as tapeinosis – a deliberate understatement to emphasize a worst-case scenario: “it is terrible!”

[28:21]  ²⁵ tn The meaning and connection of the line is not readily clear. It could be taken in one of two ways: (1) a person can steal even a small piece of bread if hungry, and so the court should show some compassion, or it should show no partiality even in such a pathetic case; (2) a person could be bribed for a very small price (a small piece of bread being the figure representing this). This second view harmonizes best with the law.