Amsal 13:7

13:7 There is one who pretends to be rich ¹  and yet has nothing;

another pretends to be poor ²  and yet possesses great wealth. ³ 

Amsal 14:22

14:22 Do not those who devise ⁴  evil go astray?

But those who plan good exhibit ⁵  faithful covenant love. ⁶ 

Amsal 19:7

19:7 All the relatives ⁷  of a poor person hate him; ⁸ 

how much more do his friends avoid him –

he pursues them ⁹  with words, but they do not respond. ¹⁰ 

Amsal 24:16

24:16 Although ¹¹  a righteous person may fall seven times, he gets up again,

but the wicked will be brought down ¹²  by calamity.

Amsal 28:2

28:2 When a country is rebellious ¹³  it has many princes, ¹⁴ 

but by someone who is discerning and knowledgeable ¹⁵  order is maintained. ¹⁶ 

Amsal 28:7

28:7 The one who keeps the law ¹⁷  is a discerning child, ¹⁸ 

but a companion of gluttons brings shame ¹⁹  to his parents. ²⁰ 

Amsal 28:13

28:13 The one who covers ²¹  his transgressions will not prosper, ²² 

but whoever confesses them and forsakes them will find mercy. ²³ 

Amsal 28:18

28:18 The one who walks blamelessly will be delivered, ²⁴ 

but whoever is perverse in his ways will fall ²⁵  at once. ²⁶ 

Amsal 29:24

29:24 Whoever shares with a thief ²⁷  is his own enemy; ²⁸ 

he hears the oath to testify, ²⁹  but does not talk.

[13:7]  ¹ tn The Hitpael of עָשַׁר (’ashar, “to be rich”) means “to pretend to be rich” (BDB 799 s.v. עָשַׁר Hithp); this is the so-called “Hollywood Hitpael” function which involves “acting” or pretending to be something one is not.

[13:7]  ² tn The Hitpolel of רוּשׁ (rush, “to be poor”) means “to pretend to be poor” (BDB 930 s.v. Hithpolel); this is another example of the “Hollywood Hitpael” – the Hitpolel forms of hollow root verbs are the equivalent of Hitpael stem forms.

[13:7]  ³ sn The proverb seems to be a general observation on certain people in life, but it is saying more. Although there are times when such pretending may not be wrong, the proverb is instructing people to be honest. An empty pretentious display or a concealing of wealth can come to no good.

[14:22]  ⁴ sn The verb חָרַשׁ (kharash) means (1) literally: “to cut in; to engrave; to plow,” describing the work of a craftsman; and (2) figuratively: “to devise,” describing the mental activity of planning evil (what will harm people) in the first colon, and planning good (what will benefit them) in the second colon.

[14:22]  ⁵ tn The term “exhibit” does not appear in the Hebrew, but is supplied in the translation for clarity and smoothness.

[14:22]  ⁶ tn Heb “loyal-love and truth.” The two terms חֶסֶד וֶאֱמֶת (khesed ve’emet) often form a hendiadys: “faithful love” or better “faithful covenant love.”

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

[19:7]  ⁸ 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]  ⁹ tn The direct object “them” does not appear in the Hebrew but is supplied in the translation for the sake of smoothness.

[19:7]  ¹⁰ 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.

[24:16]  ¹¹ tn The clause beginning with כִּי (ki) could be interpreted as causal or conditional; but in view of the significance of the next clause it seems better to take it as a concessive clause (“although”). Its verb then receives a modal nuance of possibility. The apodosis is then “and he rises up,” which could be a participle or a perfect tense; although he may fall, he gets up (or, will get up).

[24:16]  sn The righteous may suffer adversity or misfortune any number of times – seven times here – but they will “rise” for virtue triumphs over evil in the end (R. N. Whybray, Proverbs [CBC], 140).

[24:16]  ¹² tn The verb could be translated with an English present tense (“are brought down,” so NIV) to express what happens to the wicked in this life; but since the saying warns against being like the wicked, their destruction is more likely directed to the future.

[28:2]  ¹³ sn The Hebrew word translated “rebellious” has rebellion as its basic meaning, and that is the idea here. The proverb is describing a time when sinfulness brings about social and political unrest.

[28:2]  ¹⁴ tn Heb “many are its princes” (so NASB).

[28:2]  sn In such a chaotic time there will be many rulers, either simultaneously or in a rapid sequence. The times of the judges or the days of the northern kings of Israel provide examples.

[28:2]  ¹⁵ tn Heb “a man who understands [and] knows”; NRSV “an intelligent ruler”; NLT “wise and knowledgeable leaders.”

[28:2]  ¹⁶ tc The LXX reads (probably from a different underlying Hebrew text): “It is the fault of a violent man that quarrels start, but they are settled by a man of discernment.” For a survey of suggestions, see C. H. Toy, Proverbs (ICC), 495, and W. McKane, Proverbs (OTL), 630.

[28:2]  tn This last line is difficult. The MT has כֵּן יַאֲרִיךְ (ken ya’arikh). The verb means “to prolong,” but כֵּן (ken) is open to several possibilities for meaning. J. H. Greenstone’s interpretation of it as a noun from the Hollow root כּוּן (kun) with a meaning of “established order” is what is expected here (Proverbs, 293).

[28:2]  sn For a study of the verses in chapters 28 and 29 concerning kings and governments, see B. V. Malchow, “A Manual for Future Monarchs,” CBQ 47 (1985): 238-45.

[28:7]  ¹⁷ tn The Hebrew word could refer (1) to “instruction” by the father (cf. NCV) or (2) the Mosaic law (so most English versions). The chapter seems to be stressing religious obedience, so the referent is probably the law. Besides, the father’s teaching will be what the law demands, and the one who associates with gluttons is not abiding by the law.

[28:7]  ¹⁸ tn Heb “son,” but the immediate context does not suggest limiting this only to male children.

[28:7]  ¹⁹ sn The companion of gluttons shames his father and his family because such a life style as he now embraces is both unruly and antisocial.

[28:7]  ²⁰ tn Heb “father,” but the immediate context does not suggest limiting this only to the male parent.

[28:13]  ²¹ tn The Hebrew participles provide the subject matter in this contrast. On the one hand is the person who covers over (מְכַסֶּה, mÿkhasseh) his sins. This means refusing to acknowledge them in confession, and perhaps rationalizing them away. On the other hand there is the one who both “confesses” (מוֹדֶה, modeh) and “forsakes” (עֹזֵב, ’ozev) the sin. To “confess” sins means to acknowledge them, to say the same thing about them that God does.

[28:13]  ²² sn The verse contrasts the consequences of each. The person who refuses to confess will not prosper. This is an understatement (a figure of speech known as tapeinosis); the opposite is the truth, that eventually such a person will be undone and ruined. On the other hand, the penitent will find mercy. This expression is a metonymy of cause for the effect – although “mercy” is mentioned, what mercy provides is intended, i.e., forgiveness. In other passages the verb “conceal” is used of God’s forgiveness – he covers over the iniquity (Ps 32:1). Whoever acknowledges sin, God will cover it; whoever covers it, God will lay it open.

[28:13]  ²³ sn This verse is unique in the book of Proverbs; it captures the theology of forgiveness (e.g., Pss 32 and 51). Every part of the passage is essential to the point: Confession of sins as opposed to concealing them, coupled with a turning away from them, results in mercy.

[28:18]  ²⁴ tn The form is the Niphal imperfect of יָשַׁע (yasha’, “will be saved”). In all probability this refers to deliverance from misfortune. Some render it “kept safe” (NIV) or “will be safe” (NRSV, TEV). It must be interpreted in contrast to the corrupt person who will fall.

[28:18]  ²⁵ tn The Qal imperfect יִפּוֹל (yipol) is given a future translation in this context, as is the previous verb (“will be delivered”) because the working out of divine retribution appears to be coming suddenly in the future. The idea of “falling” could be a metonymy of adjunct (with the falling accompanying the ruin that comes to the person), or it may simply be a comparison between falling and being destroyed. Cf. NCV “will suddenly be ruined”; NLT “will be destroyed.”

[28:18]  ²⁶ tn The last word in the verse, בְּאֶחָת (bÿ’ekhat), means “in one [= at once (?)].” This may indicate a sudden fall, for falling “in one” (the literal meaning) makes no sense. W. McKane wishes to emend the text to read “into a pit” based on v. 10b (Proverbs [OTL], 622); this emendation is followed by NAB, NRSV.

[29:24]  ²⁷ sn The expression shares with a thief describes someone who is an “accomplice” (cf. NAB, NIV) because he is willing to share in the loot without taking part in the crime.

[29:24]  ²⁸ tn Heb “hates his soul.” The accomplice is working against himself, for he will be punished along with the thief if he is caught.

[29:24]  ²⁹ tn Heb “oath” or “imprecation”; ASV “adjuration.” This amounted to an “oath” or “curse” (cf. NAB “he hears himself put under a curse”; NRSV “one hears the victim’s curse”) either by or on behalf of the victim, that any witness to the crime must testify (cf. Lev 5:1). However, in this legal setting referring to “a victim’s curse” could be misleading (cf. also KJV “he heareth cursing”), since it could be understood to refer to profanity directed against those guilty of the crime rather than an imprecation called down on a witness who refused to testify (as in the present proverb). The present translation specifies this as an “oath to testify.”

[29:24]  sn The oath to testify was not an oath to tell the truth before a court of law in the modern sense. Instead it was a “curse” or “imprecation” expressed by the victim of the theft, or by the legal authorities, called down on any witness of the crime who kept silent or refused to testify (as here). According to Lev 5:1, if a witness does not speak up he is accountable for the crime. This person hears the adjuration, but if he speaks up he is condemned, and if he does not speak up he is guilty under the law. The proverb is an unusual one; it seems to be warning against getting mixed up in any way with the thief, for it will create a serious ethical dilemma.