by Kenneth F. Sheets
For years, the Proverbs of Scripture have posed interpretation problems both for those entrusted to teach and proclaim their truth and for those who simply read them. Many have struggled with understanding the nature of “proverbial teachings,” especially those that seem to be stated “too broadly” or “too generally” to serve as valid statements of God’s design. Human life itself often appears to demonstrate that certain of the teachings cannot be trusted; they simply do not work in human existence. All of this has led many believers and nonbelievers alike to doubt and question their nature as revelation of the Creator’s design, and these doubts have, in turn, led to a wide range of human characterizations that vary from seeing them as absolute “promises of God” to nothing more than “general observations on human life.” Both cannot be true, and neither can they be some mixture of the two, because that would make their validity subject to the finite minds of human interpreters, “picking and choosing” for themselves whether they are:
1) “absolutes,” that is, “if-then” statements, giving the truth of God in some form of “if you do this, then you will receive that,” a perspective that often leaves the individual applying “interpretation gymnastics” when attempting to explain applications that seemingly do not fit what actually happens in life;[1]
or
2) “generalizations,” that is, statements that may or may not “come true,” a perspective that makes their validity determined by the individual human who seeks to apply them, but which fails to effectively explain their inclusion in the Scriptures.[2]
Both are faulty, because neither properly explains all of the proverbs. The answer, however, is not some kind of “balance” or median position between these two views. Instead, the answer lies in an accurate perception of the nature of the Biblical proverbs, a nature inherent not only in their inclusion in Scripture but also in the very meaning of the word proverb as God used it in the Bible.
To most people, the meaning of any word, whether Biblical or not, is rooted in their knowledge of that word, a knowledge that is a composite of all their experience with the word, whether formal or informal. For most people, this knowledge is almost totally recent, that is, the meaning of the word in the mind of the person, with all its various connotations and associations, has been formed almost solely by recent modern usage. While this modern knowledge may be sufficient for interpreting modern communications, its application to ancient texts, like the words of Scripture, can lead to serious error.
In the Biblical realm, the instances are numerous where the application of erroneous definitions resulted in erroneous interpretation and a corresponding misrepresentation of God and His perfect design for all that exists. Incomprehensible numbers of people have been left without an accurate view of their Creator and His true nature, moving them to seek to interact with Him according to their own limited, and erroneous, human concept of who and what He is. This error and misrepresentation then passes from generation to generation, typically into even greater error, and the destructions in the lives of those who “believe in God” inaccurately become even more destructive in each successive generation, even at times reaching the point where “belief in God” bears little or no resemblance to the true person and nature of the One it is supposed to reflect.
Humans, both believers and nonbelievers, failing to recognize and understand this progression away from an accurate representation of God, tend to look only upon the many different expressions of “religious belief” which they think they perceive in those claiming to “believe,” and they evaluate the God Who Exists, the “Original,” by the humans, the “flawed copies,” that are supposed to represent the Original. Their flawed examples lead them to a mistaken evaluation which leads them to lower their esteem not only for the person of the God Who Exists but also for any expression of His design, and the destruction multiplies as human perception of their Creator proceeds farther and farther from His true person and nature. Accurate word meanings accurately applied are, then, absolutely essential for accurate Scripture interpretation and application.
Thus, to characterize the proverbs according to the modern meaning of the word proverb is to invite grievous error into an analysis of their nature. Accuracy and validity demand an application of the ancient meaning, the meaning that was in the mind of the God-inspired writers and readers of the ancient times during which the proverbs were written. Anything less renders a highly suspect result, and the degree to which an interpreter strays from the ancient meaning imparts a similar degree of doubt in the validity of his findings. The nature of the Book of Proverbs as an ancient Hebrew document makes indispensable an understanding of the ancient Hebrew concept of the word proverb.
The English word proverb is a translation of the Hebrew word mäshäl, which is a noun related to the Hebrew verb mäshăl, a verb that carries the basic meaning “to rule, to have dominion.” With respect to the proverbs of Scripture, this verb carries the concept “to be like, to resemble,” a sense which is derived from its basic meaning. Though the connection between “ruling, having dominion” and “being like, resembling” may not appear obvious, this connection is no less valid and essential to understanding the nature of the content of these proverbs, especially when one remembers the pictorial manner in which the ancient Hebrews thought and expressed themselves, a characteristic which is obvious in many of their expressions in the Scriptures.
Looking at life and the world in which they lived, they recognized illustrations, “pictures,” of their Creator’s design. Of course, because they lived in a world that was in a “fallen” state, not every “picture” captured an image of something desirable. Indeed, the faithful ancient Hebrews knew that, because their ancestor Adam had rejected God’s perfect design for his existence, much of life exhibited characteristics, “life pictures,” of situations and conditions which actually existed but were highly undesirable. Nonetheless, they knew that God had a specific, perfect design not only for the function of everything, but also for its every interaction with every other thing that exists, regardless of the “good” or “bad” nature of the actual situation. They knew that God had established specific design criteria for every situation at every moment in every place, and since these criteria came from the Creator Himself, every created being was accountable for applying them to life.
The criteria of God’s design were His “laws,” His “commandments,” His “way,” for His creation. Stated alternately, they were the expression of His “will,” His “plan,” His “desire.” Thus, in order to please God, each human needed to live by these criteria, and they formed the standard by which every human was to evaluate every situation of life to determine whether or not it conformed to the Creator’s design. Thus, the criteria of God’s design provided humans with mental “pictures” of how God had designed life to be. They functioned as “standards of comparison,” and, in a real sense, any human could look at any condition of his existence and draw a comparison between what he actually saw and what God’s “pictures” indicated should exist. He could then determine what needed to be done to bring his condition into conformity to God’s design. If a condition of life truly “looked like” the standard that God had established, then man could expect the results God had indicated would accompany the fulfilled criteria. On the other hand, if a condition did not “resemble” the standard, then man could only expect results intended by God to show him the error of his way. Accordingly, the criteria of God’s design, His standards, were the rules for evaluating life, that is, they “ruled,” they “had dominion,” over life. In other words, God’s rules for life dictated what life was to “resemble,” and thus, the ancient Hebrew “to rule, to have dominion” was accurately applied to any statement of God, in whatever manner He chose to express it, because those criteria formed the “pictures” of what life was “to be like, to resemble.”
Thus, when the ancient Hebrew applied the word mäshäl to the Book of Proverbs, he defined for all time the nature of the proverbs contained therein. He saw the individual proverbs as expressions of God’s design criteria for human life, criteria which were to be the basis of comparison for every aspect of his life. They were to be the “standards of comparison” according to which he evaluated and corrected his existence, all the while knowing that conformity resulted in good and that nonconformity resulted in destruction. God gave these “proverbial” criteria in a brief, easily-retained format, and their “pictures” could be recalled with increasing ease as one gained practice in correlating them to life. They were not “promises,” as such, nor were they “general observations of life,” or anything in between. Rather, the Proverbs described the truly Godly life, that is, they presented a picture of what one would see if he were looking at the life of a truly Godly person. Even the “negative pictures” of undesirable conditions, those conditions which resulted from not living within the bounds of God’s criteria, were recognized as positive specifications because they were designed to establish in the mind the necessity of remaining within His criteria. Thus, every proverb was designed to direct all, whether the one conforming or the one violating, to walk, and to continue to walk, in the design criteria of the Creator, knowing that the Proverbs carry His power and authority for success to the degree that an individual applies them.
The Proverbs of Scripture are, then, expressions of God’s design criteria for life, and especially for the daily life of all humanity. Deviations from these criteria do occur, because humans insist upon determining for themselves whether or not they should be applied. Humans, however, are unable to see beyond their immediate situation and are not capable of controlling the events of life to bring about specific results. God alone possesses not only the ability to see the future but also to direct everything in the creation to accomplish His will. These two contrasting understandings, that of humans and that of God, compete for the minds of believers who look to Proverbs for direction in life. One relies upon the trustworthiness of God to bring about the results described in the proverbs, while the other relies upon the mind of man to determine whether or not the proverbs would give the desired result in any given situation.
Obviously, the wise individual will be found applying the Proverbs, making their truth the foundation for his life instead of questioning their validity and authority. He will trust their all-knowing and all-powerful Author to validate the applicability of His design. The root of the problem goes back to the same, ages-old question which Satan offered in the garden: Does God decide what humans are to do or do humans decide for themselves? When a person entrusts his decisions and his walk to the criteria of God, that individual can rest assured that any apparent deviation from the expected result is still fully within the control of God, and has been allowed by God in order to accomplish His ultimate purpose in the life of that person. When humans are trusted to decide, the result is that which the Book of Proverbs itself gives: “There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.”[3]
[1] The wording of several proverbs seems to indicate that they cannot be “if-then” conditions. Proverbs 16:7 and 22:6, especially, are two verses commonly used to prove this point, but such usage is rooted in an erroneous understanding of both their nature and their wording. [See the author’s individual documents on these proverbs.]
[2] Even a simple comparison between the number of proverbs found in the Book (perhaps 700-800) versus the number of proverbs spoken by Solomon alone, some 3,000 (1 Kings 4:32), indicates that the faithful ancient Hebrews who collected the proverbs recognized that only certain ones were worthy of bearing the name of God for their authority.
[3] Proverbs 14:12; 16:25.