Chapter 10
2021 - As I read back through my notes before starting today's reading, it occurred to me to check and see if the "connectors", and and but, actually appear in the Hebrew. Not knowing the first thing about Hebrew kind of handicaps me in this, but the interlinear in the Blue Letter Bible app gives me some clues. In the translation of vs 1, for example, the connector "but" is included with the translation of the word kes-eel'. If you look at the definition of that word, it means fool as you would expect, but there is not "but". UNLESS, it is part of the jots and tittles. I have always believed those marks are about pronunciation of the word only, basically supplying the correct vowels so that there is no ambiguity. I wish I knew whether they can also supply the connecting word. Just looking at the other occurrences of the word in the OT, I see and used some, but used some, and many times, no connector at all. Let me compare here:
כְּסִיל
This is what the inflected Hebrew looks like in 10:1, translated "but a foolish". The inflected in this case is exactly the same as the root. Here is 10:1:
1 The proverbs of Solomon. A wise son makes a glad father, but a foolish son is a sorrow to his mother. [Pro 10:1 ESV]
וּכְסִילִים
This is the Hebrew in the verse below, translated "and fools".
22 "How long, O simple ones, will you love being simple? How long will scoffers delight in their scoffing and fools hate knowledge? [Pro 1:22 ESV]
This doesn't appear to be the same kind of usage as 10:1. I would expect these to look different.
Here is one more:
וּכְסִיל
6 The stupid man cannot know; the fool cannot understand this: [Psa 92:6 ESV]
In each of these three cases the inflected form is different, and there are three different translations. I would say, just looking at them, that I don't know enough about Hebrew to have an opinion on these translation and their accuracy. Perhaps the "ands" and the "buts" are precisely known by the differences in the words. That's what it looks like. As you look at these three, remember that Hebrew is written and read back from right to left.
This has been a nice little exercise to remind me how much I don't know. It also convinces me yet a gain that we need to always be careful with our translations, and before we "fall on our sword" over what we think a verse means - especially if we are departing from how the verse is usually explained, or if we are depending on the verse as primary support for a position, we really need to dig deep, look at several translations, and avoid interpretive Bibles like NIV and others that don't just bring the Hebrew across as nearly word for word as possible, but try to translate the thought - not the letter - of what is written. We need to be so very careful about this. Now. Moving on!
Just before this chapter starts in my TCR, there is the notation "Proverbs of Solomon". This was perhaps a collection found all together, or identified in some way as originating with Solomon himself. Wonder where the first 9 originated? None of them really identifies Solomon. (Wrong again. Proverbs 1:1, the first sentence, says "The proverbs of Solomon, son of David, King of Israel". Amazing the things I can miss...)
The next several chapters, including the three for today, have no divisions in them. They are just Proverbs, one or two verses of wisdom as a thought, and then the next.
Every verse in this chapter is a sort of "couplet". Each is a saying, a nugget of wisdom. Each is a contrast of the wise way and the unwise, of the good and the bad, and so on. Following are a few examples:
10 Whoever winks the eye causes trouble, and a babbling fool will come to ruin. ...
15 A rich man's wealth is his strong city; the poverty of the poor is their ruin. ...
2021 - 9/10, I think the point of this verse is that both the rich and the poor are mistaken. Wealth is not a strong city. We see elsewhere that wealth is fickle and fleeting, and to place such confidence in it is a mistake. On the other hand, being poor is not ruinous either. Lack of money doesn't make you a failure and shouldn't make you hopeless. It is surely a more difficult existence, but joy is still possible. Both rich and poor are crediting or blaming the things of this world for their state. But this is the wrong standard by which to judge, yet both rich and poor apply it. That is what this verse is about.
2021 - 5/10, 16 The labour of the righteous [tendeth] to life: the fruit of the wicked to sin. [Pro 10:16 KJV]. What the righteous do day to day tends to life, but the harvest of the wicked is sin. This calls up to me that a lot of work goes into a crop, and that tends to make the crop better, more productive, and so on. So a good harvest is the result of righteous labor. But the harvest of the wicked, the result of all their work, will still be sin.
2021 - 5/10, 18 He that hideth hatred [with] lying lips, and he that uttereth a slander, [is] a fool. [Pro 10:18 KJV]
Whether you keep your hatred to your self, or say it right out loud, you are a fool. KJV is awesome here.
19 When words are many, transgression is not lacking, but whoever restrains his lips is prudent. [Pro 10:10, 15, 19 ESV]
There are so many patterns in Proverbs that I have missed, even though I've read it through, one chapter a day, for months and months. Years even. But I never stopped to see the underlying organization.
This chapter has 32 verses. Each verse is a compound sentence. In English, in the ESV, 25 introduce the second sentence with the connector "but", showing a contrast between the first and second sentence. vs 18 seems to me the first verse where "and" is the connector (2020 Nope. vs 10 uses "and". I was thinking that maybe when "and" was used, the contrast was connected...as in the wise man digs a hole and the wicked fall in. This is just a made up thing to illustrate - 11:8 is a good example of what I mean. The righteous avoids trouble, but trouble is still there, it just happens to the wicked instead. The trouble itself was inevitably going to happen to someone. But the point is that whatever action is in the first half, it leads to a result in the second half. So that is an "and" connector. The ones that use "but" are just differences in the results of contrasting behaviors. One does not necessarily lead to the other. However...this first place where "and" is used doesn't work out that way. Too bad, because it was a pretty neat theory I think...) There are two verses before that where "but" is not used, but seems to be implied. vs 18 needs an "and". 22 is the next where "and" is needed. 26 is not really a compound sentence. You need both halves for a complete sentence. This is the only verse in the chapter that is not a compound sentence.
2024 - Vs 19 is a very profound verse:
19 When there are many words, transgression is unavoidable, But he who restrains his lips is wise. [Pro 10:19 NASB95]. The more you talk, the more likely you are to offend. Talk enough, and the likelihood approaches certainty. I NEED TO SHUT UP!!!
Here is one that I like, in light of current (2020) events:
25 When the tempest passes, the wicked is no more, but the righteous is established forever. [Pro 10:25 ESV]