The Falls of the Righteous (Proverbs 24:16)

According to Proverbs, how many times does a righteous man fall and rise again? Seven times (Proverbs 24:16)

Proverbs 24:16 is a straight forward maxim which highlights the resilience of the righteous.

For a righteous man falls seven times, and rises again,
But the wicked stumble in time of calamity. (Proverbs 24:16 NASB)

The Message paraphrases, “No matter how many times you trip them up, God-loyal people don’t stay down long; Soon they’re up on their feet, while the wicked end up flat on their faces”.

Emerson Eggerichs (b. 1951) internalizes:

Proverbs 24:16...gives me such hope. Good people are not perfect, but God says: “A righteous man [or woman] falls seven times, and rises again.” (Eggerichs, The Love & Respect Experience: A Husband-Friendly Devotional that Wives Truly Love, 2)

This proverb is attached to its predecessor: “Do not lie in wait, O wicked man, against the dwelling of the righteous;/Do not destroy his resting place” (Proverbs 24:15 NASB).

Christine R. Yoder (b. 1968) connects:

The second proverb [Proverbs 24:16] explains why the ambushes [Proverbs 24:15] are doomed to failure. Seven times, a number that signifies completeness, the righteous will fall and get up again (Psalm 20:7-8)...By contrast, the wicked, who by “lying in wait” [Proverbs 24:15] assume that they have an upper hand, are tripped up by their own wickedness. Lack of a parallel “arise” or similar verb of recovery in Proverbs 24:16b underscores the finality of their fate. They do not get up again. (Yoder, Proverbs (Abingdon Old Testament Commentaries), 240-41)

Bruce K. Waltke (b. 1930) expounds:

The unit’s first prohibition [Proverbs 24:15-16] cautions the disciple not to join the ranks of wicked to take away the abode of the righteous by cunning deceit and violence (Proverbs 24:15). The prohibition rests on the godly person’s faith and conviction that the righteous will recover from their fall and the wicked will finally fall through their evil and never recover from their misery. For signals the connection between the admonition (Proverbs 24:15) and its validation (Proverbs 24:16), a connection strengthened by the catchwords righteous (Proverbs 24:15a, 16a)..and wicked (Proverbs 24:15a, 16b)...The double prohibition uses imagery from the field of animal husbandry, that is, “pasture” and “bed for animals” (cf. Proverbs 24:15; cf. Isaiah 35:7, 65:10), and the double rationale uses the metaphor of travel (“stumble and fall”; Proverbs 27:16). The rationale entails that the wicked kill the righteous to plunder them (see Proverbs 1:10-19) and that they may not get their deserts until the end when the righteous triumphantly rises from his destruction...In sum, the rationale of Proverbs 24:16 adds to the promise of Proverbs 24:14 that before the wise/righteous enjoy an eternal future they may first be utterly ruined. It also adds the threat that the wicked are damned. Both promise and threat demand faith that the LORD stands behind this moral order (cf. Proverbs 3:5-6, 22:23, 23:11, 24:18, 21). (Waltke, The Book of Proverbs, Chapters 15-31 (New International Commentary on the Old Testament), 282)

Richard J. Clifford (b. 1934) interprets:

The words for “house”—nāweh “pasture, dwelling,” and rēbes, “resting place” [Proverbs 24:15]—are a pair fixed in Isaiah 35:7 and Isaiah 65:10. In this saying, the ambusher rather than the ambushed is the one actually in danger, for the righteous person always (“seven times” [Proverbs 24:16]) makes a comeback. The wicked person, however, is tripped up by only one fall—perhaps the very act of ambushing. The proverb can be extended to ethics generally, where it is a sign of a righteous person to be able to rise up after a fall (Alonso Schökel [1920-1998]). (Clifford, Proverbs: A Commentary (Old Testament Library), 215)

Proverbs 24:16’s wisdom is paralleled in the Psalms. Michael V. Fox (b. 1940) correlates:

If the righteous man suffers harm—such as an encroachment on his field—he will recover, but wickedness is a dead-end road. A Wisdom Psalm states this principle theologically: “Many are the misfortunes of a righteous man, but the Lord will save them from them all” (Psalm 34:20). (Fox, Proverbs 10-31 (Anchor Bible), 749)

Proverbs 24:16 directly contrasts the falls of the righteous and the wicked. Roland Murphy (1917-2002) notes:

Hebrew rāšā (wicked) of the Masoretic Text is taken by the NIV as a kind of apposition; others understand it as a vocative. (Murphy and Elizabeth Huwiler [b. 1952], Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs (Understanding the Bible Commentary Series))

Though the fate of the righteous is ultimately superior to that of the wicked, their path is not necessarily clear. In fact, they may endure as many as seven falls (Proverbs 24:16). Here, the number seven is proverbial (pun intended): It indicates the potential for repeated falls.

Ellen F. Davis (b. 1950) deciphers:

The number seven may be a conventional round number, similar to our use of “a dozen” (see Proverbs 24:16, 26:16). (Davis, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Songs (Westminster Bible Companion), 71)

Roger N. Whybray (1923-1997) concurs:

Seven times...means an indefinite number of times [Proverbs 24:16]. The point is that the good man may suffer temporary misfortune at the hands of the rascal, but virtue will triumph in the end. (Whybray, The Book of Proverbs (Cambridge Bible Commentaries on the Old Testament), 140)

Michael V. Fox (b. 1940) reveals:

Seven times...Even seven times...is equivalent to “many” (Sa‘adia). The Syriac Ahiqar (version S2) says: “My son, the wicked falls and does not arise, while the honest man is not shaken, because God is with him” (§21) This is based on the present verse [Proverbs 24:16]. (Fox, Proverbs 10-31 (Anchor Bible), 750)

This usage of the number seven is a common biblical trope. Leonard S. Kravitz (b. 1928) and Kerry M. Olitzky (b. 1954) survey:

While numbers have great religious symbolism, few are given any real significance in the Bible. There are, however, a few exceptions to this. The number seven, for instance, is most prominent. It is reflected in the seven days of creation [Genesis 2:2-3], the Sabbath as the seventh day [Exodus 16:26, 20:10, 31:15, 35:2, Leviticus 23:3, Deuteronomy 5:14], the Sabbatical year [Exodus 23:10–11; Leviticus 25:4, 8; Nehemiah 10:31; Jeremiah 34:13-14], the Jubilee year of seven times seven [Leviticus 25:8-13], and the Omer cycle of seven times seven days [Leviticus 23:15-16; Deuteronomy 16:9-10]. In Jericho seven priests blew seven shofars seven times on seven days in seven circuits (Joshua 6:1ff). (Kravitz and Olitsky, Mishlei: A Modern Commentary on Proverbs, 68)

Oftentimes, the righteous are frequent fallers; they are not exempt from falling consistently and perhaps even completely.

The adage has a two-fold purpose (Proverbs 24:16): It encourages the righteous to remain steadfast in the face of adversity while discouraging the temptation to shortcut righteousness for temporary gains.

Tremper Longman III (b. 1952) considers:

As it in the Masoretic Text, the passage [Proverbs 24:15-16] is most naturally understood as addressed to the wicked. If so, then the proverb serves as a warning against trying to undermine the righteous on the basis of its futility. However, it might be that this is a fictional address and that the actual hearer of the proverb is the student of the sage, in which case the proverb would serve as an encouragement in the light of the attacks of the wicked. (Longman, Proverbs (Baker Commentary on the Old Testament Wisdom and Psalms), 439)

In the face of the facade of the wicked’s prosperity, the righteous could be tempted to circumvent their principles. Duane A. Garrett (b. 1953) asserts:

Saying Twenty-Seven (Proverbs 24:15-16)...is a warning addressed to the evildoer to leave the righteous alone...The resilience of the good man (expressed in his getting back up seven times [Proverbs 24:16]) is such that the evil cannot win. (Garrett, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs (New American Commentary), 199)

Dave L. Bland (b. 1953) advises:

Do not bother to bring about the downfall of the righteous man’s house because it will only be a waste of time [Proverbs 24:15-16]. The righteous are a hardy bunch. They will continually recover from adversity or temptation (seven times) and be even stronger (notice a different scenario in Proverbs 25:26). In contrast, the wicked are brought down when they face a single crisis. (Bland, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes & Song of Solomon (College Press NIV Commentary), 217)

Allen P. Ross (b. 1943) understands:

It is futile and self-defeating to mistreat God’s people, for they survive, whereas the wicked do not [Proverbs 24:16]! The warning is against attacking the righteous; to attack them is to attack God and his program, and that will fail (Matthew 16:18). The consequence, and thus the motivation, is that if the righteous suffer misfortune any number of times (= “seven times,” Proverbs 24:16), they will rise again; for virtue triumphs in the end (R.N. Whybray [1923-1997], 140). Conversely, the wicked will not survive; without God they have no power to rise from misfortune. The point, then, is that ultimately the righteous will triumph and those who oppose them will stumble over their evil. (Tremper Longman III [b. 1952] and David E. Garland [b. 1947], Proverbs ~ Isaiah (Expositor’s Bible Commentary), 200)

In short, in the long run, crime doesn’t pay.

Other interpreters have focused on the call to perseverance (Proverbs 24:16). As the cliché asserts, tough times don’t last but tough people do.

Roland Murphy (1917-2002) characterizes:

Proverbs 24:15-16 [is]...an admonition with motivational rationale. The admonition warns against ruling the dwelling place of the righteous [Proverbs 14:15]. It grants that the latter can suffer repeated adversity (the proverbial seven times [Proverbs 24:16]), but in the long run he will prevail and the wicked will not. (Murphy and Elizabeth Huwiler [b. 1952], Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs (Understanding the Bible Commentary Series))

David Hubbard (1928-1996) professes:

The long-range vindication and prosperity of the wise is affirmed...here. The motivation tells us how (Proverbs 24:16). The “righteous” person, loyal to the Lord and His people, may come on hard times (“fall”) repeatedly...but each time he will “rise,” as the Lord, whose hand is at work though His name is not mentioned, vindicates him in due season (see the delayed timing of Proverbs 23:18, 24:14). “Wicked” people (the noun is plural here, but singular in Proverbs 24:15) are made to stumble (“fall”” in Proverbs 24:16 translates two different Hebrew words; the second ka shal describes stumbling over an obstacle or being tripped up; Proverbs 4:12, 19; see noun form at Proverbs 16:18) and never get up. “Calamity”...hits them as divine judgment and lays them low once and for all. (Hubbard, Proverbs (Mastering the Old Testament), 375)

Alyce M. McKenzie (b. 1955) preaches:

Perseverance is a crucial quality for...Christians to cultivate...because we live in a society where not all perseverance is fueled by faith in God and directed toward the good of the community...A great deal of perseverance...is fueled by the pursuit of material possessions that make for a life rich in things and poor in soul...Then there is the perseverance fueled by the desire for improving the quality of our lives in community in the best sense of the word quality: “Persistence prevails when all else fails”...The Korean proverb “Fall down seven times and get up eight” expresses the quality of tenacity for which the Korean people are renowned...Then there is the perseverance that is fueled by faith toward godly goals...Perseverance continues to build communities’ resolve and self-esteem. (McKenzie, Preaching Proverbs: Wisdom for the Pulpit, 143-44)

Though unstated, the righteous’ perseverance can surely be attributed to God. Crawford H. Toy (1836-1919) presumes:

The righteous, it is said, shall never be permanently cast down (Micah 7:8); the wicked, on the contrary, has no power to rise above misfortune — once down, he does not rise. The couplet probably refers not to the natural inspiriting power of integrity and the depressing effect of moral evil, but to divine retribution [Proverbs 24:16]. (Toy, Proverbs (International Critical Commentary), 448)

Raymond C. Van Leeuwen (b. 1948) agrees:

These verses [Proverbs 24:15-16] form an admonition against attacking the righteous (see Proverbs 1:11, 23:10-11). Its point is in the motive clause: Although the righteous are not free from troubles, even though they fall again and again, they get up and go on (Psalm 20:7-8). The wicked, however, are brought down (literally, they stumble and fall), like the wicked in Proverbs 4:12, 16, 19 (see also Proverbs 24:17). The underlying premise is that God rewards people according to their deeds (see Proverbs 24:12, 29). (Van Luewen, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Book of Wisdom, Sirach (New Interpreter’s Bible, 211)

John M. Perkins (b. 1930) confesses:

We will stumble and fail along the way. Our purest motives and sincerest efforts will not protect us from failure. We need to mentally accept this ahead of time. We must go through the fiery trial of failure before we are able to fully accept the fact that failure “comes with the territory.” In this struggle we will confront the cultural value of success. Says Robert D. Lupton [b. 1944]: “Success is not an automatic consequence of obedience. ‘A righteous man falls seven times and rises again’ (Proverbs 24:16). Saint and sinner alike must take their lumps and go on to the next risk. But for the believer there is one guarantee. We have a dependable God who made a trustworthy commitment that no matter what happens—success or failure—He will use it for our ultimate good.” (Perkins, Beyond Charity: The Call to Christian Community Development, 172-73)

Some have imagined the divine not only walking by the side of the righteous but picking them up after their falls. Jan Silvious (b. 1944) envisions:

As each of my three boys learned to walk, our hands were always there. They fell to their knees, many times, but we never let them fall on their heads or get permanently hurt. In the same way, the Lord is always there to keep us. He will not let us be cast down. “For though a righteous man falls seven times, he rises again” (Proverbs 24:16). (Silvious, The Five-Minute Devotional: Meditations for the Busy Woman, 126)

Neil T. Anderson (b. 1942) and Joanne Anderson (b. 1941) encourage:

We probably learn more from our mistakes than we will ever learn from our successes. A mistake is only a failure when you fail to learn from it: “For though a righteous man falls seven times, he rises again” (Proverbs 24:16 NIV). If you make a mistake, get back up and try again and again and again. This is not a question of self-confidence. Our confidence is in God. (Anderson, Overcoming Depression, 75)

The righteous cannot fall so frequently, completely or lowly that God cannot lift them up. There is hope, even for the wicked who can repent and become counted among the righteous.

Proverbs 24:16 affirms that both the righteous and wicked fall. This circumstance is a universal part of the human condition. The difference is in the result: The righteous emerge from the fall. And the determining factor is God. Proverbs agrees, you can’t keep a good man (or woman) down.

Is Proverbs 24:16 written more to deter wickedness or encourage the fallen righteous? Why is Proverbs 24:16 true: is the universe designed to self correct in this way or does God intervene? Is the resilience of the righteous the reason for the wicked’s ultimate defeat? What raises the righteous that the wicked lack? What is the correlation between righteousness and resilience; is perseverance intrinsic to Judeo-Christian faith? When have the wicked prospered while the righteous fell?

Implicit in Proverbs 24:16 is the recognition that the righteous are not promised sure footing: They do fall. Jesus echoes this in the Sermon on the Mount: “He causes His sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous” (Matthew 5:45 NASB).

Intrerpreters have long realized the inevitability falling. Augustine (354-430) restates:

The text, “For a just man shall fall seven times and shall rise again” [Proverbs 24:16], means that he will not perish, however often he falls. There is here no question of falling into sins but of afflictions leading to a lower life. CITY OF GOD 11.31. (J. Robert Wright [b. 1936], Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Solomon (Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture), 152)

The fall of the righteous is so common that the assurance of their triumph must be reiterated repeatedly. Tomáš Frydrych (b. 1969) realizes:

The premise about prosperity of the wise and destruction of the fools has to be reiterated again and again. This suggests at least indirectly that in the real world to which the sages are addressing themselves, this principle might not always be so obvious, and therefore, persistent reinforcement is required. Consider...Proverbs 1:10-13...Proverbs 10:30...Proverbs 19:10...Proverbs 24:15-16...Proverbs 25:26...These sayings, and other[s] like them, only make adequate sense if in the sages world at least occasionally those who ambush the innocent fill their pockets with loot, the righteous stagger, the wicked have the upper hand and fools live lives of luxury. Thus, there are both explicit and implicit indications that the proverbial sages were aware that the picture of the world they paint is not entirely accurate. (Frydrych, Living Under the Sun: Examination of Proverbs & Qoheleth, 38)

Daniel J. Treier (b. 1972) analyzes:

The last command [Proverbs 3:11-12], regarding divine discipline, tacitly acknowledges that simplistic forms of retributive theology, according to which God makes good things happen to good people and bad things happen to bad people, are wrong. Good people do not always enjoy good circumstances, or else this exhortation would not be necessary for such people to interpret their lives and respond rightly. Proverbs 24:16 provides even more obvious nuance about righteous suffering: “The righteous falls seven times and rises again,/but the wicked stumble in times of calamity” (ESV). So-called retribution, not always manifest in circumstantial moments, ultimately pertains to final ends. (Treier, Proverbs & Ecclesiastes (Brazos Theological Commentary on the Bible), 25)

Albert H. Baylis assures:

Proverbs knows there is no mechanical guarantee about these formulas. Some good people die young. You and I could both name some. The righteous have their setbacks (Proverbs 24:16). The wicked often do so well that the righteous are tempted toward envy (Proverbs 24:1-2, 23:17, 3:31). But as our own folk wisdom recognizes, those people are “living on borrowed time.” They are swimming against the tide. The odds will catch up with them. (Baylis, From Creation to the Cross: Understanding the First Half of the Bible))

Tremper Longman III (b. 1952) acknowledges:

The sages understood that the righteous wise would suffer in life, but they also have the endurance to withstand the attacks of life [Proverbs 24:16]. Life may beat them down, but they both have hope...because of wisdom. They see beyond the present misfortune. (Longman, Proverbs (Baker Commentary on the Old Testament Wisdom and Psalms), 439)

Given the seeming contradiction between Proverbs 24:16’s assertion and the present reality, many have long looked to the next life for its fulfillment.

Cassiodorus (485-585) dissects:

A Christian is said to rise again in two senses; first, in this world when he is freed by grace from death of vices, and he continues being justified by God; in the words of the most wise Solomon, “A just man falls seven times and rises again” [Proverbs 24:16]. Second, there is the general resurrection, at which the just will attain their eternal rewards. EXPOSITIONS OF THE PSALMS 19.9. (J. Robert Wright [b. 1936], Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Solomon (Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture), 152-53)

Milton P. Horne (b. 1956) associates:

The instruction [Proverbs 24:15-16] is important because it provides insight on the nature of “future hope” that the preceding instruction mentions (Proverbs 24:14). It does not mean that the righteous will not fall, but that they will recover. Or to put it another way, the future hope for the righteous does not preclude suffering; it simply assures success and fulfillment in the long run. By comparison, the wicked is swept away. (Horne, Proverbs–Ecclesiastes (Smyth & Helwys Bible Commentary), 292)

Though there is undoubtedly hope for justice in the next life, the Bible is also replete with examples of righteous believers who have overcome numerous falls. Cody L. Jones (b. 1949) relates:

Do not...raid [a] righteous man’s house. Though they fall seven times, the upright will rise again; but the wicked are overthrown by calamity (Proverbs 24:15-16). When King Chedorlaomer raided Sodom, he inadvertently raided the house of Abram by carrying off Lot [Genesis 14:12]. Abram followed and routed Chedorlaomer’s party and rescued his nephew [Genesis 14:13-16]. (Jones, The Complete Guide to the Book of Proverbs, 188)

John Phillips (1927-2010) illustrates:

The classic example of Proverbs 24:15-16 is the story of David and King Saul. King Saul was the man who lay in wait “against the dwelling of the righteous” [Proverbs 24:15]. After Saul threw a javelin at David and missed, David escaped and made his way home [I Samuel 18:10-11, 19:10]...David, on the other hand, was the just man who fell seven times, only to rise up again [Proverbs 24:16]. In spite of all his faults and failings, David loved the Lord. (Phillips, Exploring Proverbs, Volume Two: An Expository Commentary, 275)

The most obvious biblical example of rising from a fall is Jesus’ rise, even from death. T.D. Jakes (b. 1957) exhorts:

The whole theme of Christianity is one of rising again. However, you can’t rise until you fall. Now that doesn’t mean you should fall into sin. It means you should allow the resurrecting power of the Holy Ghost to operate in your life regardless of whether you have fallen into sin, discouragement, apathy, or fear. There are obstacles that can trip you as you escalate toward productivity. But it doesn’t matter what tripped you; it matters that you rise up. People who never experience these things generally are people who don’t do anything. There is a certain safety in being dormant. Nothing is won, but nothing is lost. I would rather walk on water with Jesus. I would rather nearly drown and have to be saved than play it safe and never experience the miraculous. (Jakes, Can You Stand to Be Blessed?, 14)

The righteous’ ability to rise is at the core of Christianity. The good may not win every battle but the war has been won. This proverb is both evidenced and ultimately fulfilled in Jesus’ death and resurrection.

Do you find Proverbs 24:16, with its admission that the righteous may endure repeated setbacks, encouraging? Do the righteous get stronger through their falls? Are there benefits to falling, from emerging from setbacks? Are the righteous assured of rising in the present world; is there justice in this life? Are there benefits to being righteous; what is the reward of the righteous? Who or what best embodies the wisdom of Proverbs 24:16?

I get knocked down
But I get up again
You’re never gonna keep me down
I get knocked down
But I get up again
You’re never gonna keep me down
– Chumbawamba, “Tubthumping”, 1997

The Power of the Tongue (Proverbs 18:21)

Complete this Proverb: “Death and life are in the power of __________.” The tongue (Proverbs 18:21)

A well-known children’s verse asserts that “sticks and stones may break my bones/but names will never hurt me.” The book of Proverbs rejects this conventional wisdom, asserting that the tongue carries power, the power of life and death (Proverbs 18:21).

Death and life are in the power of the tongue,
And those who love it will eat its fruit. (Proverbs 18:21 NASB)

The power of words is a common theme in the book of Proverbs. Kathleen A. Farmer (b. 1943) tracks:

A number of sayings (including several editorial clusters) are concerned with wise and foolish ways of using human powers of communication. Fully, a third of the sayings in chapters 10, 12, and 26 are related to this topic. The sayings acknowledge that “death and life are in the power of the tongue” (Proverbs 18:21), that “a soft tongue will break a bone” (Proverbs 25:15), that “the lips of the wise will preserve them” (Proverbs 14:3), and that the speech of the “worthless” is “like a scorching fire” (Proverbs 16:27). Thus, the originators of these sayings endorse a viewpoint shared by many of their counterparts in other cultures. For instance in the Instruction of Ani an Egyptian sage says, “A man may fall to ruin because of his tongue” (vii.7-11; Ancient Near Eastern Texts, 420), and in the Elephantine texts the Assyrian scribe Ahiqar says, “More than all watchfulness watch thy mouth...For a word is a bird: once released no one can recapture it,” and “Soft is the tongue of a king, but it breaks a dragon’s ribs” (The Words of Ahiqar vii.98, 105b-106; Ancient Near Eastern Texts, 428-29). This same attitude is echoed in a later era by a New Testament author: “The tongue is a little member and boasts of great things. How great a forest is set ablaze by a small [tongue of] fire!”(James 3:5-8). (Farmer, Proverbs & Ecclesiastes: Who Knows What is Good? (International Theological Commentary), 84)

The potency of words is of particular interest in the book’s eighteenth chapter (Proverbs 18:1-24). Leo G. Perdue (b. 1946) explores:

Language is once again a common theme in this chapter of the second subdivision [Proverbs 18:1-24]. The recognition of the power of speech that creates and destroys life is reaffirmed: “Death and life are in the power of the tongue, and those who love it will eat its fruits” (Proverbs 18:21). A proper answer following careful hearing and moral reflection is emphasized by the sages: “The poor use entreaties, but the rich answer roughly” (Proverbs 18:23, see Proverbs 18:13, 15, 20). The depth of human speech that often escapes simple understanding is underscored in the saying “The words of the mouth are deep waters; the fountain of wisdom is a gushing stream” (Proverbs 18:4). It is only through wisdom, as moral reflection and careful thought, that understanding is obtained. By contrast, fools misuse language to their and others’ detriment: “A fool’s lips bring strife, and a fool’s mouth invites a flogging” (Proverbs 18:6, see Proverbs 18:7, 13). The abuse of language in the words of a whisperer misshapes his or her character (Proverbs 18:8). (Perdue, Proverbs (Interpretation: A Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching), 183-84)

Christopher B. Ansberry (b. 1980) concurs:

The thematic movement between the sub-collections is also evident with respect to their treatment of communication. Solomon 1B [Proverbs 16:1-22:16] reinforces various dialogical principles presented in the Proverbs 10-15. Several aphorisms describe the individual and communal implications of proper and improper speech (e.g., Proverbs 16:28, 30, 17:20, 18:7; cf. Proverbs 10:11, 21, 11:19, 13:2, 14:3). Other sayings highlight the inherent power of the tongue (Proverbs 18:21; cf. Proverbs 12:18, 25), the forensic significance of dishonest speech (Proverbs 19:5, 9, 28, 21:28; cf. Proverbs 12:17, 14:5, 25), the effects of descriptive discourse (Proverbs 17:4, 7, 19:22, 21:6; cf. Proverbs 10:18, 12:19, 14:5, 25), and the value of silence (Proverbs 17:27, 28, 21:23; cf. Proverbs 10:19, 11:12, 13:3). These principles receive comparable attention in each sub-collection. (Ansberry, Be Wise, My Son, and Make My Heart Glad: An Exploration of the Courtly Nature of the Book of Proverbs, 108-09)

Proverbs 18:21 and its predecessor (Proverbs 18:20) form a two-verse cluster. Dave Bland (b. 1953) connects:

This proverb pair [Proverbs 18:20-21] describes the power of the organs of speech: mouth, lips, and tongue (see Proverbs 10:18-21). (Bland, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes & Song of Songs (College Press NIV Commentary), 172)

The aphorisms are joined by a thematic buzzword: fruit. Christine R. Yoder (b. 1968) bridges:

The word “fruit” frames the...two proverbs [Proverbs 18:20-21]; it is the first word of Proverbs 18:20 and the last of Proverbs 18:21. Just as gossip is like delicious morsels that descend into the body’s innermost parts (Proverbs 18:8), speech—whether positive or negative—is like fruit and harvest (“yield”) that fills the bellies of speaker and hearer alike. (Yoder, Proverbs (Abingdon Old Testament Commentaries), 200)

Knut Martin Heim (b. 1963) contextualizes:

Proverbs 18:20-21 introduce[s] a new sub-unit on the use of speech. They may still relate to the legal context of the preceding unit, although their application is much broader. Special attention has been given to their composition, as the many linking features,...daring metaphors and the almost paradoxical imagery demonstrate. Together, they vigorously challenge the untutored to learn the proper use of his “tongue”, for this ability will bring him immense profit to the point that it can save his life and/or enhance his life-style, while lack of eloquence may actually be perilous. (Heim, Like Grapes of Gold Set in Silver: An Interpretation of Proverbial Clusters in Proverbs 10:1-22:16, 251)

Proverbs 18:21 is the lens through which Proverbs 18:20 is best interpreted. Derek Kidner (1913-2008) apprises:

The second of this pair of proverbs [Proverbs 18:20-21], with its warning to the talkative, throws a sobering light on the first. Both of them urge caution, for satisfied (Proverbs 18:20) can mean ‘sated’: the meaning, good or bad, will depend on the care taken. James Moffatt [1870-1944] paraphrases Proverbs 18:20 well, but one-sidedly: ‘A man must answer for his utterances, and take the consequences of his words.’ W.O.E. Oesterley [1860-1950] quotes the witty saying of Ahikar: “My son, sweeten thy tongue, and make savoury the opening of thy mouth; for the tail of a dog gives him bread, and his mouth gets him blows.’ (Kidner, Proverbs (Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries), 130)

The proverb’s first clause affirms the tongue’s power (Proverbs 18:21a). Bruce K. Waltke (b.1930) informs:

Of the tongue is another common metonymy for good or bad in this book (Proverbs 10:20, 12:18, 15:2, 4 versus Proverbs 12:19, 17:4, 20), complementing “mouth” and “lip” in the proverb pair. And adds the parallel that qualifies verset A. (Waltke, The Book of Proverbs, Chapters 15-31 (New International Commentary on the Old Testament), 86)

Riad Aziz Kassis expounds:

The tongue is viewed in Proverbs as the organ which expresses thoughts. A good tongue is regarded highly in Proverbs. The tongue is נבחר כםך (Proverbs 10:20) and as מרסא (Proverbs 12:18) and חיים (Proverbs 18:21; cf. Proverbs 15:4). Such descriptions suggest that speech does not consist of mere words spoken ‘in the air’, but has a powerful effect in life. Words are intended actions. The value of the tongue is seen in the fruits of good speech which bring satisfaction to both individual and community (Proverbs 12:14, 13:2, 18:20. (Kassis, The Book of Proverbs and Arabic Proverbial Works, 117)

Mark Driscoll (b. 1970) and Gerry Breshears (b. 1947) apply:

In many ways, the tongue is an indicator of the heart, because Jesus said, “out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks [Matthew 12:34].” The disciple of Jesus learns to speak under the discipline of the Holy Spirit, who enables him or her to speak truthfully in love in a manner that is appropriate for both the hearer and for Jesus, who is listening to our words. The key is to get our time listening to God through his Word so that when we do speak, we echo Jesus with loving words. (Driscoll and Breshears, Vintage Church: Timeless Truths and Timely Methods, 202)

Death and life are in the “power” of the tongue (Proverbs 18:21). Though most translations render the Hebrew yâd with its figurative meaning “power” (ASV, ESV, HCSB, KJV, NASB, NIV, NKJV, NRSV, RSV) or omit it (CEV, MSG, NLT), the word literally means “hand”.

Christine R. Yoder (b. 1968) clarifies:

Life and death are “in the hand of the tongue” (Proverbs 18:21a); “hand” may refer to a person’s power, much as the English expression “The matter is in your hands” means you have control over it (e.g., Deuteronomy 32:36; Joshua 8:20). The tongue or speech one “loves” determines one’s fate, just as the choice between wisdom and folly has life and death consequences (Proverbs 1-9, see especially wisdom’s “fruit,” Proverbs 8:19; cf. Proverbs 31:31). (Yoder, Proverbs (Abingdon Old Testament Commentaries), 200-01)

Michael V. Fox (b. 1940) relays:

“Are in the hand of the tongue.” James G. Williams [b. 1936] (1980:47) sees this as an allusion to Lady Wisdom: “The tongue is like a woman who offers fruit to her friends.” See the image in Proverbs 8:19. (Fox, Proverbs 10-31 (The Anchor Bible), 645)

Speech carries life and death implications. Similar consequences are relayed in Proverbs 13:3, 21:23. Roland Murphy (1917-2002) comments:

The significance of speech is intensified by the reference to death and life. Since these are particularly the domain of the Lord, there is a strong affirmation of “the power (literally ‘hand’) of the tongue.” Does this refer to the speaker or those he addresses? Perhaps both. There is a similar proverb in Sirach 37:18 concerning the power of the tongue over life and death. It is not clear what “it” in “love it” refers to. It seems to be the tongue and so would refer to the possibility of talking foolishly or wisely. This would seem to include the alternative of life/death. (Murphy, Proverbs (Word Biblical Commentary))

Michael V. Fox (b. 1940) affirms:

Speech has the power to give and preserve life and well-being and to bring death and destruction, both to the speaker (Proverbs 12:6b, 13a, 13:2a, 3, 18:7) and to others (Proverbs 10:11a, 11:9a, 12:6a, 13a, 18). Radaq [1160-1235] says that slander kills three people: its speaker, its listener, and its victim. Paired with Proverbs 19:29, however, Proverbs 18:21 concerns particularly its impact on the speaker. (Fox, Proverbs 10-31 (The Anchor Bible), 645)

Bruce K. Waltke (b.1930) bounds:

The merism death and life (see Proverbs 2:18, 19, 5;5, 6, 8:35, 36, 12:28, 13:14, 14:27, 16:14, 15) comprehends all manner of weal and woe. Speech effects more than clinical death and life. The merism speaks of relationship within community or the lack of it. The deadly tongue disrupts community and by its lethal power isolates its owner from community and kills him. The life-giving tongue creates community and by its vitality gives it possessor the full enjoyment of the abundant life within the community. (Waltke, The Book of Proverbs, Chapters 15-31 (New International Commentary on the Old Testament), 86)

Tremper Longman III (b. 1952) condenses:

Death is the end of the road for those who use their speech to hurt others. (Longman, How to Read Proverbs, 153)

While the proverb’s opening line is relatively straightforward, its second clause is problematic: “those who love it will eat its fruit” (Proverbs 18:21 NASB). Among the challenges facing the interpreter are identifying the undefined “those”, “it” and “fruit”.

Allen P. Ross (b. 1943) theorizes:

The referent of “it” must be “the tongue,” i.e., what the tongue says. So those who enjoy talking, i.e. indulging in it, must bear its fruit. The Midrash mentions this point, showing one way it can cause death: “The evil tongue slays three, the slanderer, the slandered, and the listener” (Midrash Tehillim 52:2; see further James G. Williams [b. 1936], “The Power of Form: A Study of Biblical Proverbs,” Semeia 17 [1980]” 35-38). (Tremper Longman III [b. 1952] and David E. Garland [b. 1947], Proverbs~Isaiah (The Expositor’s Bible Commentary), 164)

Michael V. Fox (b. 1940) agrees:

Those tho love it [feminine]: Namely, the tongue. Those who cherish fine speech and hold it in respect will (as the preceding verse says) enjoy its fruit...Franz Delitzsch [1813-1890] wonders if the (feminine) antecedent of “it” refers to wisdom, which is the usual object of love in Proverbs, but the word is not available in the context. Since one does not actually love the tongue, Richard J. Clifford [b. 1934] identifies the antecedent of “it” (feminine singular) as “life” (masculine plural) or “death” (masculine singular) and translates “those who choose one shall eat its fruit.” But though it is true that a feminine singular pronoun can have a vague plurality as its antecedent, it cannot have a disjunctive antecedent (either-or), especially when neither of the antecedents agrees grammatically with the pronoun. (Fox, Proverbs 10-31 (The Anchor Bible), 645)

The use of “love” is also noteworthy. Robert Alter (b. 1935) interjects:

The choice of the verb “love” is revealing in regard to the underlying attitude toward language. A cultivated person delights in language and takes pleasure in its apt use, and this exercise of well-considered expression will redound to his profit. In this fashion, the ethic of articulate speech in Proverbs mirrors the form of the proverbs themselves, which, at least in intention, are finely honed articulations of wisdom, often exhibiting concise wit. (Alter, The Wisdom Books: Job, Proverbs, and Ecclesiastes: A Translation with Commentary, 272)

Some have contended that “those who love it” refers to loquacious people (Proverbs 18:21). Bruce K. Waltke (b.1930) interprets:

Those who love it (i.e., “the tongue” [=speech]; see Proverbs 1:22) designates people who “are in love with language; they use it fastidiously, they search for chaste expression and precise meaning, and they have an end in view which they will reach because they know what language is for and how it can best be used to achieve its purpose.” Their objective may be good (i.e., producing life; cf. Proverbs 4:6, 8:17, 12:1, 13:24, 16:13, 22:11, 29:3) or bad (i.e., producing death; cf. Proverbs 1:11, 8:36, 17:19, 20:13, 21:17). (Waltke, The Book of Proverbs, Chapters 15-31 (New International Commentary on the Old Testament), 86)

Knut Martin Heim (b. 1963) educates:

The participle of אהב, “to love” denotes a continuous activity. The expression “to love the tongue” does not refer to someone who likes to talk a lot. Rather, it denotes the positive character who diligently improves his oral skills and knows how to employ them wisely, be it by saying the right thing at the right time or by remaining quiet when appropriate. (Heim, Like Grapes of Gold Set in Silver: An Interpretation of Proverbial Clusters in Proverbs 10:1-22:16, 251)

Another vague term which must be defined is “fruit”. Duane A. Garrett (b. 1953) investigates:

Some scholars take “fruit” to refer to consequences, good or evil, that follow upon one’s words. An alternative view is that “fruit” here is good fruit as opposed to barrenness. The meaning would be that speech is powerful and the wise use it economically in order to achieve the intended result. Through the careful choice of words, their language is fruitful...In my view neither is satisfactory. On the one hand, the statement that people are satisfied with the fruit (Proverbs 18:20) excludes the view that good or bad consequences are in view. No one is satisfied with something that does not have its intended effect. On the other hand, not all fruit is good, as the text implies in speaking of tongues’ having the power of death, a destructive force (Proverbs 18:21)...Rather, Proverbs 18:20 asserts that people have a sense of self-satisfaction about their own words. To put it another way, they delight in airing their own opinions. And yet the tongue can be highly dangerous. The purpose of these verses is to warn against being too much in love with one’s own words. One should recognize the power of words and use them with restraint. Voicing one’s views, here ironically described as eating the fruit of the tongue, can be an addictive habit with dangerous results. (Garrett, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs (New American Commentary), 166-67)

Bruce K. Waltke (b.1930) deciphers:

On its own this proverb could refer to eating (i.e., taking into one’s being) the speech of others, buts its close connection with Proverbs 18:20 suggests that it continues the oxymoron of eating the consequences in an exact correspondence to the way one speaks (cf. Proverbs 13:3, 15:23, 21:23). By placing in the outer core of its chiastic synthetic parallels word-initial “death and life” (Proverbs 18:21a) and word-final “fruit (Proverbs 18:21b), the proverb clarifies and intensifies the metaphor of “fruit” in Proverbs 18:20. Its inner core, matching “in the power of the tongue” with “those who love it,” clarifies that for the speech to effect life or death one must earnestly desire to speak, to pursue it, and to stick with it. This commitment to speech precedes the rewards of Proverbs 18:20, as eating precedes being filled. (Waltke, The Book of Proverbs, Chapters 15-31 (New International Commentary on the Old Testament), 86)

Some have inferred courtroom implications. Kathleen A. Farmer (b. 1943) envisions:

Perjury (giving a false testimony) under such a system brings about a failure in justice: “A worthless witness mocks at justice” (Proverbs 19:28). The story in I Kings 21:1-29 (about Naboth’s vineyard) illustrates the lethal power lying witnesses can have. The saying that attributes the power of life and death to the tongue (Proverbs 18:21) may be most appropriately quoted in this legal setting. (Farmer, Proverbs & Ecclesiastes: Who Knows What is Good? (International Theological Commentary), 86-87)

Leonard S. Kravitz (b. 1928) and Kerry M. Olitzky (1954) construe the aphorism in terms of advice:

Proper advice has a wide effect on the society and on the individual who offers it. The development of such advice takes discipline and devotion. One has to love it in order to do it. If one does it well, then one can do well and be successful. (Kravitz and Olitzky, Mishlei: A Modern Commentary on Proverbs, 184)

Others have seen a spiritual principle involved: inner vows become reality or in the words of Michael Jackson (1958-2009), “the lie becomes the truth”. D.J. Jewels exemplifies:

What we say has everything to do with what comes about in our lives. If we constantly talk death, eventually that will happen and you stop any kind of life from enveloping your being. If we talk life, on the other hand, we will bring that life into our being...If we can get a real understanding of this concept, we will begin to use what we say to our advantage instead of disadvantage...You attract life when you speak life and living into your being and you attract death when you do not. (Jewels, God’s Original Law of Attraction)

In a more mainstream outlet, Joel Osteen (b. 1963) quotes Proverbs 18:21 three times in his book, Your Words Hold a Miracle. He implores:

You can change your world by changing your words, and specifically by agreeing with and speaking the Word of God. (Osteen , Your Words Hold a Miracle: The Power of Speaking God’s Word)

While the verse’s particulars are debated, its main thrust is not: Words are influential. John Chrystostom (347-407), whose eloquence garnered him his surname which means “Golden Mouth”, preaches:

Christ makes the same point when he says, “By your own words you will be condemned, and by your words you will be justified” [Matthew 12:37]...The tongue stands in the middle ready for either use; you are its master. So also does a sword lie in the middle; if you use it against the enemy, it becomes an instrument for your safety; if you use it to wound yourself, it is not the steel but your own transgression of the law that causes your death. Let us think of the tongue in the same way, as a sword lying in the middle. Sharpen it to accuse yourself of your own sins, but do not use it to wound your brother...Hence, God has surrounded the tongue with a double wall—with the barrier of the teeth and the fence of the lips—in order that it may not easily and heedlessly utter words it should not speak. BAPTISMAL INSTRUCTIONS 9.33-35. (J. Robert Wright [b. 1936], Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Solomon (Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture), 123)

Ellen F. Davis (b. 1950) considers:

The first verse [Proverbs 18:20], taken by itself, could be read as a purely utilitarian statement: a good command of words puts food on the table. So I recently heard a patent attorney comment that his business is “selling words.” Such a utilitarian view of speaking is very common among us; words are widely regarded as marketable commodities. Politicians and advertisers are eager to find words that will sell but rarely feel morally bound by what they have said. A presidential press secretary, confronted with a clear contradiction in his remarks, observed that the earlier statement was “inoperative.” It is telling that he chose a word that comes from the world of machinery. One might say that we have become a culture of “word processors.” We rapidly produce words and delete them, hoping they will disappear without a trace from human memory, as they do from a computer screen...But the second verse [Proverbs 18:21] shows how inadequate is that mechanistic understanding of speech. The fruit-bearing tongue is a living source of nourishment, delight, sustenance. “A healing tongue is a tree of life” (Proverbs 15:4)...But words can destroy as well as heal: “Death and life are in the power of the tongue.” [Proverbs 18:21] That proverb is the opposite pole from our own: “Sticks and stones will break my bones, but words will never hurt me.” On the contrary, the biblical perception is that words are powerful bearers of intention, for good and for ill. In speaking, we imitate God, who once spoke the world into being. Serving God requires that our words further the intentions first expressed in God’s own purposeful word (Isaiah 55:11)...The widespread degradation of words in our culture point to the need to highlight the clear biblical witness in this matter, if the church is itself to be a center of godly speech that gives life to its members. Within the New Testament, the letter of James, whose thought at many points echoes that of the sages, names an undisclosed tongue as “a fire...a world of iniquity” (James 3:6). One contemporary theologian issues a profound and imaginative challenge to the church: to recognize itself as a “guild of philogians,” literally “word-lovers.” He challenges us, not to be better Scrabble players, but to engage in “that word-caring, that meticulous and conscientious concern for the quality of conversation and the truthfulness of memory, which is the first casualty of sin” (Nicholas Lash [b. 1934], “Ministry of the Word,” 476). Truthful words, backed up with our lives, are all that we offer God in worship. Caring words are often all that we have to offer one another, the best salve that we have for healing wounds, the best mortar we have for building up the whole body of the church. (Davis, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Songs (Westminster Bible Companion), 112-13)

William Mouser (b. 1947) compresses:

Our words possess an awesome power for evil, but they also have an awesome power for good. For all that, words are not magic. Their power lies not so much in themselves as it does in the characters of those who speak them and those who hear them. (Mouser, Proverbs: Learning to Live Wisely, 36)

Actions may speak louder than words, but words are laced with power. All who have a tongue must remain aware of the power with which they are endowed. Like a puppy who must learn that its bite hurts, we must train ourselves in speech. Proverbs challenges us to hone these skills.

How would you restate Proverbs 18:21? Why is it true? Does the proverb take its own advice; are its word’s wisely chosen? How beneficial is being eloquent? Do you value words? What steps are you taking to improve your oratory skills? When have your words been used for good? For evil?

History is filled with examples which validate the proverb’s truth. Warren W. Wiersbe (b. 1929) notes:

Never underestimate the power of words. For every word in Adolf Hitler [1889-1945]’s book Mein Kampf, 125 people died in World War II. Solomon was right: “Death and life are in the power of the tongue” (Proverbs 18:21). No wonder James compared the tongue to a destroying fire, a dangerous beast, and a deadly poison (James 3:5-8). Speech is a matter of life or death. (Wiersbe, Proverbs, Be Skillful: God’s Guidebook to Wise Living, 133)

Woodrow Kroll (b. 1944) illustrates:

It’s naïve to think that our words don’t have an influence on others around us...Even offhand comments, like the one a reviewer made about “Richard’s chubby sister,” can have devastating results. When Richard’s sister, singer Karen Carpenter [1950-1983], heard this comment, she became so obsessed with losing weight that she soon became anorexic and died of heart failure when she was only 32...A story like that may be the exception rather than the rule, but we’ve all experienced the hurt that can come with someone else’s words. (Kroll, Proverbs: The Pursuit of God’s Wisdom, 83)

Raymond C. Ortlund, Jr. (b. 1949) adds:

The tongue can kill—literally. I heard about a woman in Los Angeles who took her own life. All she wrote in her suicide note was this: “They said.” In his suicide note, Vince Foster [1945-1993] of the Clinton White House wrote of Washington, “Here ruining people is considered sport.” “Death [is]...in the power of the tongue.” That is why Jesus said, “On the day of judgment people will give account for every careless word they speak” (Matthew 12:36). Words do not even have to be intentional to be deadly; they can be careless. (Ortlund, Proverbs: Wisdom that Works (Preaching the Word))

Our own tongues may not produce such dire consequences but they have great effect. The death blow our tongue deals is often to those closest to us. Chip Ingram (b. 1954) cautions:

Recognize the power of your words. The Scriptures say that there is life and death in the power of words (see Proverbs 18:21). What comes out of your mouth literally has the power to make or break a person’s day—or ruin his life. Especially if that person is younger. Especially if that person looks up to you. Especially if you are married to that person. (Ingram, The Miracle of Life Change: How God Transforms His Children, 226-27)

Given their significance, the sage’s words imply invoking caution before speaking. Knut Martin Heim (b. 1963) discerns:

The second saying presents him with a crucial choice: life or death [Proverbs 18:21]. By choosing to cultivate his eloquence through hard work, he will gain security and improve his standing...As Raymond C. Van Leeuwen [b. 1948] has observed, “Proverbs 18:21 plays on the feminine grammatical gender of ‘tongue’ to give the saying an erotic tinge...and to turn the hearer’s thought to the powerful ambiguity of love, either for wisdom and life, or folly and death. This connection with the themes of Proverbs 1-9 is heightened by the following saying, in which love of wife parallels love of Lady Wisdom.” (Heim, Like Grapes of Gold Set in Silver: An Interpretation of Proverbial Clusters in Proverbs 10:1-22:16, 251)

Thankfully, the tongue’s power can also be used for the ultimate good. J. Vernon McGee (1904-1988) formulates:

“Death and life are in the power of the tongue”—think of that! Your tongue can be used to give out the gospel, and this will give life. It can also be used to say things that would drive people away from God which makes it an instrument of death. The little tongue is the most potent weapon in this world. (McGee, Proverbs (Thru the Bible Commentary Series), 161)

Charles R. Swindoll (b. 1934) assents:

Stop and consider this: “Faith comes from hearing” only when words have communicated the right message, the right way, at the right time (Romans 10:17). God gave humanity the responsibility to carry out His evangelistic, redemptive plan for the world, and we have a solemn responsibility to use words...to accomplish his great command. (Swindoll, Living the Proverbs: Insights for the Daily Grind, 25)

Words can be used for good or evil. The choice is ours.

Which is more powerful, the spoken or written word? Why? Do you exercise restraint in your speech? What is the most good your words have produced? What is the most harm? When have you used your tongue to share the gospel?

“The tongue like a sharp knife, kills without drawing blood.” - Chinese proverb commonly misattributed to the Buddha

Another Useless Gift (Proverbs 26:7)

What is a proverb (or wise saying) in the mouth of a fool like? A lame man’s legs [useless] (Proverbs 26:7)

The first twelve verses of Proverbs 26 constitute a unit which is largely devoted to maligning the actions of fools. Richard J. Clifford (b. 1934) formulates:

According to its topics, the chapter falls into three parts, each marked by repetition of key words: Proverbs 26:1-12, Proverbs 26:13-16, and Proverbs 26:17-28. In Proverbs 26:1-12, “fool” occurs eleven times, being found in every verse but Proverbs 26:2. (Clifford, Proverbs: A Commentary (Old Testament Library), 228)

Leo G. Perdue (b. 1946) adds:

The first subsection of this chapter is found in the first twelve verses and focuses its attention on the fool [Proverbs 26:1-12]. Various forms are found in this section, though the comparative proverb is the most frequently encountered. Nine sayings compare the fool or the fool’s behavior with something else. (Perdue, Proverbs: Interpretation (A Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching), 225)

This repeated theme is calculated. Claus Westermann (1909-2000) understands:

Among the proverbs of antithesis involving the foolish and the wise we encounter comparisons in the proverbs that characterize only the fool, and particularly imaginative ones at that (Proverbs 26:1, 6, 7, 9, 11). These communicate something of the tension that takes place in a small community between those who are concerned for the community’s improvement, harmony, environment, and general conduct and those who do not care about these things. It is the former who must constantly direct their efforts in resisting the latter, whose interests are blatantly selfish in nature. (Westermann, Roots of Wisdom: The Oldest Proverbs of Israel and Other Peoples, 67)

Given this context, it is not surprising that Proverbs 26:7 addresses the recurring theme of foolishness.

Like the legs which are useless to the lame,
So is a proverb in the mouth of fools. (Proverbs 26:7 NASB)

The saying is relatively straightforward. A fool quoting proverbs is as useful as a pen with no ink.

The proverb features the Hebrew mâshâl, a term translated variously as “proverb” (ESV, HCSB, MSG, NASB, NIV, NKJV, NLT, NRSV, RSV), “parable” (ASV, KJV) or “words of wisdom” (CEV). This proverb is one of several that addresses its book’s content (Proverbs 15:23, 25:11, 26:7, 9). In doing so it is clear that the editor is painfully aware of the book’s limitations.

Tremper Longman III (b. 1952) advises:

Proverbs are not magical words that if memorized and applied in a mechanical way automatically lead to success and happiness. Consider Proverbs 26:7 and Proverbs 26:9...These two proverbs say it takes a wise person to activate the teaching of a proverb correctly. A wise person is one who is sensitive to the right place and time. The fool applies a proverb heedless of its fitness for the situation. The two...proverbs are pointed in their imagery. A paralyzed leg does not help a person walk, so a proverb does not help a fool act wisely. (Longman, How to Read Proverbs, 50)

The verse serves almost as a disclaimer: Product not valid in the mouth of a fool.

With its disparagement of the lame, the proverb does not comply with contemporary standards of political correctness. Some interpreters have even seen the quip as intentionally derogatory.

Bruce K. Waltke (b. 1930) notes:

By adding to the proverb, the Vulgate changes the point from uselessness to becoming unseemly: “As a lame man has fair legs in vain, so a parable is unseemly in the mouth of fools.” But it does preserve the connotation that the problem does not reside in the legs (= proverb) but in the person. (Waltke, The Book of Proverbs, Chapters 15-31 (New International Commentary on the Old Testament), 351)

T.R. Hobbs (b. 1942) contextualizes:

In ancient Israel, which treasured notions of a complete and ordered world, and which valued wholeness, physical defects were regarded as shameful (Leviticus 21:18; Deuteronomy 15:21; Malachi 1:8; cf. II Samuel 5:6-8). Lame (Hebrew pissēah) or limping people were regarded as helpless and useless (Proverbs 26:7). They were forbidden entry into holy places (Leviticus 21:18), and in both the Old Testament and New Testament were objects of pity and charity (II Samuel 4:4, 19:26; Job 29:15; Acts 3:2, 8:7, 14:8). (David Noel Freedman [1922-2008], Eerdmans Dictionary of the Bible, 784)

Significantly, the proverb does not draw a correlation between a fool and an invalid. Michael V. Fox (b. 1940) clarifies:

“In the mouth of dolts” is not parallel to “from a cripple.” Instead, as J.A. Emerton [b. 1928] observes (1969: 211), the parallelism pertains to each image as a whole, not to their components. The proverb actually likens a proverb that is in the mouth of fools to legs that dangle from a cripple’s body. No comparison is drawn between the fool and the cripple. (Fox, Proverbs 10-31 (The Anchor Bible), 794)

Leonard S. Kravitz (b. 1928) and Kerry M. Olitzky (b.1954) concur:

While not a politically correct statement for modern sensibilities, ungainly motion is the image here. The halting gait of the physically challenged who has difficult walking is compared to the fool who tries to be clever and make use of parables. Rabbi Ibn Ezra [1089-1167] applies a rhymed folk saying to explain the verse: marshal b’li seichel k’guf b’li regel, “a parable without sense is like a body without a foot.” (Kravitz and Olitzky, Mishlei: A Modern Commentary on Proverbs, 255)

The emphasis is on the utility of the limbs. Bruce K. Waltke (b. 1930) pinpoints:

As a lame person still has legs but cannot use them for walking because they hang loosely and uncertainly from him, so a noble proverb in the mouth of a fool carries no weight (i.e., authority) and gets him nowhere. Legs (šōqayim) when used of human beings, denotes the calves, the shanks, the lower part of the leg from the knees downward in contrast to the thigh (yārē; cf. Judges 15:8). Dangle (dalyû) is used in Job 28:4 of miners who “dangle, far from people they sway (nā‘û).’ From the lame or the limping (pissēah) designates a person whose leg is disabled and unusable for locomotion...This proverb entails that it is inappropriate to educate the fool by putting proverbs in his mouth (see Proverbs 17:16). Fools are morally too dull to utter it seasonably (cf. Proverbs 25:11-12), and/or they invalidate its effect by defective character (cf. Matthew 7:3-5; Luke 4:23; Romans 2:21). The proverb’s good message in the flawed messenger falls flat on its face and makes not the slightest impact. (Waltke, The Book of Proverbs, Chapters 15-31 (New International Commentary on the Old Testament), 351-52)

There is some discussion as to what the lame person’s legs are doing. The King James Version reads that they “are not equal”. While the fool and wisdom are certainly on unequal footing, most translations which attempt to describe the legs’ activity, including the New King James Version, opt for “hang limp” (HCSB, NKJV, NRSV), “hang loose” (ASV) or “hang useless” (ESV, NIV, RSV).

Derek Kidner (1913-2008) considers:

The predicate in line I (a single verb, dalyû) is elusive. The verb means to draw water out of a well (cf. Proverbs 20:5), which has provoked many conjectures. Franz Delitzsch [1813-1890] takes it to suggest dangling (as of a bucket on a rope), and this approximates to most modern translations which presuppose a copyist’s error for dallû (‘hang limp’). Ronald A. Knox [1888-1957] renders the Vulgate engagingly: ‘Give a fool leave to speak, it is all fair legs and no walking.’ (Kidner, Proverbs: An Introduction & Commentary (Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries), 162)

John Phillips (b. 1927) contends:

The expression translated “are not equal” can also be rendered “are lifted up.” Solomon’s idea was that just as clothes are lifted up to reveal lame legs, a fool expresses his folly by attempting to expound a parable. (Phillips, Exploring Proverbs, Volume 2, 353)

Christine R. Yoder (b. 1968) elucidates:

Fools cannot “move” a proverb; they do knot know when and how to use it. So it just hangs there, limp and ineffective, like the legs of a person who is lame (cf. Proverbs 26:9). (Yoder, Proverbs (Abingdon Old Testament Commentaries), 255)

In the mouth of the fool, a proverb has no legs. It goes nowhere.

There is consensus as to the proverb’s general meaning. Allen P. Ross (b. 1943) surveys:

Proverbs are useless to fools. In this verse the emblem is a little unclear, but the point is not. The first line gives the simile: “Like a lame man’s legs that hang limp”...There have been various attempts to interpret dalyû, but the idea must include that the lame man’s legs are useless to him; they hang down, thus preventing him from going too far. Likewise, the fool is a “proverb-monger” (as put by Crawford H. Toy [1836-1919], 474); he handles an aphorism about as well as a lame man walks. W. Gunther Plaut [1912-2012], 267, says that learning wisdom from a fool is like learning to dance from a lame man (though, of course, a lame man could have intelligence and explain things). The fool does not understand the “proverb”...has not implemented it, and cannot use it or teach it correctly or profitably. (Tremper Longman III [b. 1952] and David E. Garland [b. 1947], Proverbs–Isaiah (The Expositor’s Bible Commentary), 212)

Roland Murphy (1917-2002) supports:

Like Proverbs 26:9, this saying weighs the value of a proverb for a fool. Since the fool by definition is unwise and unwilling, no profit can be drawn from the proverb. Hence the comparison to the legs of a crippled person: these cannot support the weight of the body; neither can the proverb serve the fool. The latter may know the wisdom teaching theoretically, but he knows neither the right application nor the right time; neither does he have the will. (Murphy, Proverbs (Word Biblical Commentary))

The Southern parlance “that dog won’t hunt” applies to the fool’s attempt at wisdom.

An example of foolishly corrupted wisdom is the common live-for-today attitude associated with “Carpe Diem!” The expression comes from the works of Horace (65-8 BCE) where the original, prolonged wording reads “Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero,” which translated reads “Seize the day, trusting as little as possible in the next (day/future) (Odes 1.11).” The proverb does not advise ignoring the future by recklessly throwing caution to the wind but rather to complete as much as possible today. The contemporary interpretation is a case of a “proverb in the mouth of fools” (Proverbs 26:7 NASB).

Many have connected the ineffectiveness of the proverb in a fool’s mouth with an inability to apply the wisdom in the proper context. Michael V. Fox (b. 1940) asserts:

The dolt is a verbal cripple. Proverbs become lame when he uses them. To be effective, a proverb must be spoken with skill, in the right time and way (Proverbs 15:23, 25:11). As Ben Sira says, “A proverb in the mouth of the dolt is spurned, for he does not say it at its time” (Wisdom of Sirach 20:20). (Fox, Proverbs 10-31 (The Anchor Bible), 794)

Tremper Longman III (b. 1952) illustrates:

Rather than a message, this proverb speaks of a proverb in the mouth of a fool. Such a person may know the proverb, but since proverbs are only true or helpful if uttered in the right context to the right person, then its knowledge and use will prove as ineffective as the legs of a paralyzed person. For instance, one may know the proverbs expressed in Proverbs 26:4-5,but if one can’t tell which kind of fool one is speaking with, then the knowledge of those proverbs will not help the person. (Longman, Proverbs (Baker Commentary on the Old Testament Wisdom and Psalms), 465)

Kathleen A. Farmer (b. 1943) consents:

Simply being able to repeat a large number of proverbs does not make one wise. A proverb is useless and pointless in the mouth of a fool (Proverbs 26:7, 9). The wise are those who know how to choose and to use the right saying on the right occasion. A shrewd observer can make almost any proverb into a “true” statement by using it to comment upon the right occasion. It then becomes “a word in season” (Proverbs 15:23), expressing the truth of that particular situation in life (cf. Proverbs 25:11). (Farmer, Proverbs and Ecclesiastes: Who Knows What is Good? (International Theological Commentary), 67)

J. Clinton McCann (b. 1951) applies:

Proverbs 26:7, 9 raises the problem of practical hermeneutics or interpretation. It is not enough to read and understand proverbs rightly. One must also rightly “read” life situations, persons, and events in order to use the sayings fittingly. (McCann, Introduction to Wisdom Literature, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Book of Wisdom, Sirach ( New Interpreter’s Bible), 227)

Not surprisingly the proverb has parallels. John H. Walton (b. 1952), Victor H. Matthews (b. 1951) and Mark W. Chavalas (b. 1954) document:

A proverb is only as useful as the context in which its spoke. Thus the writer of Proverbs notes that “like a lame man’s legs that hang limp is a proverb in the mouth of a fool” (Proverbs 26:7). This is a common saying in other wisdom literature. For instance, the Instruction of Ankhsheshonqy warns that “fools cannot tell teaching from insult,” and the Instruction of Amenemope states that one should not “take counsel with fools,” since their words “blow like a storm” and are without substance. It is clear then that proverbs were not simply phrases to be memorized that anyone could understand. Their instruction needed to be unpacked and expounded by a wise teacher. It is like a curriculum that assumes the presence of a teacher to accomplish its aims. (Walton, Matthews and Chavalas, The IVP Bible Background Commentary: Old Testament, 561)

The proverb also implies that one should disregard fools even when they relay “wisdom”. Duane A. Garrett (b. 1953) infers:

Proverbs 26:7 and Proverbs 26:9 imply that no one will (or should) take a fool’s words seriously. Even if the proverb he speaks is true, he invalidates its effects by his own character. Limp, paralyzed legs imply ineffectiveness. (Garrett, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs (New American Commentary), 212)

Above all, the proverb encourages its readers to be wise. Jeremy Schipper (b. 1975) discerns:

According to Ecclesiastes 12:9, one of the roles the sages played in the Hebrew Bible was to interpret meshalim. In fact, Proverbs 26:7 implies that a mashal is useless when spoken or interpreted by a fool: “The legs of the lame languish, so does a proverb in the mouth of a fool” (cf. Proverbs 26:9; Wisdom of Sirach 20:20). In contrast, one could demonstrate his or her wisdom by understanding meshalim or hidot properly (Proverbs 1:6; cf. I Kings 10:1; Daniel 8:23; II Chronicles 9:1; Wisdom of Solomon 8:8; Sirach 39:3, 47:17). In this sense, a speaker may tell a mashal/hidah to challenge the addressee to draw out the speaker’s intended comparison. Often, the parables within the Hebrew Bible’s prose sections serve this function. They challenge the addressee to make the proper comparison and thereby they test the addressee’s discernment. In most cases, the addressee’s discernment comes up short and a hostile judgment ensues. (Schipper, Parables and Conflict in the Hebrew Bible, 16)

A fool is simply unable to implement a proverb properly. The plan may be good but the execution is not as the fool has the words but does not know how to properly use them. It is as though the fool is privy to a powerful car but has no gasoline. As such, one should neither be a fool nor listen to one.

How would you restate this proverb (perhaps in a more politically correct manner)? Who do you know who consistently misuses words and phrases? In what instances have people unadvisedly heeded the direction of fools? Whose words do you immediately discount? When a fool says something smart does it make the smart saying sound more foolish or the foolish person sound smarter? Is there hope for the fool?

Some have applied the wisdom of Proverbs 26:7 to Scripture as a whole. Kenneth T. Aitken (b. 1947) interprets:

A proverb, says the sage with typical dry humour, is about as much use to a fool as legs to a lame man (Proverbs 26:7); that is to say, the fool does not know how to use it properly. Understanding and application belong together. It is the same with God’s word. (Aitken, Proverbs (Daily Study Bible Series), 14)

Michael A. Zigarelli (b. 1965) implements:

There’s an inherent challenge, Proverbs 26:7 tells us, when we apply Scripture, and especially short Scriptures like the proverbs: Our misinterpretation may render its wisdom as powerless as a “lame man’s legs.” (Zigarelli, Management by Proverbs: Applying Timeless Wisdom in the Workplace, 21-22)

How would you self assess your Biblical knowledge; are you wise or a fool? Do you apply Biblical principles to your daily life? Who designates the fool? When, if ever, should one listen to a fool?

“The heart of a fool is in his mouth, but the mouth of a wise man is in his heart.” - Benjamin Franklin (1706-1796)

Note: The image and title of this piece come from the artwork “Another Useless Gift” by Luke Chueh (b. 1973). You may further investigate Chueh and purchase his art here.

Too Many Friends? (Proverbs 18:24)

Complete this Proverb: “There are friends who pretend to be friends, but there is a friend is a friend ________________________________.” Who sticks closer than a brother (Proverbs 18:24)

The term “friend” has a wide range of meanings, especially in the age of Facebook. One of the strongest Biblical affirmations of friendship occurs in the final verse of the eighteenth chapter of Proverbs (Proverbs 18:24).

A man of too many friends comes to ruin,
But there is a friend who sticks closer than a brother. (Proverbs 18:24 NASB)

Here, the sage breaks from offering advise and instead simply calls ’em like he sees ’em. Richard J. Clifford (b. 1934) observes:

Like many observations, this verse simply records a fact—many friends (plural) are quite happy to socialize. How different is their company from the love of a friend (singular) who does not walk away in adversity. (Clifford, Proverbs: A Commentary (Old Testament Library), 174)

The verse serves as a fitting conclusion to Proverbs’ eighteenth chapter. Robert Alter (b. 1935) analyzes:

Although the chapter divisions are not original to the text, the textual unit from Proverbs 18:1 to Proverbs 18:24 is neatly marked by an antithetical inclusio: in the first verse, we see someone who is isolated or separated from others, focusing on his own desire, and who consequently gets into trouble; this last verse affirms the sustaining power of friendship. (Alter, The Wisdom Books: Job, Proverbs, and Ecclesiastes: A Translation with Commentary, 273)

While the second clause of the proverb is easily understood and consistently translated, the first is highly problematic as evidenced by surveying commentators who provided their own translations of the text:

• Robert Alter (b. 1935): There is a companionable man to keep company with
• Richard J. Clifford (b. 1934): There are friends who spend time with you
• Michael V. Fox (b. 1940): There are companions for socializing with
• Duane A. Garrett (b. 1953): A man of many companions may come to ruin
• Leonard S. Kravitz (b. 1928) and Kerry M. Olitzky (b. 1954): To friends, a person must show oneself to be friendly
• Tremper Longman III (b. 1952): There are friends who want to associate
• Roland E. Murphy (1917-2002): Friends—for one to associate with
• Allen P. Ross (b. 1943): A man of many companions may come to ruin
• Daniel J. Treier (b. 1972) : Some friends play at friendship
• Bruce K. Waltke (b. 1930): A person who has unreliable companions is about to be broken

Christine R. Yoder (b. 1968) explains the reason for the discrepancies:

The first line is obscure. Following a few ancient versions, NRSV interprets the first words (’îš, “person” or “man”) as a particle of existence (yēš, “there are”; but cf. NIV, NASB). Confusion between the two terms occurs elsewhere (e.g. II Samuel 14:19; Micah 6:10) and the emendation affords a good parallel with the second line—the first word of which is yēš. A second concern is lěhitrō‘ēa‘, which NRSV interprets as from the Hebrew root meaning “to associate with” (rā‘â) but which may be from the root “to be beaten up” or “shattered” (rā‘a‘, Isaiah 24:19; e.g. NIV, NASB). The proverb apparently distinguishes between many (plural) who appear to be friends—and possibly do harm—and the one who, even more than family members, “clings to” a person through thick and thin (e.g., Proverbs 17:17, 19:4, 25:19; Wisdom of Sirach 6:10). (Yoder, Proverbs (Abingdon Old Testament Commentaries), 201)

Some translations (KJV, NKJV) interpret that the proverb’s first cola is advising as did Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803-1882), “The only way to have a friend is to be one.” This reading is consistent with the Greek, Syriac, Targum and Vulgate translations.

Others believe that the verse is setting up a dichotomy between casual friends and true friends. David Atkinson (b. 1943) guesses:

This probably means that there are different sorts of ‘friendship’. There is the sort of nominal friendship found among those who seek others’ company only in order to exploit it for themselves (‘a man of many companions’); such ‘friends’ bring only disaster. A true friend is there when needed, will stand by you when things are really hard, and can be relied on even more, sometimes, than one’s relatives. (Atkinson, The Message of Proverbs (Bible Speaks Today), 108)

It is equally possible that the expression intends to describe those who feign friendship (NRSV, RSV). Tremper Longman III (b. 1952) explicates:

Another understanding of the hitpael of r‘h II is “to pretend to be friends”...If so, the contrast between the two cola would be between false friends and true friends rather than between casual acquaintances and true friends. Other versions (REB, NAB, NJB) repoint the verb as a form of r‘‘ (“to be bad, harmful”). Here the contrast is between people who harm and people who help. (Longman, Proverbs (Baker Commentary on the Old Testament Wisdom and Psalms), 353)

Translations commonly assert that having too many nominal or false friends can actually lead to destruction (ASV, ESV, HCSB, NASB, NIV, NLT). From this perspective, the verse reads like modern quip, “With friends like these...”

The underlying assumption of this reading is that true friends are essential to survival. Daniel J. Treier (b. 1972) asserts:

Help is necessary at times for everyone, and God graciously meets this need through family, friends, and neighbors. However, some are truer friends than others: “Some friends play at friendship / but a true friend sticks closer than one’s nearest kin” (Proverbs 18:24). Given the strong dependence on family in the context from which this proverb stems, it contains a remarkable affirmation of friendship! (Treier, Proverbs & Ecclesiastes (Brazos Theological Commentary on the Bible), 81)

Leonard S. Kravitz (b. 1928) and Kerry M. Olitzky (b. 1954) note:

Rashi [1040-1105] adds that the reason that one should be friendly to others is that when friends are needed, they will be available. At such a time, friends may be even closer than family. (Kravitz and Olitsky, Mishlei: A Modern Commentary on Proverbs Mishlei: A Modern Commentary on Proverbs, 185)

One of the problems with the first cola is that all of the interpretations can be construed as truisms.

While first half of Proverbs 18:24 is difficult to translate, it is clear that it is antithetical to the second. Dave L. Bland (b. 1953) deduces:

Regardless of the decision one makes in translating the first line, there is an obvious contrast between the first and second lines. In the first line, companions is plural. In the second line, friend (אהב, (’ōheb ; “he who loves”) is singular. The contrast is between casual friends on the one hand and a close friend on the other; it is the contrast between the appearance of friendship and real friendship. The friend who sticks (דבק, dābaq) closer than a brother reminds one of the story of Ruth, who clings dābaq to Naomi [Ruth 1:14]. The friend/neighbor took on new meaning for the Jews during the postexilic period when the clan (extended families with a common ancestor) no longer lived in close proximity. A neighbor became more important than even a brother for the sake of support and moral development of community. (Bland, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes & Song of songs (The College Press NIV Commentary), 172-73)

The proverb invites the question, just what constitutes a true friend? The Hebrew vocabulary provides little help as the term “friend” is layered with as many nuances as its English counterpart.

Bruce K. Waltke (b. 1930) examines:

Rēa‘ is glossed “neighbor,” “another,” or “companion” when it refers to a neutral or somewhat negative relationship and by “friend” when it refers to a positive relationship (Proverbs 17:17, 22:11, 27:9-10, 14 [?]). In Proverbs 17:17, 22:11 “the friend” is qualified by ’ōhēb, (“a lover [i.e., a true friend]”). The absolute plural found here is used four other times: of superficial sexual partners (Jeremiah 3:1) versus true ones (Song of Solomon 5:1), of companions attracted to wealth (Proverbs 19:4), and of falsely denounced neighbors (Job 17:5). Here also companions (i.e., partners who fail to come through in adversity) are in view. (1) With them one is on the verge of being shattered. (2) They are contrasted with the ’ōhēb (the singular true friend; cf. Proverbs 17:17, 22:11). (3) The rē‘îm rabb´îm of Proverbs 19:4, 6, who also belong to this unit, are also pseudo, for they rally to the rich and abandon the poor. (4) This interpretation admirably suits the next unit warning against the folly of hastening after money. The person who has these fair-weather friends is a rich person according to Proverbs 19:6, linking Proverbs 18:24 to Proverbs 18:23...One who sticks (dābēq) mixes both an essentially psychological stative notion of clinging with the activity of adhering tightly to someone or something (cf. Deuteronomy 4:4), so closely that even death could not separate them (Ruth 1:14-17). The comparative closer than a brother...uses the blood relative as a basis of comparison for sticking to someone through thick and thin but which the subject has to an even greater degree (see Proverbs 17:17). Economic survival was precarious in ancient Israel, and one needed the “insurance” of a true friend. One also needed such a friend in court. The similar proverb in Proverbs 17:17 shares with this proverb three keywords, “friend” (’ōhēb and rēa‘) and brother (’āh). A friend more loyal than a brother is needed because even a brother inwardly “hates” a poor relative (Proverbs 19:7). The friend in view is a wise person who belongs to the community of the faithful and/or possibly God. The significance of friends is found in their quality, not quantity. Thus, the proverb implicitly warns the disciple against pursing wealth and having pseudo-friends, or of belonging to their company, but exhorts him to pursue wisdom and pick his friends among the wise (cf. Proverbs 12:26, 13:20, 22:24, 28:7, 29:3). (Waltke, The Book of Proverbs, Chapters 15-31 (New International Commentary on the Old Testament), 96-97)

According to this proverb, the status of a friendship is determined during hardship. Michael V. Fox (b. 1940) notes:

A true friend is contrasted with a less constant companion, the sort one spends time with socially but cannot expect more of. Though the latter is not necessarily “superficial” or “untrustworthy” (Crawford H. Toy [1836-1919]), he is not as close and reliable as the true friend, here designated ’oheb, literally “one who loves.” The words ’oheb “friend” and rea‘ “companion” or “friend” do not in themselves distinguish the degree of fidelity. An ’oheb my be opportunistic (Proverbs 14:20), and a rea‘ may “love at all times” (Proverbs 17:17). The implication of higher fidelity comes from the distinction between socializing” and “cleaving closer than a brother.” (Fox, Proverbs 10-31 (Anchor Bible Commentaries), 646-47)

The proof is in the pudding: true friendship reveals itself during adversity. Will a person assert that a friend in need is a friend indeed or that a friend in need is a pest?

Josh McDowell (b. 1939) and Ed Stewart (b. 1940) philosophize:

Friendships are as different as flowers. Some are beautiful yet delicate, needing special care. Others grow anywhere in practically any conditions, even in the blistering desert. And you find out quickly which ones wilt when the temperature starts to rise. (McDowell and Stewart, One Year Book of Josh McDowell's Youth Devotions 2, 263)

Charles Stanley (b. 1932) applies:

Casual, shallow friendships crumble in a crisis. People you thought were your friends tend to disappear in times of persecution, criticism or trouble. “Ruin” in this verse means to be shaken so badly that you fall to pieces. Casual friends do nothing to help you keep yourself together emotionally and spiritually in times of severe loss, rejection, or sickness. Casual friendships have no bonds of strength or tenacity. (Stanley, Walking Wisely: Real Guidance for Life’s Journey, 163)

Allen P. Ross (b. 1943) summarizes:

It is better to have one good, faithful friend than numerous unreliable ones. The first line of the contrast...is difficult...The idea may be that there are friends to one’s undoing...If a person has friends who are unreliable, he may still come to ruin, especially if these nominal friends use him. The second line is clearer: “there is a friend...who sticks closer than a brother.” This is indeed a rare treasure! (Tremper Longman III [b. 1952] and David E. Garland [b. 1947], Proverbs-Isaiah (The Expositor’s Bible Commentary), 166)

Who a person associates with is a matter of extreme importance. Not all “friends” are good friends as true friends are rare. The proverb tacitly advises to be discerning and to appreciate a true friend wherever she is found.

How would you restate this proverb? In Proverbs 18:24, is the sage trying to get the reader to take action? Can you have too many friends? Have companions ever contributed to your downfall? Who have you incorrectly labeled “friend”? How many true friends do you have who stick as close as family? Are you this type of friend? Who is your best friend?

Many may not feel as though they have the type of friend that is depicted in Proverbs 18:24. Countless devotional writers have reminded that Jesus is the embodiment of this verse.

Robert J. Morgan (b. 1952) exemplifies:

The second part of Proverbs 18:24 describes an ultimate Friend for each of us, a Friend who is closer than a brother, a Friend who is truly interested in us with no thought of what’s in it for Him. Somewhere there’s someone who cares about us more than anyone else. There is someone who sees us and quietly interprets every line on our faces, every care in our hearts, every tear in our eyes...In the Upper Room, Jesus said, “Greater love has no one than this, than to lay down one’s life for his friends. You are my friends...I have called you friends (John 15:13-15)...You have a Friend Who Sticks Closer Than a Brother and He’s as near right now as He was to those twelve disciples. (Morgan, He Shall Be Called: 150 Names of Jesus and What They Mean to You, 250-51)

Have you accepted Jesus’ friendship? How is the friendship of Jesus different from other relationships you have?

“A friend is one who walks in when others walk out.” - Walter Winchell (1897-1972)