Skip to main content

February 2014: Proverbs 3 by Doug

Proverbs 3:2 is an excellent example of Yoda speak when you see it in the NASB. You can see here how word order can force emphasis to other parts of a sentence, this pairing moves the reward closer to the condition. Some translations will obscure the emphasis shift by giving you better English here. It is not a translation mistake, just a decision to put the word order in typical English. Which is what you usually want, but you do miss a few beautiful things along the way.

I want to focus, though, on Proverbs 3:12 today. Take a look at this: For whom YHWH loves, He reproves, even as a father corrects the son in whom he delights. (That’s nearly the NASB.)

First, the earthly parenting. Fathers discipline, they correct their sons. Let’s take it gender-specific first. Why? Most indications of the culture of the time, and many cultures since then, place the bulk of the child-rearing on mothers. Credited to about a dozen wise men is the saying that “The hand that rocks the cradle rules the world,” and that’s a valid point. Generally, history shows that ruling families were even more likely to lean on mothers or helpers to prepare children for life. Fathers just showed up from time to time.

Yet Solomon tells us that fathers should be involved in keeping their sons on the right path. Not only their sons, but their favored sons. The ones who typically got the brand new chariots. Do you think Solomon is partly remembering how David handled Absalom or Amnon? Or perhaps the story of Eli, Hophni, and Phinehas? We have sons here with no correction from their fathers.

Now, a moment of note on correction: correction is a necessary part of parenting. If it is all the parenting you do, then Ephesians 6:4 is for you. Build the dynamic relationship of parenting with your children: you are always the parent, always hold the right and responsibility of correction, but the same “NO!” that you use to keep 2-year-olds out of the traffic must develop into a relationship.

Second, an extension on earthly parenting. Many of us have Christian influences that we might call our “fathers” in the faith. These fathers may not hold the authority over us that parents have—in Baptist land where I live, there’s not a definite line of authority between individuals and God Almighty. We think the Biblical structure of Christian life is direct relationship between people and God through Jesus Christ. Spiritual fathers help, but picture them as helper lines, not locking chains.

These fathers, though, still bear a responsibility because of their influence over others. The responsibility increases the more favor shown by that leader to a person. For example, many times I have seen famous figures in Christianity look over the offenses of their favored sons, while spotting the minor flaws in others and using those sins against them constantly. That should, however, adjust: the more favor one has, the greater the responsibility to correct.

I have, in the above, focused on the father-son concept, because that is what is present in the text. I would suggest that most of the application is gender-unspecific. That is, mothers, fathers, sons, and daughters, are all in view. However, the historical context is important as you look at the meaning.

Finally, though, this verse is not just about human relationships with each other. These mirror our heavenly relationship, with God, YHWH, as our Father.

And He disciplines, reproves, corrects. Just as we would expect from earthly fathers, with one exception. He never does it wrong. I am a father. I make mistakes. God never does—though we may misunderstand His work, His work is never mistaken.

This Proverb reminds us that we should hearken to His reproof and change our ways to His ways.


Popular posts from this blog

Book Review: The Heart Mender by @andyandrews (Andy Andrews)

The Heart Mender: A Story of Second ChancesEver read a book that you just kind of wish is true?  That's my take on The Heart Mender by Andy Andrews.  It's a charming story of love and forgiveness, and it's woven into the historical setting of World War II America.  For the narrative alone, the book is worth the read, but the message it contains is well worth absorbing as well.However, let's drop back a minute.  This book was originally published under the title Island of Saints.  I read Island of Saints and enjoyed it greatly.  Now, Andrews has released it under a new title, with a few minor changes.  All of this is explained in the Author's Note at the beginning, but should be noted for purchaser's sake.  If you read Island of Saints, you're rereading when you read The Heart Mender.  Now, go ahead and reread it.  It will not hurt you one bit.Overall, the story is well-paced.  There are points where I'd like more detail, both in the history and the geog…

Abraham Lincoln Quoted by Jesus! Mark 3

Mark records a curious event in his third chapter (link). If you look at Mark 3:25, you'll see that Jesus quotes the sixteenth President of the United States, Abraham Lincoln. After all, one of the highlights of the Lincoln years is his famous speech regarding slavery in the United States where he used the phrase that "a house divided against itself cannot stand." This speech was given in 1858 when he accepted the nomination to run against Stephen A. Douglas for Senate, but is still remembered as the defining speech regarding slaveholding in the United States. I recall being taught in school how brilliant and groundbreaking the speech was, how Lincoln had used such wise words to convey his thought. Yet the idea was not original to Lincoln. Rather, it was embedded in Lincoln from his time reading the Bible. Now, I have read varying reports about Lincoln's personal religious beliefs: some place him as a nearly completely committed Christian while others have him somewh…

Independence Day 2017

I don’t know if Thomas Paine will be aggrieved that I paste his thoughts from Common Sense here, from the electronic edition. It’s a Public Domain work at this point, so hopefully none will be bothered that I am not paying for it...I think there is value in seeing the underlying reasons of Independence. I find a couple of things noteworthy in his introduction:First, he speaks of those who disagree and, while calling those out, holds the strength of his affirmative argument will be enough to straighten them out. We could do well to think more like that.Second, his final sentence should be a required view: the influence of reason and principle. Not self-interest masquerading as principle. Not party propaganda disguised as reason.That being said, not everything Paine said is right. If he and I lived at the same time, we’d argue religion over a great deal. However, the idea of “natural rights of man” follows from the idea of humanity as a special creation—that all are created equal and en…