Proverbs 30

All we can ascertain of Agur is, that he was a teacher, (probably in the schools of the prophets,) and that Ithiel and Ucal were his disciples. (See note ver. 1.) From the humiliating language in which this man speaks of himself, it has been supposed that, like Amos, he had no regular education; yet this deficiency can hardly be inferred from his own language, since it is well known that men of the least pretensions are often men of the most knowledge. So Socrates ees affirmed, “This only I know, that I know nothing.” Our translators, however, have used a term (brutish) which, in the language of the present day, implies not only ignorance, but the want of civilization, which the original could hardly intend, but the want of eloquence and of science; his sense of which deficiency led him to compare himself to a dumb animal, as being destitute alike of language and of learning.

If we explain this, however, of his want of human instruction, the proverbs before us will show that he was divinely taught; for the very next verse, and indeed the whole of the chapter, discovers a depth of inquiry and a sublimity of ideas that would not have disgraced even Solomon himself. He begins with speaking of the Deity as omnipotent and omnipresent; and the question, “What is his name, and his son’s name?” seems to imply not only a deep sense of the mysterious nature of God, but some knowledge also of a plurality in the divine Being. It appears to us, that though Agur might not have gone through the regular studies of the prophetic schools, he was well read in the Holy Scriptures for which he appears to have had the highest reverence; and therefore says, “Every word of God is pure……

Add not thou unto his words, lest he reprove thee,” &c. Agur then discourses on prayer, in a manner that shows a pious, devoted, and elevated mind. He prays against the temptations peculiar to both the higher and the lower classes of society; prefers the golden mean, and, as we are taught to pray, that he might receive his “daily bread.” (See (Matthew 6:11).) His prayer shows a deep sense of his own frailty, and the Bee ns aimee, BSR a A EBA aE a eS Se BE

Notes on the verses

Chap. XXX. Ver. 1. Agur.—This name does not occur elsewhere; but we read of one Ithiel, in (Nehemiah 11:7)——The prophecy.—Hebrew, Massa; literally “the burden;” i.e. a weighty and important saying, or discourse, delivered by divine authority, and in the prophetic style: an oracle. So Bp. Lowth. Ver. 2. Brutish.—Like a dumb brute, unintelligent and untaught. See (Psalms 49:10); xcii. 6; xciv. 8, &c. Is = Nor have the knowledge of the holy.—Those educated for the sacred offices. Ver. 4. Who hath ascended? &c.—(By these sublime interrogations we are taught the impossibility of comprehending the essence and attributes of that infinite Being who is equally present in all space; to whom the air, whether in the gentle breeze or the tornado, is subject; who hath bound the waters of the sea within certain limits, which they cannot overpass; and who hath firmly established the earth in its orbit.

)—Bagster, Ver. 15, The horse-leech.—A creature remarkable for its blood-thirsty nature. The original word, which occurs only here, Holden remarks, thus signifies in Arabic, Syriac, and Chaldee; and is generally so understood by commentators.——Say not it is enough.—[As the horse-leech has two daughters, cruelty and thirst for blood, so the oppressor of the poor has two dispositions, rapacity and avarice, which never say they have enough: ** And like a leech, voracious of its food Quits not its cruel hold till gorged with blood.” —Francis.]—B. Ver. 16. The earth that is not filled—lor saturated; which seems to refer particularly to the sandy soil of the desert. Ver. 19. The way of a man with a maid.—It is evident that the point in which the first three objects agree is, that they leave no trace behind them.

The air and sea close immediately as the eagle or the ship pass through them; nor does the serpent make any impression on the rock over which it winds: so is it with an adulteress; “she wipes her mouth,” and says, with an affectation of innocence and simplicity, “I have done no wickedness;” and if there was no witness of her guilt, how is she to be convicted? The fourth case, therefore, ought to be similar: but it cannot be said that the illicit connexion of “a man with a maid” leaves no proof of the connexion; and this, therefore, cannot have been Agur’s meaning. Many expositors explain this transaction between the sexes, as referring to the season of courtship, which is, with us, often a time of “cunning and sleights,”

as Bishop Patrick expresses it; but it is a much simpler business in the East. A young man having seen a young woman who takes his fancy, as was the case with Samson, (though sometimes this is scarcely allowed,) reports it to his parents; if all parties consent, they are betrothed, and at a certain time, the young man marries and brings her home; but no opportunity is allowed for forming an intimacy, as with us, previous to the marriage. So that this, also, cannot be here intended. Some expositors have therefore proposed a different rendering, sanctioned by several ancient versions, and critics of the first eminence, (as Schultens, Parkhurst, &c.) namely, ‘the way of a man in his youth.” To countenance this it may be remarked, 1.

That this preserves the strict meaning of the preposition, (Beth,) which is rendered in, with reference both to the air and sea, in the same verse. 2° The character of the young men of that age, as represented by Solomon, in the first chapter of this book, explains their youthful conduct in a way which elucidates this expression. It seems that the bandits which attended Saul, and David too, (in his persecution,) used to harbour in the caverns of that country, (some of which were very large,) and they were particularly careful to avoid being traced in their predatory adventures, 1 Sa. xiii, 22, 23. 3. The term here used for man, (Geber,) implies strength and vigour, and applies well to persons of this character, who were all hardy adventurers.

4. The whole of the passage thus explained, applies to an adulterous woman, who is as difficult to trace and to arrest in her crimes, as is an eagle in the air, a ship in the sea, a serpent on the rock, or a hardy bandit in his adventures: for we are told, “her ways are moveable:” (Chap., v. 6.) she is continually shifting her haunts, and changing her stratagems, to avoid detection; and, as to her own consciousness, has no sense of either crime or shame. Ver. 23. An odious woman.—Hateful and hated, of course disquiets her family by her temper; as well as handmaid, a female slave or concubine, who “* succeeds,” or rather “supersedes,” or supplants “her mistress.” Ver. 25. The ants.—{The ants may truly be called a people, as they have houses, towns, public roads, &c.; and show their wisdom and prudence by preparing their meat in due season.

}—Bagster. Ver. 26. The conies a feeble folk.—These have been by many taken for rabbits, but which, it seems, are scarcely known in Judea; nor is the Hebrew term so rendered by any of the ancient versions. Bochart explains it of the Jerboa, or jumping mouse, a very sagacious little animal, well answering to the description. Dr. Shaw explains it of the Damun Israel, another sagacious little animal, abounding in mount Lebanon, and not unlike a rabbit; but Bruce is confident that it must mean the Ashkoko, which abounds in the same region, and resembles a rat without a tail: it is never seen but in the rocks, or seated upon great stones. But the description would accommodate to either of these animals.

See Dr. Harris’s Nat. Hist. [The shaphan, a creature like a rabbit, though but a feeble animal, and incapacitated by its soft, tender feet, from digging, yet by its sagacity and judgment, builds its house in the holes and clefts of the rock; far more inaccessible than the burrows of the Ver. 27. The locusts… go forth by bands.—[These surprising animals, though they have no leader, yet, when they take wing, go forth by troops, some miles in circumference, and so dense as to darken the sun. See notes on (Exodus 10:4, 13).]—Bagster. Ver. 28. The spider.—This is a very different word from what is used for the spider in (Job 8:14), and (Isaiah 59:5).. And this interpretation is objected to, since the spider has no hands, and builds rather in hovels than in palaces.

[Semamith, does not appear to denote the spider, whose usual name is akkavish, but a kind of lizard, or newt, as Bochart contends; so the LXX. kalabotes, and Vulgate stellio, a lizard having specks on its back like stars, probably the same as the Arabic sam, a venomous lizard, with leprous-like spots. ‘This animal answers to the description here given of her form and habits; nature having furnished her with claws resembling hands, with which she clings to the walls of houses. Bellonius mentions a lizard called samiamaton by the Greeks, which creeps into the walls of houses, and catches flies; Pliny speaks of the stellio as being in doors, windows, and chambers; and Soninni says, that a number of little gray lizards are to be seen in the houses in Egypt.}— a oe The Hebrew Zirzir, which occurs A greyhound.—See margin.

“virt in the Joins,” only here, signifies and gives a very good description of the greyhound, which Bochart and most others, consider as the animal intended; but some apply it to the horse harnessed, (or girt about.) See Zech, x. 4. 15