Amsal 6:24

6:24 by keeping ¹  you from the evil woman, ² 

from the smooth tongue of ³  the loose woman. ⁴ 

Amsal 16:1

16:1 The intentions of the heart ⁵  belong to a man, ⁶ 

but the answer of the tongue ⁷  comes from ⁸  the Lord. ⁹ 

Amsal 6:17

6:17 haughty eyes, ¹⁰  a lying tongue, ¹¹ 

and hands that shed innocent blood, ¹² 

Amsal 10:20

10:20 What the righteous say ¹³  is like ¹⁴  the best ¹⁵  silver,

but what the wicked think ¹⁶  is of little value. ¹⁷ 

Amsal 12:19

12:19 The one who tells the truth ¹⁸  will endure forever,

but the one who lies ¹⁹  will last only for a moment. ²⁰ 

Amsal 15:2

15:2 The tongue of the wise ²¹  treats knowledge correctly, ²² 

but the mouth of the fool spouts out ²³  folly.

Amsal 15:4

15:4 Speech ²⁴  that heals ²⁵  is like ²⁶  a life-giving tree, ²⁷ 

but a perverse tongue ²⁸  breaks the spirit.

Amsal 18:21

18:21 Death and life are in the power ²⁹  of the tongue, ³⁰ 

and those who love its use ³¹  will eat its fruit.

Amsal 25:23

25:23 The north wind ³²  brings forth rain,

and a gossiping tongue ³³  brings forth ³⁴  an angry look. ³⁵ 

Amsal 26:28

26:28 A lying tongue ³⁶  hates those crushed by it,

and a flattering mouth works ruin. ³⁷ 

Amsal 28:23

28:23 The one who reproves ³⁸  another ³⁹  will in the end ⁴⁰  find more favor

than the one who flatters ⁴¹  with the tongue.

Amsal 17:4

17:4 One who acts wickedly ⁴²  pays attention to evil counsel; ⁴³ 

a liar listens ⁴⁴  to a malicious tongue. ⁴⁵ 

[6:24]  ¹ tn The infinitive construct is epexegetical here, explaining how these teachings function as lights: “by keeping you.” This verse is the transition from the general admonition about heeding the teachings to the practical application.

[6:24]  ² tc The word translated “woman” is modified by רַע (ra’, “evil”) in the sense of violating the codes of the community and inflicting harm on others. The BHS editors propose changing it to read “strange woman” as before, but there is not support for that. Some commentaries follow the LXX and read רַע as “wife of a neighbor” (cf. NAB; also NRSV “the wife of another”; CEV “someone else’s wife”) but that seems to be only a clarification.

[6:24]  ³ tn The word “tongue” is not in construct; the word “foreign woman” is in apposition to “smooth of tongue,” specifying whose it is. The word “smooth” then is the object of the preposition, “tongue” is the genitive of specification, and “foreign woman” in apposition.

[6:24]  ⁴ sn The description of the woman as a “strange woman” and now a “loose [Heb “foreign”] woman” is within the context of the people of Israel. She is a “foreigner” in the sense that she is a nonconformist, wayward, and loose. It does not necessarily mean that she is not ethnically an Israelite.

[16:1]  ⁵ tn Heb “plans of the heart” (so ASV, NASB, NIV). The phrase מַעַרְכֵי־לֵב (ma’arkhe-lev) means “the arrangements of the mind.”

[16:1]  sn Humans may set things in order, plan out what they are going to say, but God sovereignly enables them to put their thoughts into words.

[16:1]  ⁶ tn Heb “[are] to a man.”

[16:1]  ⁷ tn Here “the tongue” is a metonymy of cause in which the instrument of speech is put for what is said: the answer expressed.

[16:1]  ⁸ sn The contrasting prepositions enhance the contrasting ideas – the ideas belong to people, but the words come from the Lord.

[16:1]  ⁹ sn There are two ways this statement can be taken: (1) what one intends to say and what one actually says are the same, or (2) what one actually says differs from what the person intended to say. The second view fits the contrast better. The proverb then is giving a glimpse of how God even confounds the wise. When someone is trying to speak [“answer” in the book seems to refer to a verbal answer] before others, the Lord directs the words according to his sovereign will.

[6:17]  ¹⁰ sn The expression “high/ lofty [רָמוֹת, ramot] eyes” refers to a proud look suggesting arrogant ambition (cf. NCV “a proud look”). The use of “eyes” is a metonymy of adjunct, the look in the eyes accompanying the attitude. This term “high” is used in Num 15:30 for the sin of the “high hand,” i.e., willful rebellion or defiant sin. The usage of “haughty eyes” may be illustrated by its use with the pompous Assyrian invader (Isa 10:12-14) and the proud king of the book of Daniel (11:12). God does not tolerate anyone who thinks so highly of himself and who has such ambition.

[6:17]  ¹¹ tn Heb “a tongue of deception.” The genitive noun functions attributively. The term “tongue” functions as a metonymy. The term is used of false prophets who deceive (Jer 14:14), and of a deceiver who betrays (Ps 109:2). The Lord hates deceptive speech because it is destructive (26:28).

[6:17]  ¹² sn The hands are the instruments of murder (metonymy of cause), and God hates bloodshed. Gen 9:6 prohibited shedding blood because people are the image of God. Even David being a man of blood (in war mostly) was not permitted to build the Temple (1 Chr 22:8). But shedding innocent blood was a greater crime – it usually went with positions of power, such as King Manasseh filling the streets with blood (2 Kgs 21:16), or princes doing it for gain (Ezek 22:27).

[10:20]  ¹³ tn Heb “the lips of the righteous.” The term “lips” functions as a metonymy of cause for speech. This contrasts the tongue (metonymy of cause for what they say) with the heart (metonymy of subject for what they intend). What the righteous say is more valuable than what the wicked intend.

[10:20]  ¹⁴ tn The comparative “like” is not in the Hebrew text but is implied by the metaphor; it is supplied in the translation for the sake of clarity.

[10:20]  ¹⁵ tn Or “pure”; Heb “choice.”

[10:20]  ¹⁶ tn Heb “the heart of the wicked” (so KJV, NAB, NIV). The term “heart” functions as a metonymy of cause for thoughts. The term לֵב (lev, “heart”) often refers to the seat of thoughts, will and emotions (BDB 524 s.v. 3-4).

[10:20]  ¹⁷ tn Heb “like little.” This expression refers to what has little value: “little worth” (so KJV, NAB, NRSV; cf. BDB 590 s.v. מְעַט 2.d). The point of the metaphor is clarified by the parallelism: Silver is valuable; the heart of the wicked is worth little. Tg. Prov 10:20 says it was full of dross, a contrast with choice silver.

[12:19]  ¹⁸ tn Heb “a lip of truth.” The genitive אֱמֶת (’emet, “truth”) functions as an attributive adjective: “truthful lip.” The term שְׂפַת (sÿfat, “lip”) functions as a synecdoche of part (= lip) for the whole (= person): “truthful person.” The contrast is between “the lip of truth” and the “tongue of lying.”

[12:19]  ¹⁹ tn Heb “a tongue of deceit.” The genitive שָׁקֶר (shaqer, “deceit”) functions as an attributive genitive. The noun לָשׁוֹן (lashon, “tongue”) functions as a synecdoche of part (= tongue) for the whole (= person): “lying person.”

[12:19]  ²⁰ tn Heb “while I would twinkle.” This expression is an idiom meaning “only for a moment.” The twinkling of the eye, the slightest movement, signals the brevity of the life of a lie (hyperbole). But truth will be established (תִּכּוֹן, tikon), that is, be made firm and endure.

[15:2]  ²¹ sn The contrast is between the “tongue of the wise” and the “mouth of the fool.” Both expressions are metonymies of cause; the subject matter is what they say. How wise people are can be determined from what they say.

[15:2]  ²² tn Or “makes knowledge acceptable” (so NASB). The verb תֵּיטִיב (tetiv, Hiphil imperfect of יָטַב [yatav, “to be good”]) can be translated “to make good” or “to treat in a good [or, excellent] way” (C. H. Toy, Proverbs [ICC], 303). M. Dahood, however, suggests emending the text to תֵּיטִיף (tetif) which is a cognate of נָטַף (nataf, “drip”), and translates “tongues of the sages drip with knowledge” (Proverbs and Northwest Semitic Philology, 32-33). But this change is gratuitous and unnecessary.

[15:2]  ²³ sn The Hiphil verb יַבִּיעַ (yabia’) means “to pour out; to emit; to cause to bubble; to belch forth.” The fool bursts out with reckless utterances (cf. TEV “spout nonsense”).

[15:4]  ²⁴ tn Heb “a tongue.” The term “tongue” is a metonymy of cause for what is produced: speech.

[15:4]  ²⁵ tn Heb “a tongue of healing.” A healing tongue refers to speech that is therapeutic or soothing. It is a source of vitality.

[15:4]  ²⁶ tn The comparative “like” does not appear in the Hebrew text, but is implied by the metaphor; it is supplied for the sake of clarity.

[15:4]  ²⁷ tn Heb “tree of life.”

[15:4]  ²⁸ tn Heb “perversion in it.” The referent must be the tongue, so this has been supplied in the translation for clarity. A tongue that is twisted, perverse, or deceitful is a way of describing deceitful speech. Such words will crush the spirit (e.g., Isa 65:14).

[18:21]  ²⁹ tn Heb “in the hand of.”

[18:21]  ³⁰ sn What people say can lead to life or death. The Midrash on Psalms shows one way the tongue [what is said] can cause death: “The evil tongue slays three, the slanderer, the slandered, and the listener” (Midrash Tehillim 52:2). See J. G. Williams, “The Power of Form: A Study of Biblical Proverbs,” Semeia 17 (1980): 35-38.

[18:21]  ³¹ tn The referent of “it” must be the tongue, i.e., what the tongue says (= “its use”). So those who enjoy talking, indulging in it, must “eat” its fruit, whether good or bad. The expression “eating the fruit” is an implied comparison; it means accept the consequences of loving to talk (cf. TEV).

[25:23]  ³² sn One difficulty here is that it is the west wind that brings rain to Israel (e.g., 1 Kgs 18:41-44). C. H. Toy suggests that the expression is general, referring to a northwest wind – unless it is an error (Proverbs [ICC], 468). J. P. M. van der Ploeg suggests that the saying originated outside the land, perhaps in Egypt (“Prov 25:23,” VT 3 [1953]: 189-92). But this would imply it was current in a place where it made no sense. R. N. Whybray suggests that the solution lies with the verb “brings forth” (תְּחוֹלֵל, tÿkholel); he suggests redefining it to mean “repels, holds back” (cf. KJV “driveth away”). Thus, the point would be that the north wind holds back the rain just as an angry look holds back slander (Proverbs [CBC], 149). But the support for this definition is not convincing. Seeing this as a general reference to northerly winds is the preferred solution.

[25:23]  ³³ tn Heb “a tongue of secret” or “a hidden tongue,” referring to someone who goes around whispering about people behind their backs (cf. KJV, NAB, NASB, NRSV “a backbiting tongue”).

[25:23]  ³⁴ tn The phrase “brings forth” does not appear in Hebrew in this line but is implied by the parallelism with the previous line; it is supplied here in the translation for clarity.

[25:23]  ³⁵ sn The verse implies a comparison between the two parts to make the point that certain things automatically bring certain results. Gossiping words will infuriate people as easily as the northerly winds bring the cold rain.

[26:28]  ³⁶ tn Heb “the tongue of deception.” The subject matter of this proverb is deceptive speech. The “tongue of deception” (using a metonymy of cause with an attributive genitive) means that what is said is false. Likewise the “smooth mouth” means that what is said is smooth, flattering.

[26:28]  ³⁷ sn The verse makes it clear that only pain and ruin can come from deception. The statement that the lying tongue “hates those crushed by it” suggests that the sentiments of hatred help the deceiver justify what he says about people. The ruin that he brings is probably on other people, but it could also be taken to include his own ruin.

[28:23]  ³⁸ tn Or “rebukes” (NAB, NASB, NIV, NRSV).

[28:23]  ³⁹ tn Heb “a man,” but the context does not indicate this should be limited only to males.

[28:23]  ⁴⁰ tn There is a problem with אַחֲרַי (’akharay), which in the MT reads “after me.” This could be taken to mean “after my instructions,” but that is forced. C. H. Toy suggests simply changing it to “after” or “afterward,” i.e., “in the end” (Proverbs [ICC], 504), a solution most English versions adopt. G. R. Driver suggested an Akkadian cognate ahurru, “common man,” reading “as a rebuker an ordinary man” (“Hebrew Notes,” ZAW 52 [1934]: 147).

[28:23]  ⁴¹ tn The construction uses the Hiphil participle מַחֲלִיק (makhaliq, “makes smooth”) followed by the adverbial accusative of means, the metonymy “tongue” – he makes what he says smooth. This will be pleasing for the moment, but it will offer no constructive help like the rebuke would.

[17:4]  ⁴² tn The Hiphil participle מֵרַע (mera’) indicates one who is a doer of evil. The line affirms that a person of this nature will eagerly listen to evil talk – it is part of his nature.

[17:4]  ⁴³ tn Heb “to the lip of evil”; ASV, NAB, NASB, NRSV “wicked lips.” The term “lip” is a metonymy of cause for speech (what is said); the term “evil” is an attributive genitive. The same will be true in the parallel line where the expression “to the tongue of destruction” (NASB “a destructive tongue”) means things that are said that destroy others.

[17:4]  ⁴⁴ tc The verb מֵזִין (mezin) is from זִין (zir, “to feed”); therefore, the suggested emendation is to take it from אֹזֶן (’ozen, “ear”) as a denominative verb, “to give ear; to listen to.” Two Hebrew mss have this variant.

[17:4]  ⁴⁵ sn Wicked, self-serving people find destructive speech appealing. They should be rebuked and not tolerated (Lev 19:17).