When Alexander set forward upon his great exploits before he went from Macedonia, he divided among his captains and friends all that he had; for which, when one of his friends reproved him, saying that he was prodigal, for that he had reserved nothing for himself, the answer which Alexander gave was this: that he had reserved much unto himself, namely, hope of the monarchy of the world, which by the valour and help of those his captains and nobles he hoped to obtain. And thus, surely, he that giveth to the poor may seem to be prodigal, yet, in respect of the hope that he hath of profit, he is frugal-wise; neither is his hope such as Alexander’s was, which depended on the uncertainty of war, but such as is grounded upon the certainty of God’s Word.—Spencer.
The Lord will not only pay for the poor man, but requite him that gave alms, with usury, returning great gifts for small. Give, then, thine house, and receive heaven; give transitory goods, and receive a durable substance; give a cup of cold water and receive God’s kingdom. . . . If our rich friend should say unto us, lay out so much money for me, I will repay it, we would willingly and readily do it. Seeing, then, our best friend, yea, our king, the King of kings, biddeth us to give to the poor, promising that He will see us answered for that we give, shall we not bestow alms at His motion and for His sake?—Muffet.
The off-hand sense is no doubt correct, and, as a worldly maxim, often the munificent are rewarded in this world. . . . But we are not to suppose the generous to suffer, and the saint might lose by being paid in money. The saint might need the chastisement of pecuniary distress. We are not to suppose, therefore, this sense to be the grand one. But the meaning is that obedience, if it be spiritual, is a positive thing; that it involves large and generous sacrifices; that it is to “visit the fatherless” (Jas. i. 27); and to feed the hungry (Matt. xxv. 35); and that, in the grandest sense, he that does these things “makes a borrower of Jehovah;” and that the transaction, under the grand head of guarding his own soul (ver. 16), will pay him better than any less positive and more mystic species of obedience. . . . It may be fancy, but causing to borrow seems to be more expressive than (as an equivalent) to lend (E.V.). We can make God borrow of us at any time among the widows and the orphans (Matt. xxv. 40; Jer. xlix. 11).—Miller.
main homiletics of the paragraph.—Verses 18–20.
Relative Duties.
We have before considered verse 18 in connection with verses 13 and 14. A reference to the [Critical Notes] will, however, show that there is an interpretation of the last clause which was not treated there. Verses 19 and 20, regarded separately, embody thoughts and precepts which we have had before. (See Homiletics on chap. [xiv. 17], [29], pages 363, 386, and on chap. [xii. 15], page 271.) But these verses, taken in conjunction with the other interpretation of the last clause of verse 18, may be regarded as giving valuable advice both to those who have to enforce discipline and administer chastisement, and to those who have to endure them.
I. Counsel for parents. The reasonableness and necessity of chastisement has been considered before, but the additional thought which the other rendering of verse 18 makes prominent is, that it must be administered from a sense of duty, and dictated by love. Parents are far too apt to punish their children, not because they have sinned against God, but because they have offended them,—and when this is the case, the anger manifested deprives the correction of its salutary effect. “When the rod is used,” says Wardlaw,—and the words may be applied to any form of parental chastisement,—“the end in view should be, purely and exclusively, the benefit of the child; not the gratification of any resentful passion on the part of the parent. Should the latter be apparent to the child, the effect is lost, and worse than lost; for, instead of the sentiment of grief and melting tenderness, there will be engendered a feeling of sullen hostility, . . . if not, even, of angry scorn, towards him who has manifested selfish passion rather than parental love.” The parent must regard himself as God’s representative, and must act, not as for himself, but for the Divine Master and Father of both parent and child. If this is done, there will be none of that “provocation to wrath” or “discouragement” against which Paul puts Christians on their guard (Col. iii. 21; Ephes. vi. 4), and there will be good ground to hope that the chastisement will bring profit.
II. Counsel to children. The reasoning here is akin to that used by the Apostle in the twelfth of Hebrews. It is admitted by him (verses 11, 12), that “no chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous, but grievous;” nevertheless, those who have to endure it are exhorted to accept it with submission because of the precious after-yield—they are counselled to give themselves up to the Divine pruner and suffer Him to work His will upon them now, in consideration of the “peaceable fruits of righteousness” which will be the result in the days of harvest. So Solomon argues here. He does not deny that “counsel” and “instruction,” or rather discipline, may often be unpalatable and irksome, but he holds up the wisdom that may be gained by them as an incentive to induce the young to “hear” and to “receive” them—he “reaches a hand through time,” and “fetches the far-off interest” of what at present seems grievous in order to give effect to his exhortations. The actions of men in the present are mainly determined by the amount of consideration they give to the future. There are men who live wholly in the present hour—who gratify the fancy or follow the passion of to-day without giving a thought of the needs of to-morrow, or the penalty that they may then have to pay for their folly. Others look ahead a little farther—they fashion the actions of to-day with a due regard to the interests of their whole future earthly life, but they bestow no thought upon the infinite “afterward” that is to succeed it. The proverb counsels both the young and the old to bring this long to-morrow into the plans of to-day, and to let the remembrance of it open the ear to the words of Divine wisdom by whomsoever they are spoken, and bend the will to receive the “chastening of the Lord,” whether it come in the form of parental discipline or in a sterner garb.
outlines and suggestive comments.
Verses 18, 19. “Being in great wrath, remit the punishment; but if thou let him escape, yet apply (or add) chastisement again.” (So Muffet renders verse 19.) When thou are in thy mood, or burnest with fiery anger and displeasure, let pass for that time the correcting of thy child, lest thou passest measure therein, or mayest chance to give him some deadly blow. Nevertheless, if for that time or for that fault thou let him go free, yet let him not always go uncorrected; but when thou art more calm, according as he offereth occasion, correct him again.—Muffet.