Original Meaning
FEAR OF YAHWEH (22:4) makes a significant appearance in this collection, which includes two pair of Yahweh sayings, each with a saying in between (22:2–4, 12–14). The appearance of ʿšr (“riches, the rich”) in 22:1, 2, 4, 7, and 16 may be the clearest indicator for reading this section as a unit, though there are some indicators of smaller clusters.1 Proverbs about the training of a young man (naʿar; NIV “child”) and the relations of rich and poor are juxtaposed at verses 6–7 and 15–16. The terms and themes of verses 9–16 fall into a mirror pattern that links proverbs about rich and poor (vv. 9, 16), driving out trouble (vv. 10, 15), and speaking (vv. 11–14). No one outline can capture the complex web of interaction between the collected proverbs; connections and relationships overlap like threads woven together to form a rope. Because the proverbs about riches are concentrated in verses 1–7, we make the following divisions, using titles that describe the concentrations, not every proverb in the section:
Proverbs about riches and consequences (22:1–7)
Proverbs about speaking and judgments (22:8–16)
Proverbs About Riches and Consequences (22:1–7)
MOST OF THE proverbs about riches are clustered here, interspersed with proverbs about rewards and consequences.
22:1. Each line of this “better than” saying makes a comparison. The first line places the Hebrew word for “choosing” (nibḥar; NIV “more desirable”) at the beginning. It can be translated: “A good name is to be chosen rather than riches” (NRSV). If one chooses riches above all else, the actions that follow will break relationships of trust and tarnish one’s name. Wealth in itself is not condemned in Proverbs, but it is always secondary to honorable relationships and reputation. The “good name” (šem) implies that good character will make itself known around town. “Esteemed” (ḥen) uses a word translated elsewhere as “favor” (3:4; 13:15; 28:23) or “grace” (1:9; 3:34; 4:9); it is translated as “gracious” in 22:11.
22:2. Reputation is to be preferred above riches (22:1), but there are to be no preferences between rich and poor. To make such distinctions is to dishonor Yahweh, the “Maker of them all” (cf. 14:31; 17:5; 29:13). The proverb does not say that Yahweh makes anyone rich or poor, for poverty and wealth often are a result of sinful human preferences (22:16).
22:3. The key to this verse can be found in the contrast between the “prudent” one (singular) and the “simple” ones (plural), hinting that the majority is not always right. The prudent one practices foresight, looking ahead to see the consequences that issue from choices (12:16, 23; 14:8, 15, 18; and here 22:3 [cf. 27:12]). The word for “danger” (raʿah) is translated as “evil, wicked” (11:19, 27; 16:27, 30; 17:13; 24:1, 16) or “trouble, harm” (1:33; 3:29–30; 13:21; 16:4; 27:12), depending on context; both meanings may be intended here. The prudent, knowing the effects of evil, see it coming and hide, while the simple, not even knowing the danger (chs. 1; 7; 9), walk straight toward it (cf. 22:5).
22:4. The familiar trio of desirables, “wealth and honor and life,” comes to those who seek higher ideals and lower status. Many translators set “humility” as primary and “fear of the LORD” as appositional, rendering something like “the consequence of humility, fear of the LORD,” but the two related attitudes can be taken as complementary. “Riches” links this verse with verses 1–2. Can we also read a link with verse 3, that fear of evil and fear of Yahweh go together?
22:5. Just as the fear of Yahweh leads to desirable attainments, so the path of the “wicked” (lit., “a crooked person,” a play on the path image) leads to dangers of “thorns” that hinder and wound, as well as “snares,” the symbol of death. To avoid the path is to avoid the dangers, an observation of cause and effect similar to verses 3–4. One who is vigilant guards the “soul” (nepeš), although this word can be translated “life” or “desire.”2 The ambiguity lets readers conclude that those who guard their desires and appetites also guard their lives.
22:6. Linked with “path” in verse 5 by the catchword “way” (derek in both cases; cf. also 22:3),3 the first imperative in this chapter urges parents to start a youth on the right way. The second line predicts the likely outcome, “when he is old, he will not turn from it.” Remember that a proverb is not a promise; therefore, this one is no guarantee for any method of parenting. It should never be interpreted so caring parents whose offspring give up the faith or get into trouble are at fault. The verb “train” (ḥnk) often denotes dedications of various kinds4 and may refer to the initiation of the young man into adulthood.5 The word for the youth, naʿar (NIV “child”), is used seven times in Proverbs (1:4; 7:7; 20:11; 22:6, 15; 23:13; 29:15) and elsewhere for young adults (Gen. 14:24; 37:2).
“Way he should go” is (lit.) “at the beginning of his way” (darko); thus, four views on the proverb have been proposed. The moral view stresses the good way; the vocational view stresses the position a young man would take in society or court; the personal aptitude view stresses the learner’s capacities; and in the personal demands view, the proverb ironically observes that a spoiled child will never change.6 In my judgment, the proverb speaks not so much of early childhood training as of the initiation to adulthood and the teaching of its expectations and responsibilities.
22:7. In strong contrast to the picture of equality in verse 2, this saying depicts life as it is usually observed. The rich rule over poor, with implication that only one party has access to the power that money brings. The second line adds that those who borrow, whether by necessity or choice, put themselves under that power. Many commentators take this saying as a warning to the poor against borrowing,7 but perhaps a more general observation about the responsibilities of power is intended (cf. 22:9, 16; 18:23).
Proverbs About Speaking and Judgments (22:8–16)
IN THIS CLUSTER, proverbs about right speaking commingle with sayings about the judgments that come on the foolish and wicked.
22:8. This version of “you reap what you sow” (cf. Job 4:8; Gal. 6:7) extends the idea of responsibility from Proverbs 22:7. One can share with the poor or oppress them (22:9, 16), but each action will receive the same treatment in turn. The most difficult part of the translation is the last word; the “rod of his fury” will either finish, fail, or by extension, “be destroyed.”8
22:9. Continuing the theme of just rewards from verse 8, the giving of bread and the blessing of generosity will receive good in return. The “generous man” is (lit.) “generous of eye,” the opposite of one who has a bad eye and hoards things (23:6; 28:22).9 The attitude behind this sharing with the poor obviously has more in common with 22:2 than with 22:7 and 16 (cf. Deut. 15:9–10; 2 Cor. 9:8 on cheerful giving).
22:10. The logic of the first line works also for the second: Get rid of the troublesome person, and the trouble goes with him (“strife” and “quarrels” come from the same Heb. root, dyn). The mocker has made a number of appearances toward the end of this collection (19:25; 20:1; 21:11, 24), but he, like folly (22:15), should not be accepted or tolerated. The proverb does not advocate the suppression of conflict, only unnecessary arguing. Whereas many conflicts can be worked out with attention to proper process, not all are due to misunderstanding. “Sometimes,” said a humorist, “people just act like jerks.”
22:11. The person who practices wise and good speech is not driven out like the mocker (22:10) but is welcomed by the king. The connection of heart and lips has been made throughout proverbs. Here “gracious” uses the same word as “esteemed” in 22:1 (ḥen). The king would want a friend or counselor with qualities such as these (cf. 16:13).10
22:12. Linked with verse 11 by the theme of speaking, this saying makes a strange contrast between the “words of the unfaithful” and “knowledge” guarded by Yahweh. In Proverbs, the Lord watches or guards (nṣr) to protect (2:8) or to judge (24:12); here judging makes a better parallel with the frustration of the unfaithful (cf. 11:3). Yahweh not only judges how “knowledge” leads one to live, he “frustrates” (slp) wicked persons (21:12) as well as wickedness and folly itself (11:3; 13:6; 19:3). Some see a legal reference in the word “knowledge” similar to that in 29:7, translating “the eyes of the LORD watch over a lawsuit.”11
22:13. This satire depicts a sluggard industrious enough to concoct a far-fetched story in hopes of avoiding work. Although few real excuses are as wild or transparent as this one, the scene reminds readers that Yahweh can tell whether one’s words come from knowledge or deception (22:12). Although this proverb appears unconnected to its context,12 there may be a subtle link with the next proverb about the predatory adulterous woman, who was last seen in the “streets” (7:12; cf. 5:16).
22:14. The strange (zarot) or “adulterous” woman has not appeared throughout the collected proverbs. But just as the adulterous woman and Woman Folly appeared at the conclusion of the instructions (7:1–27; 9:13–18), so the smooth-talking woman (cf. 23:27) appears at the conclusion of this collection of proverbs.13 Added here is the news that this fate is somehow associated with Yahweh’s wrath. We would expect the one who falls into the pit of her words will incur that wrath (cf. 22:12), but we get the reverse! Foolish choices in one area influence others (22:15), and only those who stray from Yahweh’s way will be susceptible to her seductive danger.
22:15. It was a youth (naʿar), not a child, who fell into the trap of the adulterous woman in chapter 7, and the naʿar now appears in this proverb that follows hers. Better the rod used for discipline than a trap of sin and death (13:24; 23:13–14; 29:15)—though this rod can also be symbolic of parents’ teaching (musar, “discipline”). Words from 22:5 (“far”), 22:6 (teaching the naʿar), and 22:8 (“rod”) link this proverb with others on training and judgment.
22:16. This proverb describes an anti-Robin Hood, who takes from the poor and gives to the rich. In the parallelism of the Hebrew, the two lines of the proverb each follow an action with a result: The one who oppresses the poor increases his wealth, and the one who gives to the rich comes to want. The question is whether the second result, “come to poverty,” does apply to “both,” since in Hebrew, there is no word “and” joining the two lines. The ambiguity may be intentional, even a reflection of life’s own ambiguities, but in the context of Proverbs, even a simple observation can have its sting. So it may be that the proverb uses irony to describe the same person—an operator who first takes advantage of the poor to make oneself rich and then uses that wealth to buy more illegitimate influence. That cycle will be broken, for as Knox aptly puts it, “Oppress the poor for thy enrichment, and ere long a richer man’s claim shall impoverish thee.”14 In the final proverb of this first collection, oppressors wake up to find they have become one of the group they oppressed!15
Bridging Contexts
AS WE READ the last of the individual proverbs collected in chapters 10–22, we expect the conclusion of a major section to draw our attention to its most important themes. Here proverbs about responsible adulthood stand side by side with proverbs about teaching and discipline, many of which use words and pictures from the instructions of chapters 1–9.16 Verses 10 and 15 in particular suggest that one can forgive a young person’s folly, but if it is not driven out (like a mocker), it can turn to evil. When that happens, it is not only the young who suffer but also the family and the whole community, especially its poor. Together, these proverbs present their closing argument that one can either become a student of wisdom and a gracious member of adult society or an example of folly and a curse to society.
Wisdom training for youth. Verses 1–7 present a list of attitudes and qualities that characterize the wise one, recognizing the value of honor and equality above that of riches (22:1–2) and practicing prudence and watchfulness (22:3, 5) as a result. Common to all are the humility and fear of Yahweh that bring riches, honor, and life (22:4). These qualities do not come without intentional guidance, and so 22:6 recommends giving the young a good start. The reappearance of terms from the book of instructions reaffirms the importance of teaching upcoming generations, a theme that runs throughout Proverbs. Although it is nowhere stated directly, this collection of proverbs holds out the expectation that those who learn will eventually take their turn as teachers (22:6, 15; cf. 4:1–9; 9:7–9).
The naʿar (“youth, young man”; NIV sometimes uses “child”) appears seven times in Proverbs, twice in this chapter (1:4; 7:7; 20:11; 22:6, 15; 23:13; 29:15). In the prologue (1:1–7), the book indicates that it is designed to teach the young the right way (1:4) so that they do not stray onto deadly paths (cf. 7:7). The end of this present collection places the spotlight on the youth’s learning once again, stressing the need for teaching (22:6) and the correction of “discipline” (musar, 22:15). Later references to that correction also speak of the rod that drives folly away, for a beating is better than death (23:13; 29:15). If the rod of discipline drives folly far away from the youth’s “heart” (22:15), it does so to nurture the love of a “pure heart” that will win over the king (22:11). The king’s love for purity is like that of Yahweh, who watches over knowledge (22:12). In sum, the discipline of correction will save the youth from the path of the wicked (22:5) and make a way for responsible service to king and community (22:11).
Verse 6 is no promise that every parent’s efforts to teach and guide children will be successful (see comments), but it is a warning that those who neglect this teaching court trouble. Parents, therefore, should not take the proverb as judgment, for as we saw in the instructions of chapters 1–9, the parental teachers place responsibility for learning on the shoulders of the son (2:1–6; 9:6–12). While there are many differences between the educational methods of the instructions and our own, we also observe that the ancients did not define growth into adulthood in terms of individuation and distance from families but rather the assumption of responsibilities for the family and the neighboring community.
This orientation toward community is a welcome correction to the individualism that so often confuses independent judgment with self-centeredness. I recently saw a teen sitcom in which a young woman struggled to please her friends and family, each expecting her to attend a different college. The plot was resolved when she announced that she wanted to make her own choice and had her wishes acknowledged. So far, so good; but when viewers hear the actress ask “What do I want to do?” they may also need a reminder that self-determination is not the same thing as self-indulgence. Growing up and making decisions about college and career does not mean that one can also choose whether or not to consider the needs of neighbors or take responsibility to care for the poor (22:9). In the view of the sages, maturity includes both independent decision-making and the making of new commitments that match independence with interdependence. Education, public and Christian, must strike a tender balance between encouraging independence and fostering connectedness. According to Proverbs, the test of a solid education of our young is the concern they show for the poor.
Wealth and poverty. The book of Proverbs does not present a systematic treatment of the topic of wealth and poverty; instead, it integrates it into its vision of wisdom. For example, in many cases, the poverty of the sluggard is used to illustrate the truth that choices have consequences. The purpose is not to describe the origins of all poverty but rather to warn against a life of folly.17 Neither the poor nor the rich are idealized, for both stand as equals before their maker (22:2). Both can hear the call to wisdom and fear of Yahweh, and both can choose to shut their ears to it. Poverty and wealth are extreme situations of life that can lead people away from God (30:7–9), while generosity to the poor is an expression of true wisdom (cf. 31:20).18
Certainly we should never use 22:2 to support a fatalistic acceptance that “the poor you will always have with you” (cf. Matt. 26:11), an attitude that Jesus never taught or encouraged. The whole of Scripture denounces the ongoing presence of poverty as a witness to the sin of a people. The purpose of the text is not to excuse us from responsibility but rather to read it in its context of justice and care. Wealth is a blessing of Yahweh, but it is to be acquired and used as a fruit of wisdom.19 In other words, wisdom must set the guidelines for how money is gained and used. The poor are not to be exploited in commerce or forgotten in their need.
The section begins with a proverb about honor and ends with one of shame, both calling for a proper attitude toward wealth and riches (22:1, 16). Two other pairs juxtapose proverbs about teaching and proverbs about relations of rich and poor (22:6–7, 15–16). In addition, the frequent mention of rich and poor throughout implies that a primary objective of this teaching is an understanding of wealth and its power, an understanding that leads to fair and generous treatment of the poor. If humility and the fear of Yahweh bring wealth (22:4), the arrogant reverse of those attitudes will eventually result in poverty (22:16).
If 22:6–7, 15–16 were placed to form an inclusio that frames all that comes between,20 then we who read these proverbs centuries later can see that what they say about speaking is connected to the theme of justice and compassion. Speech that mocks in pride is not the gracious speech that wins the king (22:10–11); likewise, faithless words and lazy excuses will not please Yahweh (22:12–13). Those who turn from God’s way will be vulnerable to what is most dangerous of all, words of seduction—here symbolized by the mouth of the adulteress, a pit, a trap that destroys. The way we speak also says a great deal about the way we think about riches and the poor.
Therefore, as we seek to apply these proverbs to our own day, we must remember that the sages did not separate good speaking from issues of fairness and justice. As Lemuel’s mother reminded him, kings are to speak out for justice for the poor (31:1–9), but the responsibility is ours as well. If we are to watch our words, we must do more than look to see how our words affect the people we like to be with, people of similar social and economic status. We must also recognize the power of words to educate others about decisions that affect the poor and to speak out for justice. In practical terms this means not only speaking out for the needs of the least privileged members of society but also teaching the coming generation to care about their concerns. If we can encourage a new generation to love generosity and justice, we have done our job well.
Yahweh proverbs. Finally, as we conclude our study of this first collection of individual proverbs, we note the strategic placement of two sets of Yahweh proverbs, each with a seemingly unrelated proverb in between (22:2–4, 12–14). The first pair speaks of attitude. To recognize that rich and poor are both creations of Yahweh is to exhibit humble fear of Yahweh. The second pair speaks of Yahweh’s watching over the words spoken by the unfaithful, watching also as the unfaithful suffer his wrath in the form of seductive words. In the middle of the first pair is a proverb about seeing trouble and hiding from it; in the middle of the second pair is a proverb about hiding from work and responsibility.
If there is good news to be heard, it is that God has made the wise way known and has made wisdom’s rewards clear in the form of strong contrasting choices. We can choose to value a good name above riches (22:1) or to value riches above good relations (22:16), but we cannot claim we do not know that one is better than the other. Just as Yahweh wants us to become students of wisdom so we can teach it, he also sets the example of a teacher by laying out clear choices and consequences. Those consequences are not rewards for our merits or failings but rather natural responses to our choices for wisdom or against it. Yahweh our teacher also ensures that correctional discipline takes place.
Contemporary Significance
CHOICES. WILLIAM WILLIMON, Dean of the Chapel at Duke University, preached a sermon on “a good name is more desirable than great riches.” To the students, he issued a challenge:
Form two lines at Commencement, and ask people who graduate from here to choose one of these paths into the future. One line leads to riches, the other to a good name. Which line will be longer? Don’t call it “riches,” for things are usually only a means to some other end, but call one path “power,” and the other “a good reputation.” Which line would be longer? I know of someone who, upon graduation, had decided to give himself to the task of teaching in an inner-city school. “I’ve wasted two years in that school,” he said. “Now I’ve got to face facts, move on. I’ve lost some of my idealism, my early naivete. I’m going to apply to law school.” Yes, face facts. Get in step with the way the world works. And the way the world works is, “Choose power, riches, things, and if there is any free time left over when you get home from the office, work on your reputation.”21
The proverbs gathered at the end of this collection state again and again that our choices about riches say the most about our choices for or against wisdom. Moreover, these proverbs not only assert that integrity of wisdom must be taught and learned, they also make clear that both teacher and learner share responsibility for that process. Elders are responsible for teaching the young (22:6, 15), but the young are responsible for internalizing the knowledge and values of their teachers. Love of integrity (a “pure heart,” 22:15) and love of neighbor shown in the sharing of bread (22:9) are matters of individual choice. But, as one of my teachers was fond of saying, those choices are “personal, but not private.” These proverbs are designed to persuade individuals to learn wisdom and love its characteristics, though the goal of such persuasion is interrelatedness—relationship, not isolation. The wise person is a connected one.
Individual versus corporate. Yet sometimes these emphases on individual responsibility can create the opposite effect. A worst-case scenario produces the self-made person who believes, “God helps those who help themselves,” confusing the proverbs of Ben Franklin with those of the Bible! While it is true that the biblical proverbs continually ponder the mysterious interaction of divine action and human response, a misreading of this principle suggests that people bring all their troubles on themselves, but this is never taught in Proverbs. Folly will bring its consequences, but not all negative consequences are the result of folly. As we seek to apply these proverbs, we must be careful to remember that individual responsibility is not the cause of every problem, nor is it the solution. How many times have we heard ourselves say, “If they would just. . . .”
The many proverbs about the poor that cluster in this final section remind us that the rich often have power over the poor and sometimes abuse that power (22:7, 16). This practice of gaining and distributing wealth contrary to the ways of wisdom cannot exist without a system, that is, a network of relationships in which oppression is allowed to go unchecked. While the presence of systemic sin is not directly stated in these proverbs about education and uses of wealth and power, it is everywhere implied.
Individualistic explanations or solutions to the gap between rich and poor can overlook the problems of corporate sin, an ironic perversion of the proverb’s sense of community relationships. Richard Mouw argues that as heirs to the fundamentalist legacy, we share many of that movement’s strengths, particularly its emphasis on biblical authority and evangelistic urgency. However, we have also inherited some weaknesses or negative expressions of its traits: an anti-intellectualism that prefers action over reflection, an otherworldliness that overlooks the possibilities for positive social change in the here and now, and a separatistic spirit that often criticizes other Christian bodies before seeking to understand them.22
About that second matter of otherworldliness, Mouw is concerned that we evangelicals often speak of a “personal evangelism” in contrast to a “structural” or “social” understanding of gospel witness. Why, he asks, is it personal evangelism to ask an alcoholic to break free of enslavement to drink, yet it is something different if we ask believers to give up some deeply ingrained gender biases and racial prejudices? Further, why is it often not considered a gospel witness to call for changed practices of local and national economies as well as government institutions such as education? He follows his questions with an example:
Back in the days of South African apartheid, I often illustrated the importance of addressing the structural dimension of human life by imagining a miraculous result from a single effort at mass evangelism. Suppose Billy Graham were to hold a crusade in South Africa, and every single person in the country, whether by being physically present at the meeting or by watching on television, were to make a personal commitment to Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord. Would this cure South Africa of its racism? No. The next morning all the apartheid apparatus would still exist. Laws would have to be rewritten. Prejudices would have to be unlearned. The educational system would have to be reformed. The evangelical slogan “changed hearts will change society” is clearly inadequate in such a situation. To be sure, the motivation to bring about change can result from millions of individual wills being redirected toward the love and service of a divine Savior. But individual conversions do not automatically bring about structural change.23
While the proverbs of this chapter do not directly address the problem of corporate or institutionalized sin, the contrast between a king who loves integrity and a person who oppresses the poor (22:11, 16) implies that personal sin, like spilled wine, often seeps its way into social structures, staining everything it touches. Yet those who hope to hold a high view of Scripture and submit themselves to its teachings do not always see it that way, particularly when it comes to linking economic injustice with racial prejudice.
A recent study of attitudes toward race among white evangelical Christians in America concluded that the evangelical movement’s understanding of individual free will and responsibility, along with the importance it places on personal relationships, leads many Christians to conclude that racism is a problem of sinful persons, not social structures, and that the problem can be solved if those at fault were to repent and take steps to treat others better. The authors conclude that these ideas and values actually work to perpetuate a racially divided society rather than improve it.
Most white evangelicals, directed by their cultural tools, fail to recognize the institutionalization of racialization—in economic, political, educational, social, and religious systems. They therefore often think and act as if these problems do not exist. As undetected cancer that remains untreated thrives and destroys, so unrecognized depths of racial division and inequality go largely unaddressed and likewise thrive, divide, and destroy. The solutions evangelicals propose and practice—though in many ways unique in modern America, and much needed as far as they go—simply cannot make much headway in the face of these powerful countercurrents that undercut and fight against their well-intentioned, individualistic solutions.24
The authors quote from their interviews to support their claims. When asked if America has a race problem, one woman answered, “I think we make it a problem. . . . Well, people have problems. . . . It’s just people. People are gonna have arguments with people. I feel like once in a while, when an argument happens, say between a black guy and a white guy, instead of saying, ‘Hey, there’s two guys having an argument,’ we say it’s a race issue.” One respondent was especially direct: “We don’t have a race problem, we have a sin problem.”25 The authors recommend that evangelicals temporarily set aside their preference for action and urgency and take time to consider the problem from many perspectives, especially that of African Americans, before promoting any strategies.
As a first step, we can examine our own attitudes toward individualism and collective responsibility. The authors of Habits of the Heart took their title from a phrase in Tocqueville’s famous work Democracy in America. His description of American individualism, written in 1835, sounds remarkably familiar:
Individualism is a calm and considered feeling which disposes each citizen to isolate himself from the mass of his fellows and withdraw into the circle of family and friends; with this little society formed to his taste, he gladly leaves the greater society to look after itself. . . . There are more and more people who, though neither rich nor powerful enough to have much hold over others, have gained or kept enough wealth and enough understanding to look after their own needs. Such folk owe no man anything and hardly expect anything from anybody. They form the habit of thinking of themselves in isolation and imagine that their whole destiny is in their hands. . . . Each man is forever thrown back on himself alone, and there is danger that he may be shut up in the solitude of his own heart.26
A decade after Habits of the Heart was released, the authors observed that our culture’s concern for adolescent independence may have adverse effects. “American individualism resists more adult virtues, such as care and generativity, let alone wisdom, because the struggle for independence is all-consuming.”27 Calling for a “civic membership . . . [that] points to that critical intersection of personal identity with social identity,” they also cite Lester Thurow’s distinction between an establishment and an oligarchy:
An establishment seeks its own good by working for the good of the whole society (noblesse oblige), whereas an oligarchy looks out for its own interest by exploiting the rest of society. Another way of putting it would be to say that an establishment has a strong sense of civic membership while an oligarchy lacks one. . . . An oligarchy taxes itself least; an establishment taxes itself most. . . . We need at least a portion of the overclass acting as a true establishment if we are to deal with our enormous problems. If the members of the overclass can overcome their own anxieties they may realize that they will gain far more self-respect in belonging to an establishment than to an oligarchy.28
“A good name is more desirable than great riches.” While the church must act to overcome racial divisions and ensure equal opportunity and access, we must first examine our own ideas and opinions about these matters and consider our attachment to individualistic understandings of wealth and success. We must ask if there are ways that the very economy that provides us with jobs and income sets a good name above riches or whether it takes from the poor and gives to the rich. In other words, we may come to see that our economy works like the greedy individual of Proverbs 22:16. Because attitude is incipient action, we must work at both levels, and so the importance of the teacher.
Conclusion. I have argued that the collected proverbs of chapters 10–22 reaffirm the call of wisdom presented in chapters 1–9, but do so by calling young learners to responsible adulthood. Such maturity discerns the dynamics of power and wealth and acts wisely through the example of sharing bread (22:9), speaking graciously (22:11), and teaching these ways of wisdom to the young (22:6, 15). In so doing, wise believers will remember that Yahweh teaches the way of wisdom but also looks to see how it is practiced. Some will become full-time teachers, and some will model and teach as part of their work as police officers, health-care providers, attorneys, mechanics, and politicians. Yet all are called to pass on what has been learned.
The other day I got a call asking if I would serve on the Christian Education Board of my church, planning the programs and courses for children, youth, and adults. Realizing that it is one more way to become a teacher and a chance to introduce Christians to the issues of personal and social responsibility cited above, I decided to say yes. But my work of responding to these proverbs has just begun.