"Tell me what company you keep, and I will tell you what you are." A man seeks the society and shares the pursuits of those who are likeminded with himself; if he chooses the fellowship of the good it shows that there is something in his character that has an affinity to theirs, and if he willingly associates himself with bad men, he proclaims himself to be a bad man. Good men do not "walk in the counsel of the ungodly," or "sit in the seat of the scornful"—men who are found in such places must be counted among the ungodly and scornful, although they may be negative rather than positive sinners.

II. Criminal partnerships are self-destroying. As we have seen, partners with criminals are criminals themselves in spirit if not in actual deed, and must therefore meet with the doom of the transgressor. Probably the proverb is directed against those who shelter themselves under the idea that those who do not commit the crime themselves, but only consent to it beforehand, or conceal it afterwards, are not so very guilty; but this is nowhere the teaching of Scripture, nor is it the verdict of the human conscience.

OUTLINES AND SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS.

A partnership life is becoming more and more common and necessary in our commercial England. Great undertakings can only be carried out by companies. Modern legislation has greatly encouraged these combinations, by limiting the monetary liability of its members. Hence, joint-stock companies are multitudinous and multiplying. Such companies are often, perhaps generally, projected and managed by selfish, needy, and unprincipled speculators; and honest men are often tempted by the glowing promises of their lying programmes to become their adherents, and they soon find themselves in the unfortunate position referred to in the text.-Dr. David Thomas.

The receiver and resetter is at least as guilty as the thief. I say at least; for in one obvious respect he is worse. His is a general trade, which gives encouragement to many thieves, by holding out to them the means of disposing of their stolen property and evading the law. He is thus, in fact, a partaker in the guilt of all. One thief cannot set up and maintain a resetter; but one resetter may keep at their nefarious trade many thieves. Wardlaw.

This is a warning under the eighth commandment. Do we realise the same solemnity of obligation as under the first? Many professors attach a

degree of secularity to a detailed
application of the duties of the second
table.
table. But both stand on the same
authority. The transgressions of both
are registered in the same book. The
place in the decalogue cannot be of
moment, if it be but there with the
imprimatur-"I am the Lord thy
God."-Bridges.

...

It is the cursed policy of Satan, that he strives to join men in wickedness. In drunkenness there must be a good fellow; in wantonness there must be a corrival; in bloody duels there must be a second; in theft there must be a partner, yoking men together to draw upon themselves the heavy burden of God's displeasure Wherefore, although it may be a love unto the things stolen, or else a love unto the stealer, which maketh others to join with him, certainly he showeth little love to God's law, certainly he proveth great hatred, which he has to his own soul. For while he joineth with another in stealing some worldly goods, he joineth with Satan in stealing his own soul from himself. And whatsoever fear he may have of some curse which the other hath laid upon him, if that he doth reveal it, he hath much more cause to feel the curse of God's wrath, if he doth conceal it. He hath but heard the one, he shall feel the other. Jermin.

MAIN HOMILetics of VERSES 25 and 26.

SAFETY FROM A SNARE.

I. Men fear and hope too much from their fellow men. This fear and this hope are very active agents in this world, influencing men often to abstain from what they know to be right, and inducing them to do deeds of evil. Good men have often staggered and sometimes fallen before this fear and have been misled by this false hope, and both the hope and the fear are intensified when the object of them belongs to the ranks of the conventually great-when the man whom they desire to propitiate is a "ruler" among his fellows. Such a man sometimes has the power to injure those who displease him, and has also much that he can bestow upon those who seek his favour; but the weight of his displeasure and the worth of his gifts are generally estimated far too highly by his inferiors in rank, and when this is the case they are snares which lead to sin.

II. Trust in God is the only escape from the fear that will mislead, and the hope that will disappoint. The many and great contrasts, not only between the favour of God and the favour of man, but between all that is connected with the seeking and the bestowal, will lead every wise man to forsake the pursuit of the less for the greater. 1. The favour of an earthly ruler is often obtained only by the exercise of great skill on the part of the seeker. When the woman of Tekoa desired to obtain from David the forgiveness of Absalom, what ingenuity on her part was necessary in order to gain the monarch's ear and goodwill. She had to study how to put the case before him in the best light, and to enact a little drama before his eyes in order to enlist his attention and soften his heart. And yet she was pleading with a tender-hearted father for his own son. How different is it when we plead for the mercy of God either for ourselves or others. The simplest statement of the case is sufficient; no schemes or plans of any kind are necessary to win the ear of Him who is always waiting to be gracious. 2. Success with an earthly ruler is often quite unconnected with the merit or demerit of the pleader. It often happens that the most worthless characters obtain the greatest favours, even if the ruler himself be a fairly impartial man, because they have more friends at court than a deserving man. In the case just mentioned, Absalom, a thoroughly bad man, was able to command the services of a person who was probably more fitted to gain the desired end than any person in the kingdom. If there had been a banished subject who really merited a free pardon from the king, he would probably not have been able to command the services of so successful a pleader as the woman of Tekoa. the case is altogether different with Him who doth not "judge after the sight of His eyes, neither reprove after the hearing of His ears.' (Isa. xi. 3.) The "judgment which cometh from the Lord" is founded on the strictest impartiality, and depends upon nothing but the character and needs of the suitor. If we add to these drawbacks the uncertain good which may be contained in the "favour of a ruler" even after it is obtained, we may well wonder that it is as true now as in Solomon's days that the "many" seek it, and only the few trust their earthly and their spiritual interests with their God. How many of the few who are not disappointed of the favour of great men are disappointed in it, and find it a poor and unsatisfying portion after all; but the testimony of all those who seek the higher good is "In Thy favour is life, and Thy lovingkindness is better than life." (Psa. lxiii. 3.)

OUTLINES AND SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS.

To those who look out upon society from the standpoint of trust in God, the greatest magnates of the world will

But

appear only as grasshoppers.
He who can say, "Surely my judgment
is with the Lord," will stand before his

For Homiletics on verse 27, see on chap. xxviii. 4.

CHAPTER XXX.

66

CRITICAL NOTES.-1. Agur. There have been many conjectures about this person. Many consider that it is a figurative name, and some have adopted the old Jewish tradition that it is an allegorical desiguation of Solomon. "The name," says Delitzsch, "means "the gathered" (see chap. vi. 8, x. 5), also “the collector," or the word might mean, perhaps, "industrious in collecting." The son of Jakeh, etc. Stuart and Zöckler adopt here the reading of Hitzig and others, and read "The son of her who was obeyed in Massa (or the princess of Mass): I have toiled for, or wearied myself about, God, and have ceased." For their reasons the student is referre to their commentaries, where the subject is discussed at great length. Ithiel and Ucal signify respectively “ God with me,” and “the son of the mighty," and the common opinion is that they were Agur's disciples. From the great differences between the language and style of the last two chapters of the book, and those which have preceded them, most scholars believe that they were written outside the land of Palestine. Zöckler thinks that " Agur and Lemuel might very properly be regarded as Arabian-Israelitish shepherd-princes or kings of a colony of Israelites of the tribe of Simeon that had emigrated to northern Arabia." (See 1 Chron. iv. 38-43; Micah i. 15, ii. 8, 10.) Delitzsch suggests that they were "Ishmaelites who had raised themselves above the religion of Abraham, and recognised the religion of Israel as its completion." 2. Brutish, i.e., without reason. 10. Stuart and Zöckler here read "Cause not a servant to slander his master." Delitzsch agrees with the English version. 15. Horseleech, or vampire, an imaginary spectre or ghost, supposed to suck the blood of children." (Stuart.) 15 and 16. On these verses, Dr. Aiken, the American translator of the Proverbs for Lange's Commentary, remarks, "As compared with the numerical proverbs which follow, the complexity and the more artificial character of the one before us at once arrests attention. They all have this in common, that whatever moral lesson they have to convey is less obvious, being hinted rather than stated. In the one now under consideration, insatiable desire and the importance of its regulation seem to be the remote object. In the development, instead of the "three things" an i "four things" which repeatedly appear afterwards, we have the "leach," its two daughters, the three, and the four. Some have regarded the two daughters as representing physical characteristics of the bloodsu ker, others as expressing by an Orientalism a doubly intense craving. Parallelism suggests making the first two of the four the two daughters; other allusions of the Scripture to the greediness of the world of the dead justify the first, while the second alone belong to human nature." 23. Odious, or unloved. 26. Conies. A gregarious animal of the class Pachydermata, which is found in Pal-stine living in the caves or clefts of the rocks. Its scientific name is Hyrax Syriacus. It is like the Alpine marmot, scarcely the size of a domestic cat, having long hair, a very short tail, and round ears (Smith's Biblical Dictionary). 28. Spider. Most commentators translate "lizard." Delitzsch reads, "The lizard thou canst catch with the hands, and yet it is in the king's palaces." 29. Go well, rather, "are of stately walk. 31. Delitzsch renders the last clause of this verse :-" A king with whom is the calling out of the host."

NOTE. The following is Miller's unique translation of the first four verses of this chapter with his reasons for the same, and the teaching which he sees in the passage. "It struck us that we would take the simple Hebrew and inquire its meaning. We would accept nothing as a proper name till we found it destitute of sense; and, following no intricate conceits, we would fail of a directer meaning before we went off into anything more difficult. It is astonishing how facile the result. We believe that all was the work of Solomon. We believe that there was no such man as Agur, except the great man Jesus Christ We believe there was no such king as Lemuel. We believe everything is the work of Solomon as much as any other proverb. If it appear Arabic or extra-Hebraic no matter. Solomon gathered his materials over a wide surface. We believe it is distinctly what it says, The prophecy. We count it as all finished in the four first verses, and Jakeh and Ithiel, and Ucal and Muel in the next chapter (verse i. 4). We would be quite willing to read that way, if, like Lo-ammi in the prophet, or Lo-ruhamah, words confessedly significant (Hosea i. 8, 9), it were thought euphonious or wise to give them without a translation. But what the Hebrews saw why not our people see? Certain it is that the words to a Hebrew were about as follow:

"1. Words of I-fear, Son of the Godly: The Prophecy :

"The Strong Man speaks to God-with-me, to God-with-me and to I-am-able.

"2. Forasmuch as I am more brutish as to myself, than a man of the better sort, "and have not the intelligence of a common man.

"3. and have not been taught wisdom and yet know the knowledge of holy things.

"4. who has gone up to heaven and come down?

"who has gathered the winds in his fists?

"who has bound the waters in a garment?

"who has set firm all the extremities of the earth?

"what is his name, and what is his son's name? Because, Thou knowest.

"Let us examine, first, the language, and then the result as to the sense. 1-fear. This is the very simplest Hebrew. It actually occurs in Deuteronomy (chap. xxxii. 27).

The verb is the

familiar oue m, which means primarily to turn out of the way. And this turning out of the way for danger is a prudent and innocent character of fear. Agur therefore, or I-fear, with the light we get afterward, marks himself as the Strong Man of the next clause; the Son of the Godly, because descended out of the loins of the Church (see Rev. xii. 5); and the Wan-just as Muel (chap. xxxi. 1) is God and man-contemplating the low humanity of Christ, which is about to express its wonder at its amazing knowledge. Godly; from a root meaning to venerate: Jakeh is in the singular, and means the pious one; which keeps in view what is too often forgotten, that Christ was not the son of the abandoned, but, as His mother expresses it (chap. xxxi. 2), the son of my voros. The Prophery; not needfully prediction, as in the present case, but an oracle, visum, or inspired elation of any kind. The words that follow constitute the prophecy for though the speech of the Man-Christ does not begin till the second verse, the very names in the next clause are predictive; and the most vitally so of the whole of the vision. The Strong Man; strong, though weak; strong because he sees in himself such wonderful conditions. The word strong is implied in the noun that is selected. Speaks; oracularly. It is the solemn, poetic, and in fact, rare expression. To-God-with-me. That the Man-Christ should address the Deity has innumerable precedents. If it were necessary, we could imagine the Human Nature as addressing the Divine Nature; for that really occurs in high Eastern vision, in the Book of Zechariah (chap. iii. 4, 6, 7, 8). In lofty texts, like this, it is perfectly admissible. Christ speaks of His Divine Nature (John iii. 13); and speaks of it as being where the Man Christ Jesus was not, viz., in Heaven. But the fourth verse of this chapter mentions both Father and Son; and therefore in this, which is so near it, it is not necessary to distinguish. The Strong Man speaks to the God which was with (Him), and calls Him Ucal, which means I-am-able. There was a powerful Divinity in Christ, and that He was wondering about. His mother repeats the wonder in the after case (chap. xxxi. 2). The whole is a grand Prophecy of Christ in the form of a grand inquiry. Agur makes it of Ithiel. That is, the Man, I-fear, goes searching into the God-with-me. There is an I-fear part and an I-am-able part, of His one Grand Person; and these parts speak even in the New Testament with the humility (John v. 19) and with the splendour (John viii. 58) that belong to each. Forasmuch as; the simple particle because. I am more brutish, i.e. more the mere untaught animal. As to Myself, i.e. as to my human self; for it is the Strong Man that speaks. The emphasis is laid by the mere expression of the pronoun. Than a man of the better sort; than an educated, refined man, which Christ was not. And have not the intelligence of a common man. That is, he had not the education usually given to the more lowly. The commonness of the humanity is expressed again by the noun. And have not been taught wisdom. Here the emphasis is on taught. And yet know the knowledge of holy things. The meaning of the whole is, that he has singular light. He confronted the doctors in the temple, and, as a little child, was a miracle. Whence came this? This is what the prophecy represents as a surprise. Who has gone up to Heaven and come down? Somebody has. The Strong Man addresses this appeal to the God-with-me; and ends it significantly;-Who is it? Because Thou knowest. One word back in the third verse :-know the knowledge. We have not altered this, nor said have the knowledge, which would be better English, because this seems the intentional form. The words that Christ gave to His disciples, God gave to Him; and Christ, in saying so, would include all senses; the outer word; the inner word; the outward blessed revelation, and the inner teaching. He knew the knowledge; i.e., He discerned in perfect ways what the Spirit without measure was there to impart. Going up to heaven, gathering the wind, binding the waters, and setting firm the extremities of the earth, were the work of a Divinity. Some Divinity had been at work upon Him. He applies to the Able One, to the God with Him, to explain a low man's wonderful knowledge, and then adds, as significant of the reply, Because Thou knowest."

This extract is given here, not because we agree with Miller's view of the passage, but as affording a specimen of the mode of interpretation which he adopts throughout the book.

MAIN HOMIletic of tHE PARAGRAPH.-Verses 1-9.

THE SOURCE OF TRUE HUMILITY.

I. In proportion as men know God they confess they know Him not. A child looks above his head at the midnight sky and he concludes that the stars that he sees are only so many shining points which have no use beyond that of beautifying the heavens and giving a little light to our world. He does not think that there is any more to know about the stars, but this conclusion of his is based