R.C. Sproul’s Proverbial Peccadillo

Thanks to Jake Swink for pointing out a helpful post by R.C. Sproul on the Proverbs.

Sproul uses Prov 26:4-5 to show how the application of a proverb often depends on the situation.  Part of wisdom is figuring out which instructions apply to different life situations!  Read Sproul’s excellent thoughts, and learn wisdom from a sage.

However, I disagree with the framing of Sproul’s chief conclusion that proverbs “reflect insights that are generally [not universally] true.”  In his book Knowing Scripture, Sproul elaborates the point: “A common mistake in biblical interpretation and application is to give a proverbial saying the weight or force of a moral absolute” (p. 89).

This approach to Proverbs is common among evangelicals.  Even the ESV Study Bible, which I really appreciate, goes in that direction.  Consider the note on Proverbs 3:9-10:

“Your barns will be filled with plenty is a generalization concerning the effect of honoring the Lord with all that one has and is.  It is not, however, more than a generalization (as Job’s comforters held), for to view this as a mechanical formula dishonors God and his inscrutable sovereign purposes.”

Sproul believes proverbs are not commands, and the ESV Study Bible claims they are not promises.

My problem here is that this approach to Proverbs fosters mistrust of the text by claiming that it doesn’t really say what it says.  So, “Honor the Lord with your wealth…then your barns will be filled with plenty” (Prov 3:9-10) applies only when you’re not in a recession.  Since proverbs are not promises, they must be only probabilities.

But I ask: Is Prov 2:1-5 not really a command with a promise?  If I seek wisdom, is it possible, but not guaranteed, that I can know God?  Can someone seek and seek and never find him?

Is Prov 3:11-12 only generally true?  If I suffer God’s discipline, is it only generally true that he loves me as a father loves his son?  Might he actually be disappointed with me, even if I’m trusting in Christ?

Is Prov 4:5 not a moral absolute?  Is it not really the case that God commands people to get wisdom and hold on to his commandments?  Perhaps not, since it might be only a generalization to think that God will give life to those who find wisdom (Prov 8:35).

No, there’s got to be a better way to read Proverbs.

As commentator Bruce Waltke states,

“The popular evangelical solution that these are not promises but probabilities, though containing an element of truth, raises theological, practical, and psychological problems by stating the matter badly…A psychologically well person could scarcely trust God with all his heart (Prov 3:5) knowing that he usually, but not always, keeps his obligations” (The Book of Proverbs, Chapters 1-15 (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2004), pp. 107-8).

So how would I frame the conclusion differently?  I would say that, yes, biblical proverbs (at least those with imperatives) are commandments.  Yes, proverbs (at least those that promise something) contain divine promises.  But they are commandments/promises with a context.  Each one applies (always) in its situation, but we ought not misapply it beyond the proper situation (as Sproul ably demonstrates in Prov 26:4-5).

See, I don’t really disagree with Sproul all that much.  I agree with what he gets at in Prov 26; I just disagree with how he got there.   To say that proverbs “reflect insights that are [only] generally true” is to over-generalize what proverbs intend.  Such over-generalization can be misleading.