Ignorant Actions Never Made A Man Innocent

*See now! *Since by practice, *he reveals himself to be *a youth, *with conduct *that twists what was to be *pure and upright. MAST

Proverbs 20:11 (NKJV)

11 Even a child is known by his deeds, Whether what he does is pure and right.

*[See now!] literally, moreover. But its important to understand the contextual narrative of the interaction and response. This is Solomon’s second application to a moral question cast upon his throne of justice. This is an adverbial conjunction for emphasis that introduces a climatic scenario. It works like an exclamation to stress a point. Solomon previously made an internal application through self-examination but now is making an external one by examining a subject of his court (Matt.7:5). In our previous proverb, he used himself to testify of the moral depravity of our worship, but in this context, he is using the other subject of this court to illuminate this moral depravity even further (Matt.7:6).

Behold now; there are two subjects of this court, governed by the Most High (Pr.20:8), who profess to worship the same God (Pr.20:10), if you will, on the altar of God’s choosing (Pr.20:9), each having a diverse size of the value of the service of this worship (Pr.20:10). In this court, these two worshipers are like stones stacked against each other to work out the fruit of repentance in the God of Israel. It shouldn’t be this way, but because of the vain thing that a man of sin is, it is a necessary evil that is part of the religion of the system of faith that works righteousness in the heart of Israel (Matt.13:15; 19:8; Mk.3:5; Rom.8:28). It is to this purpose (repentance) that the separation of powers ( the government of the two covenants (Levi and David) meet to work together for the good of their subjects and the glory of Yahweh, Israel’s holy and most high King. Therefore, Solomon is calling our attention to behold the spiritual reasoning of this conduct for which the very existence of this court needs to be atoned (Pr.20:9). The justice of this court is insufficient to atone for sin. In wisdom, however, this court is an offering of mercy to restrain evil but remains powerless to be reformed to the point of moral purity and be free from its own potential to be corrupted by itself (Matt.23:23).

*[Since by practice] literally, when with evil habits. The leading adverb emphasizes the preposition here. There is much depth to this little Hebrew adverb, but in association with the contextual pattern of habits, it doesn’t retain its hypothetical use in the first clause. Solomon is making a statement of fact, not a propositional one. He is making a judgment of the court to reason out the actions that have been demonstrated in the court. But Solomon is appealing to the covenant, which reasons out of objective, spiritual truth that has its standard in Yahweh. He is not reasoning like a child who knows, nor has no standard at all. He is not making a comparison between himself and the subject of the court as this case was in presenting itself before him, which has cast up this moral question that concerns the objectivity of the court.

Again, I do not seek to discredit those other faithful translations, like the one I prefer to read with, such as the NKJV. The philosophy that went into their translation was to keep these proverbs concise and practical. Still, I am seeking to translate it with an understanding of the historical and cultural context. The translation “Even a child is known by his deeds, whether what he does is pure and right” is a sufficient and good translation to demonstrate the author’s intent. It is even faithful to the greater testimony of Scripture, but I want to squeeze out every drop of contextual intent I can. The noun is a construct of the plural Hebrew word for “deeds,” which is describing one particular man’s habitual practice (his pattern of works). In Hebrew, however, this clause ends rather than begins with the Hebrew noun for youth. So it is unclear to me what the actual age it represents with the masculine pronoun of this construct. Is it referring to a man acting like a boy, or is it a boy who is acting his own age?

The pronoun leads this phrase and the following verb, but its antecedent is unclear to me, for Solomon is not referring to himself but another subject. It can then only be applied to the subject of his court. Our original (NKJV) translation seems to suggest Solomon is making an application by comparing the doctrine of moral inability to a child outside of the immediate context. Still, the Hebrew seems to suggest it is directly applied to someone he is conversing with about the topic. I picture this like a court recorder making a record of these courtroom investigations (as it happens live). Some of these proverbs are recordings of Solomon’s judgments about the cases brought into his question. Therefore I see Solomon addressing the whole court with the acts of this one subject and making a comparison of his actions to that of a youth, but who is a grown, responsible adult who still thinks like a child, as does the following verbal construct which defines the phrase (1Cor.13:11).

*[he reveals himself to be] typically, to disguise oneself. But this verb only has fifty occurrences from which we can derive its standard meaning. And each time, its definition varies. It can mean: to know; to recognize; to regard; to disguise; to misconstrue or twist; to treat as foreign or profane; to act as alien; to reveal; to deface; to inspect; to estrange. And so it makes it challenging to know Solomon’s intention behind this word with such little context to draw from. The scholars suggest the verb, in this proverbial context, means to make oneself known. I believe they are correct because it is in the Hitpael (reflexive) stem. My preferred version (NKJV) disregards this stem in its translation, while the ESV and others have it correct. The subject is reflexive of himself. In other words, the subject acts upon himself. Therefore as this construct stands alone, the meaning is, to reveal by his own deeds, as the ESV renders it: “Even a child makes himself known by his acts, . . .”. But what both the ESV and the NKJV fail to do is emphasize the opposing standard of comparison, which I believe is in the original Hebrew. Solomon is comparing the practice of this subject with an absolute standard of moral purity and righteousness in the clause that follows.

Therefore by the standard of this subject’s own heart, Solomon is calling him a boy, but in truth, he is a grown man who, by his deeds, disguises himself as a little boy. Solomon is basically saying that it is the nature of a child to twist the standard of truth! Are you truly that innocent of the knowledge of evil, like a child, to be defending your actions? No, you are guilty! says the judge. Now it doesn’t just close here. This verb gives the additional meaning as it is conjoined to the next clause in its relationship to the adjectives that contrast the subject’s conduct.

*[a youth] literally, a young man. Again, I don’t believe this offers us a dogmatic age by the use of this word, but I believe it does do us injustice to (read it) and understand it as a little child or infant. That’s not what Solomon’s intent is. He is certainly referring to the ignorant actions of a youth, but the term ranges from the image of a young boy to a teenager and even a slave. Therefore the conduct of this subject, who is known as a son of Israel, is acting unbecoming of the spiritual education of either a common slave or a little boy. His conduct reveals his soul's condition to be of that of moral ignorance (Jonah 4:11). Therefore, this subject needs a spiritual education to know the straight and clean way of Israel’s Lord (Matt.3:3; 7:13-20; Lk.3:5; Acts 13:10).

*[with conduct] literally, his practice. This is the completion of the whole phrase in the joined construct. But for the sake of making sense out of it in English, it is conjoined as the hypothetical conclusion to the introductory statement of fact, since. The hypothetical presumption, here, then, is that a man is born morally clean and upright (made in the image of God, as “they say”), but is presented here hypothetically and sarcastically by Solomon. If this subject acted out of moral purity and cleanness of heart, his actions would surely show it. But of course, this is rhetorical sarcasm that it surely cannot (Matt.7:20). So it could be translated: “Since with his deeds, he exposes his youth; but if he were clean and righteous, his character should be also.” That’s really the flow of this in the Hebrew as it is being applied out of the progress of the previous proverb (Pr.20:10). Hypothetically, if he were a good person acting out of good character, his conduct would be good also (Matt.7:18). But with emphasis, Solomon said it is not a good character, as we previously expounded in the first clause. And so the conjunction here is joined to a statement of fact concerning the revelation of the subject by the image (or identity of his deeds) in the court of this law. No, there is no such thing as a good person under the curse of the law (Rom.2:15; Gal.3:10). You remain guilty in your own excuse (Rom.2:15; 3:4,27-28; Gal.3:13; Col.1:15).

Now the meaning of this goes even deeper, which is why I prefer to translate it as character rather than conduct because, in the Hebrew, it conveys the understanding of a wage of work. If this subject were obeying the law, which instructed the sons of Israel “to confirm” all the words of the covenant (Deut.27:26), then the moral character would be the “imputed” reward of his labor. But instead, this subject receives judgment as his wage (Rom.6:23). He hasn’t then been laboring over his soul to guard it against sin. Instead, he has invested his soul like the rest of us to indulge in sin, which is why he is pleading before a “civil” judge of the Most High rather than by the ceremonial sacrifice. This subject is in a dangerous condition because Solomon has the authority to render a just punishment for his sinful behavior (Ezk.18:4). But, a man appealing to his own moral goodness to save him from a just judgment is insanity in Solomon's mind. Those who treasure the moral character of Israel’s covenant will labor to conform their life to it (1Cor.9:24; Matt.16:26). The infinite value of its content will be the acquisition of the soul who exchanges sin to obtain it (Matt.6:19-21; 13:44; Mk.10:21; Lk.6:45; Rev.22:12).

*[that twists what was to be] literally, a hypothetical conjunction. Again, we are dealing with a conjunction that is making a theoretical application to the previous clause. And so while this conjunction is silent in the Hebrew, it draws out the fuller meaning of the verb stem that it is conjoined with. The previous verb, which derived its action out the meaning “to make known,” has the opposite action in its hypothetical use. It could be rendered, “. . . but rather, he alienates himself from his pure and upright character” (Heb.12:16). It would be like putting a veil over the face of truth or hiding a lamp under a basket (Mk.4:11-13, 21-23). However, if by some means all men were made in the image of God with the moral ability to act out of a good character it would be impossible for their deeds “to veil” or “disguise” the nature of God’s light (Jn.1:8; 2Cor.3:7-18). The works of darkness cannot lessen nor cheapen the power of God’s light (Jn.1:4-5). These works of darkness can only reveal what the soul is apart from the character of Christ’s light (Rom.1:21; 13:12; Eph.5:11; Lk.11:33-36). The veil of darkness does not (and cannot) cover the face of the image of Christ but only the heart which abides in the works of darkness (Jn.12:46; 2Cor.3:16-17; 4:3-6). A soul that has no regard for the moral standard of truth treats itself as profane because it twists the testimony of the Spirit of Truth to alienate itself in death (Ecc.7:29; Isa.28:13-19; Heb.10:26-31; Rom.1:24-25, 28-32; Jn.8:24). A soul made in the image of God (i.e., pure and upright) cannot and will not continue in sin (1Jn.1:6; 3:9-10; Mk.13:13; Php.1:6; 2:13). Why? Because the moral character of Christ that is united to his nature will not permit him (Rom.8:1-11).

*[pure and upright] literally, clear and straightforward. The Hebrew adjective translated as pure here is derived from a noun used for the oil pressed out of olives. When it was filtered, free from all sediment, it was a clear substance that was used to burn in the tabernacle's lamps. It was made for a clean burn for pure light. That’s the image of the substance, which is standardizing this character that is being contrasted with the deeds of the subject. The other Hebrew adjective translated as upright is derived from a standard of a straight line or raised level pathway. Therefore, together, this standard is conveying the thought of being clear and straightforward. This is the way of life in which the righteous grow. If they have a light, the light burns clean, and if they have a righteous character, they will also have good habits (1Cor.15:33-34); because good habits are born out of the root of moral character (Matt.12:33). But if some remain asleep in the works of darkness, the Christian principle is corrupted through the deception of an evil influence (Gen.3:1). Therefore the standard never penetrates the heart and root of the moral question (Matt.12:34; 13:18-22; Lk.6:45). Therefore, it can be sufficiently translated, “. . . but if he is clean and righteous, his practice is also” (1Cor.3:1; 14:20; Heb.5:13; 1Pet.2:2). As a son of Israel, this man is being treated as a child without understanding to relearn the oracles of God all over again (Heb.5:12; Rom.3:2). Solomon is simply saying, “Show yourself to be one of God’s children. Show yourself to be circumcised by the holiness of this kingdom. Stand up straight and act like a man. Prove that your heart has been cleansed from evil and learn the fear of the Lord.” As we will see further down in our study, this judgment has been made concerning theft and from a previous judgment concerning laziness. The root cause of this crime was from the heart of laziness, which is a spiritual condition inherited through the imputation of Adam’s fall into sin. But for now, let us thank the Lord that if we fear to sin, it is because the Lord has given us eyes to perceive his goodness and ears to hear his voice of reason.