Chastening is best associated to a parent-child relationship (Deuteronomy 8:5; 2 Samuel 7:14; Proverbs 13:24; Proverbs 19:18; Hebrews 12:6-8). As such, God’s chastening, at least within the New Testament, is only intended for those He calls His sons (1 John 3:2). God chastens His children, not to administer justice, but to strengthen and correct them. The believer does not receive some type of punishment from the Lord resulting from the believer’s sins because these sins have been completely atoned through the shed blood of Christ. However, the saint’s continued practice of sin requires the chastening hand of the Lord in order to conform him into the image of Christ. While chastening is reserved exclusively for sons, a lost man receives only punishment or salvation.
The book of Proverbs offers many profound truths and sometimes conveys these truths through the implementation of comparisons and contrasts. Today’s proverb is a case in point. The Lord uses this structure to assist man’s venturing from the familiar to that which is unfamiliar. Those concepts recognizable to mankind can be used to help convey and explain deeper truths known only to the Lord. For instance, man easily understands what is meant by saying that a stone is heavy and sand is weighty, but the Lord wants man to comprehend the heaviness of a fool’s wrath. Man knows that wrath is cruel and anger is outrageous, but God wants man to realize that envy is crueler and more outrageous than both wrath and anger. During times of anger and wrath, merciful moments might be displayed; however, envy relentlessly pursues its victim without mercy.
The church at Antioch sent out Paul and Barnabas (Acts 13:1-4). These men were missionaries seeking to win the lost and edify the children of God. They travelled far and wide on their first missionary journey and then returned to Antioch to offer the believers a report of the work (Acts 15:30). Soon thereafter, Paul determined that he and Barnabas should make a second trip to check on the growth of those to whom they previously ministered (Acts 15:36). Barnabas sincerely desired to accompany Paul but also thought it wise to take John Mark (who had previously quit on Paul and Barnabas). Paul disagreed with taking John Mark and the Bible describes that the “contention was so sharp between them, that they departed asunder one from the other” (Acts 15:39).
The Lord gave laws to protect innocent life and punish those guilty of harming others. In the midst of these laws, the Bible has a section devoted to a scenario of what might occur when two men strive with each other. During their conflict, they might hurt a woman who was with child causing her to lose her unborn child. The conflict is literal or physical and the problems resulting are literal or physical, but one cannot miss the spiritual truth disclosed. When two people strive, those not even involved in the initial conflict suffer consequences. Before two people decide to take part in strife, they would be wise to consider how their contentious behaviour affects the innocent people around them.
A simplistic view of vengeance involves the retribution of an evil deed. The first (Genesis 4:15) and last (Jude 7) mention of the word vengeance substantiates this definition. The Bible uses words like recompence (Deuteronomy 32:35), reward (Deuteronomy 32:41), punishments (Psalm 149:7), avenge (Jeremiah 46:10), revenge (Ezekiel 25:15), and repay (Romans 12:19) as descriptive words for vengeance. With this in mind, it is clear that vengeance is the just punishment as a consequence upon those who violate the laws of God. It is not the dispensing of wrath without cause but is specific punishment exacted for specific crimes committed.
The Bible plainly and repeatedly warns believers not to put their trust in men. In addition to this truth, men are not to trust in themselves. As today's passage shows, sometimes God allows circumstances to come into our lives in order to teach us not to trust in ourselves. If any mere mortal could stake a claim to self-trust, it would have been the apostle Paul. He was “circumcised the eighth day,” “an Hebrew of the Hebrews,” and “a Pharisee” (Philippians 3:5). In spite of this, Paul knew these attributes were not sufficient to trust for eternal life. In fact, he counted these things but dung, that he may win Christ (Philippians 3:8). If Paul understood that he could not put his trust in himself or his accomplishments, everyone else should realize that his or her ability or merits are not worthy of trust.
One might think that prayer has always existed in the exact manner in which it presently exists, but such is not the case. It appears that the first major shift in prayer took place in Genesis 4:26. We know that Adam and Eve freely spoke with the Lord face-to-face in the garden (Genesis 3:8). However, it seems that the fall of man caused men to have to begin “to call upon the name of the LORD.” Even then, prayer was not as it is today. The very fact that prayer has not always existed parallels a time in the future when prayer as we know it will not exist. When man had full access to the Lord, there was no need for prayer. In eternity, the same will be true. For now, the Lord has given us access to Him through prayer (Hebrews 4:16).
God’s people should conscientiously cover themselves so that the shame of their nakedness does not appear to others. Yet, it is also important that their choice of covering be acceptable in the sight of the Lord. Some people have wrongfully assumed that the Lord does not give any thought to the attire of His people. God's word emphasizing the inward man does not reflect a lack of concern for the outward adornments. The assumption that it does is sometimes based upon a misapplication of 1 Samuel 16:7 where the Bible says, “for man looketh on the outward appearance, but the LORD looketh on the heart.” Truly, man is generally limited to looking upon the outward appearance, but God sees both the outward appearance and the inward man. In fact, Proverbs 7:10 testifies to the validity of this truth. In that passage, the Holy Ghost plainly indicated that a woman’s clothing was representative of a harlot’s attire. Apparently, the Holy Ghost was keenly aware of what was seen on the outside.
