- Proverbs 8:22-33:
- Wisdom as a Theological Resource for Women
- by Artemio Allan Martin II, Doctoral Candidate, Fuller Theological
Seminary
Abstract:
It is the purpose of this paper to first, provide an exegetical treatment
of Proverbs 8:22-33. Second, this paper will provide an reflective exposition
on the related issue of Wisdom as a theological resource for women.
Exegesis: Proverbs 8:22-31
Pericope Rationale:
Proverbs 8:22-31 is a meaningful pericope in and of itself. The rationale
that substantiates this claim is based on the chapter structure, author's
poetic form, and thematic content of this passage.
Scott (1965, p. 71) notes the structure for Proverbs chapter 8 as a "unified
formal composition," consisting of three strophes (verses 1-11, 12-21,
22-31) and a peroration (verses 32-36). McKane (1970) concurs with Scott's
structural segmenting, dubbing them "Wisdom as Instructress,"
"The Power of Wisdom in Human Affairs," "The Antiquity of
Wisdom," and "The Concluding Admonition" respectively.
Barker and Kohlenberger (1994) as well as Gaebelein et al. (1991) view
the chapter as comprised of an introduction (verses 1-3) and three cycles
(verses 4-9, 10-21, 22-36), with each cycle having an invitation (verses
4-5, 10, 32-36) and a motivation (verses 6-9, 11-21, 22-31).
Allen et al. (1971), Buttrick et al. (1955), and Hubbard (1989) all have
their slight variances in how they divide and categorize the structure
of chapter 8, but all sources, including those previously cited, apparently
agree in distinguishing 8:22-31 as a meaningful unit.
Further rationale for 8:22-31 as a distinct pericope can be drawn from
the use of a 22-line strophe structure, indicating the author's use of
the number of letters in the Hebrew alphabet (22) as a poetic structural
form (Scott, 1965, p. 71). This form is found in poems in earlier chapters
as well as in the first and third strophes (verses 1-11, and 22-31 respectively)
of chapter 8. The second strophe (verses 12-21) would have also followed
in the same 22-line structure except for what most scholars believe is
a gloss inclusion in the first line of verse 13 (Farmer, 1991, p. 52).
The final rationale points towards the thematic content of verses 22-31,
which is easily distinguished from the surrounding texts. This unit of
verses seeks to establish the antiquity of Wisdom, providing cosmological
evidence of her credibility (Hubbard, 1989; McKane, 1970). This is a marked
departure from the content of the previous strophe which focuses on the
"earth-bound" advantages of listening to Wisdom, highlighting
the powerful impact Wisdom has on human affairs (Allen et al., 1971, p.
31; Gaebelein et al., 1991, pp. 944-945). McKane (1970, p. 343) posits
that the order of the strophes indicates primacy of world affair evidences
of Wisdom's effectiveness as the emphasis of the chapter. Allen et al.
(1971, pp. 32-34) appears to agree with the central theme of the chapter
proposed by McKane, and suggests that 8:22-31 is a later inclusion to the
chapter, providing further support from a different "apologetic presuppositional"
position.
Buttrick et al. (1955, p. 833) distinguishes verses 32-36 as the concluding
exhortation of the chapter, as do all the referenced sources. Although
Barker and Kohlenberger (1994) structure their third cycle as verses 22-36,
they too distinguish 8:22-31 from 8:32-36 as motivation and invitation
respectively. In addition to the other rationale noted, the thematic content
of verses 22-31, in contrast to surrounding texts, provides considerable
reason to treat this given passage as a meaningful pericope in and of itself.
Pericope Context:
Further comparison and contrasts of Proverbs 8:22-31, within the larger
literary set in Proverbs and specifically in chapter 8, provides additional
information as to the unit's contextual relevance. Hubbard (1989) suggests
the goal of the speeches in Proverbs 1-9 is to "to accent wisdom's
worth and thus attract the young students who will be Israel's future leaders
to pursue it with might and mane (p. 116)." Hubbard points at chapter
8 as central to this purpose.
Indeed, chapter 8 poses a formidable appeal for humankind to take note
of Wisdom as a true and powerful source of understanding (Buttrick et al.,
1955, pp. 826-829; Gaebelein et al., 1991). McKane (1970, p. 342) notes
Wisdom's main audience for this speech is men, specifically young, untrained
males. In chapter 8, Wisdom serves as a teacher, or possibly a prophet,
providing instruction in the common, public places of life (Farmer, 1991,
p. 51; McKane, 1970, p. 342).
Wisdom is personified as a true, pure woman of integrity, held in contrast
to the seductive, evil woman of chapter 7:6-23 (Allen et al., 1971, p.
30; Gaebelein et al., 1991; Horton, 1903, pp. 106-109). Chapter 8 is the
venue in which the virtues of Wisdom are extolled as evidences of her effectiveness
and power. Scott (1965, p. 69) denotes his view of the theme for chapter
8 in the title he gives for this poem, "The Divine Wisdom Manifest
in Creation Offers Herself to Mankind."
In chapter 8, as the author repeatedly displays a personified Wisdom and
invites his audience to heed her, the lure is open and honest, revealing
a self-description that speaks of her virtues and credentials (Hubbard,
1989; Horton, 1903). Following the other two strophes which center on the
earthly worth, power, and rewards of Wisdom, the third strophe (8:22-31)
presents an additional credential which differs from the others (Allen
et al., 1971, p. 30-32). McKane (1970) calls 8:22-31, "a new stage
in the presentation of the personified Wisdom (p. 352)." He suggests
this pericope is a "reorientation, enrichment and supplementation"
of the previous texts (McKane, 1970, p. 352).
Whereas verses 1-21 presented the life advantages of adhering to Wisdom
in the world, verses 22-31 go to another level of persuasion noting the
cosmic connection between God and Wisdom from the beginning of the world
(Allen et al., 1971, pp. 32-33). In the context of chapter 8, the 8:22-31
pericope fits perfectly into the chapter's purpose to provide motivation
for one to take Wisdom's invitation (Barker & Kohlenberger, 1994; Gaebelein
et al., 1991). But verses 22-31 provide commendations for Wisdom from a
different "apologetic presupposition" (Allen et al., 1971, p.
32).
The personified Wisdom legitimizes herself by citing her presence during
the creative process (Farmer, 1991, p. 55). This is a bold claim which
immediately lends her credibility. The purpose of the first two strophes
is reasserted from another angle by verses 22-31, the angle of Wisdom's
experiential presence at creation (Hubbard, 1989, p. 123-126). Hubbard
(1989, p. 123) cites simply, "Her {Wisdom's} self-description turns
from her present assets to her past experience, as a witness to and celebrant
in God's creation."
The pericope may fit perfectly within the purposes of the book and the
chapter, but Allen et al. (1971) makes note of the unit's diversion from
the presuppositions of the previous strophes. He suggests that the unit
was a later addition to the interpretation serving as further support,
not corrective or contradictory, to the previous passages (Allen et al.,
1971, pp. 32-33). McKane (1970, p. 352) concurs with Allen's perspective,
noting that the pericope, although from another angle, does not take away
from the author's didactic objective to promote Wisdom to men.
Proverbs 8:22-31 admirably fits into the larger literary context of chapter
8 as a purposeful whole, although wearing its own distinctive color. Beyond
the earthly advantages endorsed in previous texts, this pericope asserts
that Wisdom should be obeyed because of the "essential nature and
high place she holds in the universe (Buttrick et al., 1955, p. 830)."
Pericope Translation Language Comparisons:
In comparison of the various Biblical translations some notable differences
lend themselves to particular interpretive bents. In verse 22, KJV, ASB,
and Scott say "possessed me;" RSV says "created me;"
and NIV says "brought me forth." Gaebelein et al. (1991, p. 946)
suggests that the older versions use "possess" lest God appear
to not have wisdom before creation. Buttrick et al. (1955, p. 830) leans
toward a "created" translation given citations of a created Wisdom
in Ecclesiasticus.
In verse 26, KJV says "highest part of the dust;" RSV and ASB
say "first of the dust;" Scott says "first morsels of the
earth's soil;" and NIV says "any of the dust of the world."
Although there is some variance between translations, I fail to see any
significance in this difference. Buttrick et al. (1955, p. 832) notes that
the Hebrew meaning here is unclear.
In verse 28, KJV says "when he strengthened;" RSV says "when
he established;" Scott says "and [he] made;" ASB says "when
the springs became fixed;" and NIV says "and [he] fixed securely."
Here again I see little significance to the difference. Again Buttrick
et al. (1955, p. 832) cite that the Hebrew here is uncertain, but they
assert their preference for the KJV and RSV given the similar verbal forms
found in following texts.
In verse 30, KJV says "as one brought up with him;" RSV and ASB
say "like a master workman;" NIV says "I was the craftsman;"
Scott says "I was beside him binding [all] together." This is
clearly a different picture portrayed depending on the translation. The
"craftsman" translation leans one towards the picture of Wisdom
having a hand in the creative process. The "one brought up with him"
offers a word picture of a little child in the presence of God. Gaebelein
et al. (1991, pp. 946-947) cite that "workman/craftsman" has
the most support based on antiquity literature. Buttrick et al. (1955,
pp. 832-833) notes that contemporary commentators are equally split on
the translation. Scott (1965, p. 72) interestingly vies for his own interpretation,
based on the idea of a "uniting, binding together." McKane (1970,
pp. 356-358) is unconvinced by Scott's rational and asserts his advocacy
of a childlike view of Wisdom, with the world "as a playground."
Pericope Genre:
The author's use of a 22-line poetic structural form is found in first
and third strophes of chapter 8, as well as the second in LXX (Scott, 1965,
p. 71). This form usage links the author of the 8:22-31 pericope to poems
elsewhere in Proverbs chapters 1 through 10. Scott (1965, p. 71) notes
further that this evidence of common authorship suggests that the author
was utilizing personification of Wisdom as purely poetic and "not
ontological."
McKane (1970, p. 344) cites sources which attribute the personified form
of Wisdom to Egyptian influences. The "complex of motifs associated
with Maat" appear to link Wisdom speeches with speeches of Egyptian
gods (McKane, 1970, p. 344). He also cites sources which note the formal
similarities of the 8:22-31 pericope to "Egyptian and Babylonian hymns
of creation (p. 352)." If a translation of "little child"
is opted for in verse 30, the formulation of the pericope lends itself
to genre comparisons to mythological motifs, with "a child of the
gods" more probable (McKane, 1970, p. 353).
Scott (1965, p. 70) notes that the idea of divine beings is not viewed
as incompatible with God having unique deity, and that other Old Testament
poets utilize imagery from "pre-Israelite mythologies." Scott
further notes the idea of a "god or goddess of wisdom with the creation
of the world and man" was common to Egyptian, Sumerian, and Babylonian
mythology. Scott (1965, p. 71) concludes that, although the author may
have drawn from old mythological material for his purpose, such evidence
only substantiates his "figurative poetic use of it."
Exegesis Concluding Comments:
Proverbs 8:22-31 is a meaningful pericope which serves the purposes of
chapter 8 from a distinctive vantage point without taking away from other
components within the chapter. Instead, it provides a bold endorsement
beyond the earthly advantages Wisdom provides; With the assertion of Wisdom's
presence at creation, giving her primeval antiquity credentials, a clear
cosmological link is displayed between God and Wisdom.
In view of the exegetical and commentary sources analyzing verses 22-31
and its larger literary context, the majority scholastic opinion appears
to hold that the personification of Wisdom is a poetic literary tool which
draws the reader to her words. Barker and Kohlenberger (1994, p. 954) note
that many have equated Wisdom with Christ, but even this personification
can only go so far given that Wisdom was "created" by God. Horton
(1903, pp. 117-119) also notes the possible equating of Christ with Wisdom
of Proverbs, but he leaves it as "impossible to say."
It is my opinion using this pericope as a platform to digress into the
gender-bantering between scholars really skirts around the purposes of
the author. Clearly, the intentions here are to invite humankind to adhere
to Wisdom. My exegesis points to "listening to Wisdom" as primary;
Gender identity does not appear to be even of tertiary significance to
the pericope. This is not to say that an androcentric formulation is commendable.
Hopefully some reflection on the theological resource of Wisdom for women
will express an egalitarian perspective on this issue.
Reflection: Wisdom as a Theological Resource for Women
With the rise of feminism and the emerging awareness of the value of Wisdom
literature for theological study, a variety of theological authors have
brought new energy to the exploration of Wisdom's message to contemporary
religious circles. From a select spectrum of authors, the remainder of
this paper endeavors to review the issues the authors raise, develop some
distinctives between them, and then, from a personal perspective, reflectively
expound on the possible implications.
Wisdom as-in-through-and Jesus:
Given the enthusiasm of Christian feminists to provide women with answers
to the difficult questions of a pervasive androcentric Christology, to
explore neglected portions of early Hebrew and Christian tradition, and
to establish a keener understanding of God, scholarly attention has been
turned towards investigating the relationship between Wisdom and Jesus
(Barker & Kohlenberger, 1994, p. 954; Cady, Ronan & Taussig, 1989,
p. 15; Johnson, 1986; p. 261).
Cady and Taussig (1988) cite the abundance of Hebrew literature which center
on Wisdom, noting her prominence among the top five figures in Hebrew tradition.
From the Wisdom of Solomon, Ecclesiasticus, Proverbs, Corinthians, Baruch,
and several other sources, they evidence the pervasiveness of Wisdom's
presence in the literature and decry her absence in theological discussion.
Wisdom's role as creator, teacher, lover, tree or plant, and law are discussed
extensively, but the emphasis of Cady et al. (1989, pp.28-30) is to pose
and answer the question: "Is Sophia {Wisdom} God?" Based on their
perusal of Hebrew tradition, their resounding conclusion is "YES!"
Cady and Taussig (1988) do not hedge from saying that Wisdom is not merely
a personification of an attribute of God; Without hesitance they say Wisdom
"is far more than a mere personification in these texts. She walks,
talks, protects, enters into relationship, creates, and teaches (p. 9)."
Cady and Taussig (1988, p. 9) note that the personification theories of
Wisdom have propagated the long neglect of her and assert her as a "real
divine person" for theological consideration. As for Jesus, Cady and
Taussig (1988, p. 9) identify Him both as Wisdom's Child and Wisdom herself.
They cite both patriarchy and gnosticism as inhibiting forces from full
acknowledgement (Cady & Taussig, 1988, p. 10-11).
Johnson (1986, p. 261) also finds Biblical scholarship evidencing Jesus
as Wisdom herself, not settling for being roled only as a wisdom teacher,
Wisdom's child, or special envoy for Wisdom. Because of the "irreducible
maleness of the humanity of Jesus," Johnson (1986, pp. 262-263) notes
that the developing androcentric Christology has served to subordinate
and exclude women, especially in church affairs. In various ways this has
compromised the human dignity of women.
She states further, that Christ's gender has also been used to identify
God as male Father, perpetuating a paradigm which views "male human
beings as normative and exclusively capable of the representation of God
(Johnson, 1986, p. 262)." It is in the midst of this theological androcentricity
that Johnson (1986, p. 271-273) offers several perspectives by which to
view the personification of the feminine Wisdom: Wisdom personifying the
cosmic order, Wisdom personifying wisdom of Israel's wisdom schools, Wisdom
as poetic personification of God's attribute, Wisdom as hypostasis, and
Wisdom personifying God's own self.
Of the five, Johnson (1986, p. 273) clearly advocates that, "Wisdom
is a personification of God's own self in creative and saving involvement
with the world." Although some scholars concede the "functional
equivalence" of Wisdom and YHWH, they stumble on the idea that Wisdom
is not "Yahweh himself (Johnson, 1986, p. 275)." Johnson (1986)
makes a compelling argument that engendered pictures of God are simply
that, human constructs which give us snapshot glimpses of a transcendent
God. Whether using the name of YHWH or Wisdom {Sophia}, these are only
humanly available images. Johnson (1986) says plainly, "Sophia is
not YHWH, understood in the specificity of that Biblical name, but both
female Sophia and male YHWH express the one God who promises life upon
being found (p. 275)."
Pentz (1988, p. 20) agrees that Judaism has latitude for a transcendent
God who is above both female and male categories. She notes, "Judaism
was not so totally patriarchal that it erased the female characteristics
of deity (p. 20)."
Pentz (1988, p. 17) notes that the pre-Christian wisdom tradition formed
two predominate views in relation to Christ. One view, which she calls
Sophialogy, a study of Sophia, holds Christ as one prophet of Wisdom. The
other is coined Sophia Christology, identifying Christ as Wisdom herself.
Pentz (1988) furthers her view of a Sophia {Wisdom} Christology as viable
orthodoxy, and as such opens avenues for interchange between wisdom tradition
and established Christological studies, revealing a deeper understanding
of Christ. She cites wisdom literature as responsible for providing theological
constructs revealing more of Christ's identity. Pentz (1988) asserts that
"Sophia is the mother of incarnational Christology. As such she should
be honored, not relegated to the footnotes (p. 21)."
In overview of these select sources, Cady et al. (1989) appears to take
a distinctive stand from Pentz and Johnson, viewing Wisdom as a fully hypostasic
entity. Johnson (1986) and Pentz (1988) both view Jesus Christ as Wisdom
incarnate. Johnson differs slightly from Pentz by viewing Wisdom as a "personification
of God's own self (Johnson, 1986, p. 273)," whereas Pentz (1988) delimits
herself to the discussion of Jesus as Wisdom. I feel if Pentz was pushed
on the issue, she would agree with Johnson's view of God as well.
Personal, Reflective Exposition:
I found Cady et al. (1989), Johnson (1986), and Pentz (1988) a refreshing
"next step" theological advance from the exegetical resources
I perused for Proverbs 8:22-31. I feel they have risen to the next level
of God's revelation of Godself. Cady et al. (1989) did not persuade me
of Wisdom's goddess role; It may be I am not yet personally prepared to
deal outside of the Trinity with other deities. As I did the exegetical
work, an attribute personification view seemed to be predominant among
the scholars, with a hypostasis view characterized as a polytheistic, pagan-influenced
perspective. Whether or not this is androcentric bias, I hedge from discussing.
What I can say is that Cady et al. (1989) did not resonate with me.
I found Johnson's (1986) argument for God personified as Wisdom as the
most compelling of the three positions. Both Pentz and Johnson rang true
for me, but the latter's emphasis on the transcendence and immanence of
God drew me in and convinced me of her perspective (Johnson, 1986, pp.273-276).
Especially as we have developed further inclusive language on the Fuller
Seminary campus, I have found myself wanting to think about God beyond
the androcentric molds of my religious upbringing. For the past several
years, I have held the conviction that God was above and beyond gender,
but had never been able to clarify my view.
I liked the Scriptural portraits of God as Father and Jesus as Son. My
own paternal relationship has been, and continues to be, rewarding, so
I had various positive attachments letting me perpetuate a patriarchal
paradigm of God. I was convicted that God was transcendent of gender, but
not until perusing Johnson's paper did I fully appreciate how God encapsulates
both feminine and masculine to help us better understand God.
I see no danger in this revelation. Only the positive appears on the horizon
as I envision the way God is using these Self-revelations, affirming the
dignity of women, a cross-culture, cross-class, marginalized group who
have been oppressed for too long. This is miraculous not only for women,
but for all who seek One in whom they can find redemption. I have always
known God through Christ as active in advocating for those in the margins.
As He walked the earth and as He is viewed as Wisdom incarnate today, Christ
is consistent to His word.
Johnson (1986) admirably states, "The combination Jesus Christ/Sophia
leads to a healthy blend of female and male imagery that empowers everyone,
and works beautifully to symbolize the one God who is neither male nor
female, but creator of both, delighter in both, savior of both, and imaged
by both together (p. 294)."
Investments in perpetuating an androcentric theological frame must be scrutinized.
The compelling, exceptional scholarship of Christian feminist is simply
moving theological resources to the next paradigm, a change which, I feel,
is God-ordained. It is past time to retrieve Wisdom out of the margins,
the footnotes, and the background. New avenues have been forged by Christian
feminism to discover more about Jesus as we involve Lady Wisdom in our
Christology. It is time to grasp, with both hands, the wonderful resource
that Wisdom offers and heed her contemporary call.
References
Allen, C. J., Durham, J. I., Honeycutt, R. L., MacGorman, J. W., Stagg,
F., Fallis, W. J., Green, J. F., & Colson, H. P. (Eds.). (1971). The
broadman Bible commentary: Proverbs-Isaiah (Vol. 5, pp. 30-34). Nashville,
TN: Broadman Press.
Barker, K. L., & Kohlenberger, J. (Eds.). (1994). Zondervan NIV
Bible commentary (Vol. 1, pp. 954-955). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.
Buttrick, G. A., Bowie, W. R., Scherer, P., Knox, J., Terrien, S., &
Harmon, N. B. (Eds.). (1955). The interpreter's Bible (Vol. 4, pp.
826-834). New York, NY: Abingdon Press.
Cady, S., Ronan, M., & Taussig, H. (1989). Wisdom's feast: Sophia
in study and celebration (pp. 15-32). San Francisco, CA: Harper &
Row.
Cady, S., & Taussig, H. (1988, November/December). Jesus and Sophia.
Daughters of Sarah, 14(6), 7-11.
Farmer, K. A. (1991). Who knows what is good? A commentary on the books
of Proverbs and Ecclesiastes. In F. C. Holmgren & G. A. F. Knight (Eds.),
International theological commentary (pp. 51-56). Grand Rapids,
MI: WM. B. Eerdmans.
Gaebelein, F. E., Polcyn, R. P., Kaiser, W. C., Waltke, B. K., Alexander,
R. H., Boice, J. M., & Tenney, M. C. (Eds.). (1991). The expositor's
Bible commentary (Vol. 5, pp. 943-947). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.
Horton, R. F. (1903). The book of proverbs. In W. R. Nicoll (Ed.), The
expositor's Bible (pp. 106-121). New York, NY: A. C. Armstrong and
Son.
Hubbard, D. A. (1989). Communicator's commentary: Proverbs (pp.
116-127). Waco, TX: Word.
Johnson, E. A. (1986). Jesus, the wisdom of God: A Biblical basis for
non-androcentric Christology. Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses,
61, 261-294.
McKane, W. (1970). Proverbs: A new approach (OTL) (pp. 342-359).
Philadelphia, PA: Westminster.
Pentz, R. D. (1988, December). Jesus as Sophia. Reformed Journal,
38(12), 17-22.
Scott, R. B. Y. (1965). Anchor Bible: Proverbs, Ecclesiastes (pp.
66-73). Garden City, NJ: Doubleday.
