Proverbs 8:22

HEAVENLY ORIGIN OF WISDOM, Proverbs 8:22-31.

22. Possessed me… of old Literally, from then, since. Great controversies have been held over this word. Great theological questions have been supposed involved. Hence the earnestness of the disputants. “I will also show mine opinion.”

(1.) It is an error to lay too much stress upon words, especially on their etymology, in a poetical composition, in order to deduce nice theological distinctions. Theology is a science, and requires words to be used in an accurate, well defined, scientific manner, in statements and disquisitions. The object of poetry is different, and seeks to arrange them in an ornate, esthetic mode, partly for the purpose of moving the passions. The strict etymological meaning of words is very little regarded in poetry, only as it contributes to an esthetic effect; nay, it is very frequently departed from purposely, for the same effect. These considerations are to be borne in mind in drawing theological propositions from poetic language. There are, doubtless, doctrines involved in the sacred poetic compositions, but they are not so much to be learned from the etymological or even conventional sense of individual words, as from the general scope, tenor, and drift of the passage. It is the very essence of poetic genius and inspiration to conceive of things in a mode different from the vulgar reality, and so to represent them in poetic language. Poesy, so to speak, sees things with her own eyes, invests them with her own hues and forms, and exhibits them according to her own fancies. When theology, for her own purposes, becomes interested in these esthetic creations, she must learn to distinguish the shadow from the substance; above all, she must avoid the mistake of regarding an ornament as an essential part of the building; a poetic conception of a thing for the scientific statement of an eternal verity.

(2.) The Hebrew term for “possessed,” קנה , kanah, is a word used, in its various inflections, with a great variety of significations. As usual, these significations are related to each other, and it is, perhaps, impossible at this day to tell which is the original one; nor if we could would it help the matter, for how do we know that the royal poet used the word in that particular sense here? It is just as likely to have been used in a secondary as in a primary sense. The following are some of the meanings given to it in the dictionaries. Gesenius says, “Perhaps the primary idea is to set upright, to erect, kindred with קון , kun, and כון , khun; then, to found, to create; to get, to gain, to obtain; to own, to possess: Niphal, to be bought: Hiphil, to sell.” Bagster’s Analyt., “To form, to create; to get, acquire, obtain; to buy, purchase, redeem, possess. Hiphil, to buy.”

As to the nouns derived from it: קנין , kinyan, (Psalms 104:24,) is rendered in our version riches, (the lexicons say creatures,) also acquisition, purchase, possession, wealth; מקנה , mikneh, purchase, possession, riches, wealth, (but chiefly in cattle;) מקנה , miknah, purchase, things purchased, price of purchase, possession. The participle, קנה , koneh, signifies owner, possessor, master, and, some think, creator.

So far as discovered there is no place where this word, ( possessed,) in any of its inflections, necessarily involves the idea of creation proper, as we understand that word. Our translators have very properly avoided giving it that sense in any case. The primary idea was probably, to hold, to contain, which, by an easy transition, as in other tongues, passed over into holding as property, or possessing; only another step takes us to the idea of getting, acquiring; and closely allied to this is that of originating, as our property: that is, as we say, making money, creating wealth. The most frequent use of the term is to express the relation of possessor and possessed, and the translators were probably right in rendering it by that term here. In this book there is no other place where the word could, with any plausibility, be translated by the verb create. Who would think of rendering Proverbs 4:7: Create wisdom, and with all thy creating, create understanding? The usus loquendi in this book is wholly against the translation of Proverbs 8:22, by our verb “created.” Stuart, Zockler, and others contend stoutly for created. In conformity with the remarks above, in (1,) we would not object to it, if the sense and usage of the word by any means required it. But they do not: rather, the reverse. There are terms in the above verses in respect to wisdom which imply and express origination; but it seems fitting that in the setting out the poet should express the idea that wisdom belongs inherently to God. That at the beginning of his creative acts, whenever that was, she was his: yea, and before his most ancient works. Stuart renders the verse thus: “Jehovah created me, the firstling of his way, before his works, long ago.”