Proverbial characters;- The Quarreller

The collector of the Old Testament Proverbs makes his purpose clear from the beginning.
“That men may know wisdom and instruction, understand words of insight” (ch1 v2).
Then he further defines this wisdom as “fear of the Lord” (v7). This phrase, when used in the Bible, means respect and willingness to obey.
I’m studying the different characters of Proverbs, as one way of organising and understanding the teaching.

I’ve already looked at the general character of the Fool, who does not understand this “fear of the Lord”.
I observed that the combination of his talkativeness and his lack of wisdom tends to make him quarrelsome.
So that gives us the Quarreller as one of the subcategories of this character.

“Every fool will be quarrelling” (ch20 v3).
This is particularly the case when the Fool has an angry nature;
“A man of wrath stirs up strife, and a man given to anger causes much transgression” (ch29 v22).
Or he may just be a man who ”loves transgression” and therefore “loves strife” (ch17 v19).

One of the connecting links between anger and strife is hasty and ill-considered speech, which is one of the characteristics of the Fool.
“There is one whose rash words are like sword thrusts” (ch12 v18).
“Do you see a man who is hasty in his words? There is more hope for a fool than for him” (ch29 v20).

It is the Fool, rather than the Wise man, who offers insulting language;
“He who belittles his neighbour lacks sense, but a man of understanding remains silent”- (ch11 v12).
Wisdom is with those who take advice (before opening the discussion), but “by insolence the heedless make strife” (ch13 v10).

It is the Fool, rather than the Wise Man, who responds badly to insulting language from the other party;
“A soft answer turns away wrath, but a harsh word stirs up anger” (ch15 v1).
“The vexation of a fool is known at once, but the prudent man ignores an insult” (ch12 v16).
“A fool gives vent to his anger, but a wise man quietly holds it back” (ch29 v11).

They need to find a way of escaping from an emerging conflict before it gets out of hand;
“The beginning of strife is like letting out water; so quit before the quarrel breaks out” (ch17 v14).
This image obviously comes from a society which practices irrigation. People are used to seeing the irresistible rush of water once it has been released.
Therefore it is important to learn forgiveness;
“Hatred stirs up strife, but love covers all offences” (ch10 v12).
“He who forgives an offence seeks love, but he who repeats a matter alienates a friend.”- ch17 v9

They should certainly avoid bringing other people into the quarrel;
“He who states his case first seems right, until the other comes and examines him” (ch18 v17).
“Argue your case with your neighbour himself, and do not disclose another’s secret;
Lest he who hears you bring shame upon you, and your ill repute have no end” (ch25 vv9-10).
Even worse, calling in the lawyers;
“What your eyes have seen do not bring hastily into court;
For what will you do in the end, when your neighbour puts you to shame?” (ch25 vv7-8).
“Be not a witness against your neighbour without cause, and do not deceive with your lips.
Do not say “I will do to him what he has done to me; I will pay the man back for what he has done” (ch24 vv28-29).

The better approach is to break the cycle of hostility;
“Do not rejoice when your enemy falls, and let not your heart be glad when he stumbles, lest the Lord see it and be displeased, and turn away his anger from him” (ch24 vv17-18).
“If your enemy is hungry, give him bread to eat; and if he is thirsty, give him water to drink;
For you will heap coals of fire upon his head and the Lord will reward you” (ch25 vv21-22).

By the same token, they should not be getting involved in other people’s quarrels;
“He who meddles in a quarrel not his own is like one who takes a passing dog by the ears” (ch26 v17).
But it’s hard for them to avoid getting involved in quarrels if they take up company with men who are prone to quarrelling;
“Make no friendship with a man given to anger, nor go with a wrathful man, lest you learn his ways and entangle yourself in a snare” (ch22 v25).
“A man of violence entices his neighbour and leads him into a way that is not good” (ch16 v29).

On the other hand, “the tongue of the wise brings healing” (ch12 v18).
“He who restrains his words has knowledge, and he who has a cool spirit is a man of understanding” (ch17 v27).
Strife is avoided by the man who controls his tongue and his temper.
The wise man is “slow to anger”, and this victory over himself makes him “better than a man who takes a city” (ch16 v32)
“A man of quick temper acts foolishly, but a man of discretion is patient” (ch14 v17).
“It is his glory to overlook an offence” (ch19 v11)

That is one way of detecting the difference between wisdom and folly, between righteousness and unrighteousness.

originally posted by: DISRAELI
The collector of the Old Testament Proverbs makes his purpose clear from the beginning.
“That men may know wisdom and instruction, understand words of insight” (ch1 v2).
Then he further defines this wisdom as “fear of the Lord” (v7). This phrase, when used in the Bible, means respect and willingness to obey.

The obsession with fearing and obeying seems wrong to me. Our God is perfect and complete desiring nothing and needing nothing. i think it is important to have reverence for God but the Bible's obsession with obeying doesn't seem right to me. The Bible was not written by God. Men are full of imperfections. Our omnipotent God of unconditional love seems to me would love us no matter what without any conditions. The greatness that is God is not limited by our lack of obeying words written by men. Men desire "willingness to obey." God is perfect without any desires. The whole idea of God wanting something from us seems like having a lack of appreciation of God's unlimited powers supreme perfection.

a reply to: dfnj2015

Ah yes, the god of "Do Whatever You Want So Long As You Love Me".

a reply to: dfnj2015

I like God.

a reply to: dfnj2015
I suspect that you make these little thread raids without bothering to read any responses.
Even so, I will give you the same reply I gave the last time you trotted out this argument;

The Biblical God never actually claims "unconditional" love- people of modern times have supplied the adjective, but it's misleading.
But since the essential laws are about the way we treat other people, the demand for obedience is actually a demand that we should treat other people in the right way.

And we are not in a position to choose the kind of God we would like to obey. He is either there or he isn't, like features in geography, and our personal preference is irrelevant one way or the other.

a reply to: DISRAELI

"For you will heap goals of fire uonp his head and the Lord will reward you"
Gotta love the Bible.

a reply to: Peeple
Yes, it is very easy to make the Bible or any other piece of writing sound bad by quotation in half-sentences.
You omitted the part where this effect is accomplished by giving an enemy a glass of water, and this presumably means that the enemy will feel remorse for his previous malice. I'm a little sceptical about how often this works, but since this was also recommended by Paul, I suppose we are obliged to try. This is an excellent example of the way the Old Testament and New Testament are fundamentally saying the same thing.

a reply to: DISRAELI

That's a nice gesture. In a desert a glass of water.
It's just my background is more new age. I always have in the back of my mind that yours is just one of many stories.
What would be far more interesting to me is, how does it effect your life? Why do you believe this is the way it is? Religious upbringing?
Because that can't be it. Just religion is too small to cover the whole phenomenon.

a reply to: DISRAELI

Did ya find yer 'Quarreller' yet?

a reply to: Nothin
I've encountered a few quarrellers in my time. I believe I live next door to one.

originally posted by: Peeple
Why do you believe this is the way it is? Religious upbringing?

I can only answer that question by referring you to this thread;
How an atheist became a Christian
And this thread series;
New Testament salvation
And my other threads in this theology forum, which are covering the "relevance of religion" issue in more detail

a reply to: DISRAELI

I'm too lazy to read all of that. Just one sentence. What does god mean to you?

originally posted by: DISRAELI
a reply to: Nothin
I've encountered a few quarrellers in my time. I believe I live next door to one.

Thank-you for your answer.

Perhaps: if we could examine the neighborly relationship, potentially, maybe, with a quarreller; what are our options in replying to this?

Could one not, at least attempt, to win this interaction: with kindness, gentleness, and understanding?

Wanna discuss the neighbor?

a reply to: Nothin
I would rather not, in detail, just in case he reads ATS, recognises himself, and realises how much I know about what he does.
In practice, I deal with him mainly by avoiding contact, which could be called the "patience" which Proverbs also recommends. I couldn't match him even if I wanted to, because I don't have a loud enough voice.

a reply to: Peeple
There is no one sentence answer.
If you really wnated to know, you would have been willing to dig a little deeper.

a reply to: DISRAELI

If you really would want to have a conversation you would just answer my question.
As short as you can. What does "god" mean?

a reply to: Peeple
I'm not actually claiming to want "a conversation", and I'm certainly not going to be chivvied into having one on your terms.
My answer to your most recent question is outlined in the thread One way of defining God

originally posted by: Nothin
a reply to: DISRAELI

Did ya find yer 'Quarreller' yet?

Surely you are joking. We're on an internet forum. It's a place made for quarrelers.

Not only that, but being quarrelsome is something all of us engage in from time to time. The archetype as constructed in Proverbs is for instruction more than it is to be a label. Proverbs is a series of character stories meant to instruct on how you should not be. Labeling someone an inveterate quarreler would be like labeling an African-American a lazy, porch-sitting person snacking on fried chicken and watermelon. It would be highly, offensively stereotypical in the extreme. Are there African-Americans who engage in some of those behaviors from time to time? Sure, just like there are people from other backgrounds who do. I love a good watermelon myself ... just like I have likely been quarrelsome myself.

The point is to take the type/behavior to an extreme and illustrate and bad outcome (or the good ones in the case of the healthy archetypes) more than it is to point to actual people themselves.

a reply to: DISRAELI

And we are not in a position to choose the kind of God we would like to obey. He is either there or he isn't, like features in geography, and our personal preference is irrelevant one way or the other. 

If I ever met someone claiming to be god and they demonstrated their identity to my satisfaction, I would have three questions. How have they used their power to preserve kindess and discourage cruelty? How did they acquire the authority to operate in mysterious ways without answering to a board, supervisor, or the voting public? Why don't the citizens have proper representation and democratic ability to participate in the process of divine oversight? Mountains and rivers and trees don't make decisions so the whole geography comparison doesnt work at all. Our personal preference should absolutely be relevant to a king who values his kingdom and wishes to be honored as it's monarch. Only a foolish lord thinks himself above the will of the land, for that is the will he serves. Mayors, presidents, Kings and gods all serve the people. Until they are replaced, by due process or by force if necessary.

a reply to: TzarChasm
But if he really is what he claims to be, he doesn't need to answer your questions. The power alone would be enough to place him beyond that necessity.
Your political analogy is flawed to the point of being silly, because it belongs to a world of imperfect humans depending on other humans. My geographical analogy is trying to convey the idea of something completely independent of our own wills and preferences.