A much quoted verse in Proverbs says, "Where no counsel is, the people fall: but in the multitude of counsellors there is safety" (11:14, KJV). These words are used to teach that the Christian should entertain the advice of others while making important decisions; some use them to justifying their attempts to impose their rather half-witted suggestions on their victims. Although, as the NIV translates it,1 the verse refers more to warfare than personal decision-making, few would perceive the principle as completely inapplicable. Besides, at least one other verse in Proverbs restates the teaching seemingly without limiting it to warfare: "Plans fail for lack of counsel, but with many advisers they succeed" (15:22).
This is not to say that believers should heed suggestions from others without discrimination. Psalm 1 begins thus: "Blessed is the man who does not walk in the counsel of the wicked or stand in the way of sinners or sit in the seat of mockers" (v. 1). Or, to make the parallelism in the verse explicit:
Blessed is the man
who does not
(1) walk in the counsel of the wicked
or
(2) stand in the way of sinners
or
(3) sit in the seat of mockers.
Although I do not object to taking the three marked phrases as roughly equivalent, something may be said for the understanding that they illustrate the progressive stages of wickedness into which one who strays from God enters. With each stage, the ungodly becomes more resolute and his hostility against righteousness increases.
The path toward apostasy and perdition begins when one heeds "the counsel of the wicked." This is sufficient to restrict the application of the two verses from Proverbs cited above. While we should pay attention to advice from others, the Bible excludes ungodly counsel, and states that the righteous man shuns such.
The counsel of the wicked is at times explicit and graphic:
My son, if sinners entice you, do not give in to them. If they say, "Come along with us; let's lie in wait for someone's blood, let's waylay some harmless soul; let's swallow them alive, like the grave, and whole, like those who go down to the pit; we will get all sorts of valuable things and fill our houses with plunder; throw in your lot with us, and we will share a common purse" – my son, do not go along with them, do not set foot on their paths; for their feet rush into sin, they are swift to shed blood (Proverbs 1:10-16).
We expect those who call themselves Christians to know not to follow this type of invitations, although we are almost just as often surprised in this regard. The distorted gospel message preached by many today must be blamed for the large number of false converts in our churches. Still, even some unbelievers refuse to follow criminals.
Not all ungodly counsel is as obviously adverse to biblical faith. Beginning from any non-Christian a priori or telos, any valid process of reasoning results in proposals that are questionable. We may obtain several examples from Jeffrey J. Fox's How to Become CEO,2 in which the author gives a number of "rules for rising to the top of any organization."
One refreshing aspect of this book is its break from corporate common sense. "Common sense" is overrated. One often hears the exclamation, "That's just common sense!" But this is often why the proposed course of action ought not to be followed. In ordinary usage, the term means "sound practical judgment that is independent of specialized knowledge, training, or the like; normal native intelligence."3 But I am both delighted and amused to find my definition of "common sense" in Merriam-Webster: "the unreflective opinions of ordinary people; sound and prudent but often unsophisticated judgment."4
Based on either definition of the term, I object to the popular notion, affirmed even among some theologians, that the Book of Proverbs is a compilation of "common sense" sayings. Some say that much of Proverbs, or even other parts of Scripture, is just "plain common sense," as if this is an argument for their hearers to follow the Bible. But to how many people is it common sense to think, "The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom, and knowledge of the Holy One is understanding" (Proverbs 9:10)? Even professing Christians fail to understand that devotion to God must begin and permeate the pursuit of wisdom and knowledge.
In our day, common sense rejects the very notion that, "Folly is bound up in the heart of a child…" (Proverbs 22:15). The verse teaches human depravity, that foolishness is "bound up" even in the hearts of those supposedly least corrupted by evil. But contemporary common sense tells us that everyone, and especially the child, is born innocent and inherently good. This anti-biblical premise results in curriculums that maximize the child's self-expression instead of self-discipline. A Christian philosophy of education must emphasize verbal instructions and moral excellence, not student participation and unbridled creativity.
And surely, if the child is inherently innocent and good, physical punishment constitutes abuse and not discipline. Thus, a denial of the first portion of Proverbs 22:15 also necessitates a rejection of the second part: "Folly is bound up in the heart of a child, but the rod of discipline will drive it far from him." It follows that Proverbs 13:24, 23:13-14, and 29:15 are all discarded as false and primitive: "He who spares the rod hates his son, but he who loves him is careful to discipline him"; "Do not withhold discipline from a child; if you punish him with the rod, he will not die. Punish him with the rod and save his soul from death"; "The rod of correction imparts wisdom, but a child left to himself disgraces his mother."
The Bible is opposed to what sinful man thinks. Proverbs, as with the rest of Scripture, does not teach common sense – it teaches against it. By both definitions of the term, the Bible rejects common sense – "normal native intelligence" has been crippled by the noetic effects of sin, and no Christian believes that the Bible teaches "the unreflective opinions of ordinary people." The Scripture is divine verbal revelation, not common sense.
However, even without the religious objection, "normal native intelligence" does not always arrive at the same conclusions, although a naïve consensus is often reached by a majority. Fox suggests several rules that deviate from the common sense of corporate culture, and for this I applaud him. For example, "Don't have a drink with the gang," "Skip all office parties," "Don't take work home from the office," "Avoid superiors when you travel," and "Eat in your hotel room" seem to differ from much of conventional wisdom. Fox himself is successful in terms of his career, and assuming that he follows his own principles, his example shows that skipping all office parties does not doom one to corporate oblivion.
Under "Study these books,"5 I am glad to find Webster's Third Unabridged Dictionary and the Bible, although it is likely that the latter is included only to enhance one's moral and cultural awareness, rather than to be revered as divine revelation. The Art of War is superior to other contemporary secular works, and I know there is The Art of War for Executives.6 To read Machiavelli's The Prince is at least more cultured than Who Moved My Cheese?7
However, our purpose is to discover whether his suggestions, despite their seemingly non-religious and non-moral nature, escape the designation, "the counsel of the wicked." Right way, one questions whether The Art of War and The Prince may be applied to business in accordance with biblical principles. Take as another example, "Always take the job that offers the most money." Fox gives several reasons that commend such a rule:
First, all of your benefits, perquisites, bonuses, and subsequent raises will be based on your salary. . . Second, the higher paid you are, the more visible to top management you will be. . . Fourth, if two people are candidates for a promotion to a job. . . the higher paid person always gets the job. . .8
Let us assume that all the reasons he provides are true, but they support the rule in question only if a certain purpose or goal is presupposed. If this aim is not derivable from biblical revelation, then what Fox proposes here cannot be consistent with the Christian perspective.
It may be said that Fox is not trying to write a religious book, and thus only assumes what should be the case in a business environment. However, this point carries little relevance for the Christian, since his faith commits him to obeying the Scripture in every aspect of his life. Therefore, before he understands the teleology of work as prescribed in the Bible, he cannot tell if "Always take the job that offers the most money" applies to him. It may be true that one should take the job that offers the most money once the Christian concerns have been considered, but then the principle can no longer remain as stated by Fox, but must be modified accordingly.
Even Christians have produced the kind of books here examined, and in such cases they do not let the Scripture control their thinking as they write. Since they are only writing about business, it may seem inappropriate to bring religious presuppositions to the discussion; however, when they do without biblical premises, they inevitably allow another set of presuppositions to dominate the content. If career success is the highest aim in one's system of thought, then his social and spiritual practices would reflect such a teleology. However, if the knowledge of God is supreme, that all subsidiary categories are dominated and permeated by theological presuppositions.
It is impossible to write a neutral book on business or any other subject; it will either be a Christian or non-Christian book. Fox's book therefore comes under the category of "the counsel of the wicked." Although it does not advocate crime or blatant lewdness, it at least attempts to be religiously neutral. Knowledgeable Christians may find several suggestions in there that may be useful after some modifications, but most believers cannot be sure which rules are consistent with Scripture and which are not.
Those who "walk in the counsel of the wicked" soon begin to "stand in the way of sinners" (v. 1) As one entertains or follows ideas antagonistic to the Christian faith, he begins to travel the same path as the sinners. His sympathy for their way of life becomes greater and greater, so that he now stands with the wicked. When he finally "[sits] in the seat of mockers" (v. 1), he has fully joined himself to unrighteousness. He now has a place at their table. More than pursuing the path of wickedness, he is now one of the "mockers" who scorn the things of God, despising those who expound and follow his precepts.
Such is the road to perdition, and it begins with heeding ungodly counsel. Most professing Christians "walk in the counsel of the wicked" daily, but many also "stand in the way of sinners" and "sit in the seat of mockers" without realizing it, perhaps partly due to self-deception. One who pays lip service to the Bible may nevertheless affirm and follow the unrighteous counsel of non-Christians, and mock those who speak and act in accordance with Scripture.
The fall from righteousness begins from admiration and respect toward ungodly thinking, and ends in intimate fellowship with the wicked. Derek Kidner writes,
Counsel, way and seat. . . draw attention to the realms of thinking, behaving and belonging, in which a person's fundamental choice of allegiance is made and carried through. . . the three complete phrases show three aspects, indeed three degrees, of departure from God, by portraying conformity to this world at three different levels: accepting its advice, being party to its ways, and adopting the most fatal of its attitudes – for the scoffers, if not the most scandalous of sinners, are the farthest from repentance. . . 9
With this excellent summary, we proceed to the next verse.
One might expect, with the structure and content of the previous verse being what they are, that verse 2 may contrast the counsel, behavior, and fellowship of the righteous, godly, and reverent against what has been said in verse 1. Rather, it says, "But his delight is in the law of the LORD, and on his law he meditates day and night."
The Psalm moves immediately to the law of the Lord. This warns us that, "Plans fail for lack of counsel, but with many advisers they succeed" (Proverbs 15:22) does not demand many human counselors. In fact, Psalm 119:24 says, "Your statutes are my delight; they are my counselors." Proverbs 15:22 still applies to human counselors, but they must be bound by the precepts of God.
Whereas there is an ultimate authority for all Christians, namely, the whole of Scripture, there is no such unifying principle from which comes all secular philosophies. The first principles of non-Christian systems oppose one another; their thinking is in utter confusion.
As we have observed, the turn to wicked living begins from sinful thinking, and so verse 2 addresses the issue at its fundamental level when it says of the righteous man that, "his delight is in the law of the LORD, and on his law he meditates day and night." To "delight" in the law of God is to think on it "day and night"; one whose thinking is not permeated with Scripture cannot claim to love the word of God. Spurgeon writes, "Perhaps some of you can claim a sort of negative purity, because you do not walk in the way of the ungodly; but let me ask you – Is your delight in the law of God? Do you study God's Word? Do you make it the man of your right hand – your best companion and hourly guide?"10
To "meditate" on the Scripture means to think on it, to ponder its meaning and implication. Although the word can mean "to mutter; to make sound with the mouth,"11 it does not require the translation, "murmurs his law day and night" (NJB). The GNT says that the righteous "study it day and night." The idea to be stressed is the intellect's contemplation of divine revelation, whether it is spoken aloud or not. To quote Kidner again, "The mind was the first bastion to defend, in verse 1, and is treated as the key to the whole man. . . The psalm is content to develop this one theme, implying that whatever really shapes a man's thinking shapes his life."12
We can see this in God's command to Joshua: "Do not let this Book of the Law depart from your mouth; meditate on it day and night, so that you may be careful to do everything written in it. Then you will be prosperous and successful" (Joshua 1:8). His instruction for raising children is also similar: "These commandments that I give you today are to be upon your hearts. Impress them on your children. Talk about them when you sit at home and when you walk along the road, when you lie down and when you get up" (Deuteronomy 6:6-7).
Knowledge comes before practice and application, and repetition reinforces God's precepts on the mind. This has always been the way of the righteous: "Reflect on what I am saying, for the Lord will give you insight into all this" (2 Timothy 2:7). What distinguishes the wicked and the righteous? The former heed ungodly counsel, while the latter delight in and think on the Scripture. This basic difference in the thoughts divides the two groups. Verses 5-6 say, "Therefore the wicked will not stand in the judgment, nor sinners in the assembly of the righteous. For the LORD watches over the way of the righteous, but the way of the wicked will perish."
Professing Christians may perform many good works in the name of Christ, but their thoughts betray them; "the Lord looks at the heart" (1 Samuel 16:7). Contemporary Christianity, an aberrant version of the true faith, seeks to minimize the relevance of one's theological position; only love and unity are important. But the Bible says our thoughts define us, and it is the starting point from which the totality of our lives is derived. Therefore, let those who profess the name of Christ cease whoring after the wisdom of this world, and press the irreconcilable antithesis between the biblical worldview and all secular systems.
The reader may still be concerned that, if all non-Christian counsel is wicked, then one cannot trust his physician, or even a car owner's manual. I will answer this with a personal example. A dentist told me that I had cavities, but several minutes later another one came in and said that I did not. Did I have cavities? If I had obtained a third opinion, there was no guarantee that a fourth dentist would have agreed with the third. And this was supposed to be a simple problem. Anything short of divine revelation is at best uncertain, and a non-Christian premise or teleology will compel a non-Christian conclusion. On the other hand, the way of the righteous is the Reformation motto, sola Scriptura - the Scripture alone.
Endnotes: