Proverbs 3:27 is part of a cluster of Proverbs. The larger section is 3:21-35  and the subsection is 3:27-32. A literal translation of Hebrew is found in the Geneva Bible, “Withholde not the good from the owners thereof, thogh there be power in thine hand to do it.” Other translations render מִבְּעָלָ֑יו not as “from the owners thereof” but as “those to whom it is due” (NKJV [cf. KJV], RSV, NRSV. ESV, NIV11, NASB, LSB) or “from the one to whom it belongs” (CSB, cf. HCSB).  

Matthew Poole understands this to refer to “from those who have any kind of right to it,” and he includes in this a moral right of those who are in need to receive relief from their “real want or misery” (Annotations, 2:219). John Gill likewise observes that “rich men are not so much proprieters of good things as they are God’s almoners or stewards to distribute to the poor,” whom God has deemed the owners of these gifts (Exposition of the Old Testament, 4:350). Van Leeuwen concludes, “Humans have a general claim on certain things that their humanity entitles them to. Life, food, shelter, and dignity are among the most obvious of these things essential to our humanness” (NIB, 55). Garrett broadens the referent to include not only the poor but also “laborers who have earned their pay” and those who have loaned money and deserve to be repaid” (NAC, 84). Kitchen, on the other hand, would narrow the referent to those who are owed wages (Mentor, 90). Schipper also rejects the application to “a needy or poor person” but instead argues the verse “would call for the addressee to remit that which belongs to another person (debts, taxes?) insofar as one is in the position to do so” (Herm., 1:157-58). 

Waltke observes that this verse indicates that some people have “a moral claim upon your assistance” (NICOT, 1:267). He draws upon Fox who indicates the “owner” “is one who possesses something by right” even if he “does not currently hold them item” (AB, 1:164). These include the enemy whose donkey has fallen down (Ex. 23:40) or the widow or orphan gleaning in the field (Dt. 24:19), but it does not include “the sluggard (cf. 19:24; 2 Thess. 3:10, 12), the leech (Prov. 30:15), and the pampered servant (29:21)” (NICOT, 1:267). Regarding the former, Fox observes, “Such moral claims and their corresponding duties are essential to the cohesion and sound working of society, perhaps even more so than acts of mercy and kindness” (AB, 1:165). 

The final phrase, “when it is in your power to do it” pushes the interpretation away from that which is strictly owed (since debts must be remitted whether one has the money at hand to do so or not) and toward the idea of those with means having obligations to others who are in need. In context, it likely includes employers being generous in their wages, especially toward poor workers. Verse 28 would push in this direction since it parallels commands in the Mosaic law designed to protect poor workers from having their wages withheld. It also fits with Proverbs 3:31 in which the “oppressor” (KJV, NKJV) or “man of violence” (RSV, ESV, NASB, LSB; cf. NIV, CSB, CEB) is not to be envied (presumably for the wealth that his oppression generated).

Place in the structure of Proverbs 3: Exhortation to the son (3:1–12), Personified wisdom (3:13–20), Exhortation to the son (3:21–35).

Links with Proverbs 3:1–12. There are numerous connections between these verses and the previous address to the son. The concern with length of days/life and peace in 3:2 is picked up in 3:17-18. The language of ways and paths (though a different Hebrew word for the latter) in 3:6 is picked up in 3:17. The promise that wisdom leads to wealth in 3:10 (cf. 3:8) is qualified in 3:14-15 (but not denied, cf. 3:16).

Proverbs 3:13–20 as a textual unit. Blessed forms an inclusio around 3:13-18. Blessed is the first word of 3:13 and the last word of 3:18. Wisdom and understanding begin the section in v. 13 and are the key words in v. 19 (with knowledge being added in v. 20).

Eternal life in Proverbs 3:13–20.  In 13–20, the terminology of blessedness, ways, and tree link this section to Psalm 1. The reference to the tree of life link this section to Genesis 1–2. These intertextual connections and the superlatives “nothing you desire can compare with her” indicates that the “long life” of verse 16 (and the “tree of life” in v. 18) should be read as a reference to eternal life.

Long life, shalom, and eternal life (a tree of life), is given by wisdom to the one who finds her. Verses 19-20 explain that this is because wisdom is built into the fabric of creation. Getting wisdom is thus like a return to Eden. It is living life as God intended and is therefore life-giving. This is not earning salvation by works, since the beginning of wisdom is fear of Yhwh (=faith).

On the significance of riches and honor in 16b. In light of the foregoing, it seems best to understand the riches and honor of verse 16b as riches and honor obtained in the new creation. (Though, under the Mosaic covenant, some riches and honor may have been typologically enjoyed in the present.) I don’t know if it would be over-reading the text to note that long (=eternal) life is in the right hand while riches and honor are in the left hand. Eternal life is of greater importance while riches and honor are significant blessings, but not as important as eternal life.

Is personified wisdom the Son or creational norms?

Steinmann wants to see wisdom in these verses as the Son. In favor of this is the idea that those who get wisdom get eternal life. 

However, Proverbs 3:13–20 speaks not only of wisdom (which is personified in the book) but also of understanding and knowledge (which are not personified in Proverbs). Nor is wisdom personified in this passage, though this passage does have affinities with the passages in which wisdom is personified.  

Furthermore, wisdom, understanding, and knowledge all have senses that have been established by previous usage in the book. God communicates them to humans through words (2:6). A person can have his own understanding and be wise in his own eyes (3:5, 7).  

Wisdom is something the son is looking for and supposed to find. The preceding context is clear that it is a certain character, not a divine person that is being sought.

Thus, it is better to understand 3:19-20 as indicating that the creation was made by means of Yhwh’s wisdom, understanding, and knowledge. That being the case, Yhwh’s wisdom, understanding, and knowledge is baked into the created order. Personified wisdom in Proverbs refers to the created order, not to the Son.

This does not mean, however, that the Son is absent from these passages. He is the Creator who built wisdom into the creation. He is Son who is greater than Solomon in His wisdom. 

How, then, does getting wisdom relate to eternal life and blessedness? I think “tree of life in the context of Proverbs” refers not to initial regeneration but to living as a person with new life. To find wisdom of to find the way God made his world to work, and that makes life run right. Living according to creational norms = living according to God’s law = eternal life. However, Proverbs, though closely connected to the Mosaic covenant is not a works covenant. Because the beginning of Wisdom is fear of the Lord (= faith) the entrance onto the path of wisdom is faith. The emphasis of Proverbs, however, is the walk on that path.

 The life and length of days and shalom that Solomon’s teaching will give to his son is ultimately eternal life. This is why they are to be bound to the person and written on the heart, an allusion to Deuteronomy’s prediction of the new covenant in Deuteronomy 30.

However, these verses are not teaching that obedience to the law leads to eternal life. Rather vv. 5-8 make it clear that it is trusting in Yhwh will all of one’s heart and knowing him in all of one’s ways, and fear Yhwh rather than being wise in one’s own eyes that enables walking according to the divine commandments.

Verses 11-12 reveal that the obedience of such a person will not be perfect, for Yhwh will need to discipline and reprove. Thus, this passage really is presenting eternal life though faith alone, but not a faith that is alone.

Regarding the promises of heath and wealth in these verses: though there may be some experience of these as a result of living wisely in this life, they are ultimately looking toward eternity.

Waltke	Steinmann	Schipper
3:1-12	3:1-20	3:1-12
3:13-35	3:21-35	3:13-20
		3:21-35

In favor of Waltke and Schipper, 3:1-12 has a unified structure that sets it apart from what follows. In favor of Steinmann, the “my son” address does not reoccur until v. 21. Steinmann treats 3:1-12 and 3:13-20 as two subsections under 3:1-20. On the other hand, Schipper’s structure does seem to divide the text naturally. It may be that 3:1-12 and 3:21-35 are addresses to the son. The other kind of material in Proverbs 1-9, other than the introductory statement in 1:1-7, are addresses by Wisdom herself. Though 3:13-20 is not an address of Wisdom, it contains many affinities to these addresses, especially the one in chapter 8. If it is associated with those Wisdom addresses, it could be classified as its own section here.

Bruce Waltke writes of the reference to land in these verses:

Were this the law and the prophets, it would undoubtedly refer to the LORD’s land grants to his covenant people in Canaan. But in the wisdom literature, which treats humanity apart from Israel’s historic covenants, ‘eres more likely refers to the ground in general with its fatness (Gen. 27:28), in- crease (Lev. 26:4, 20), and fruit (Num. 13:20); as such it is a metonymy for life.83 The good earth stands in striking contrast to the grave with the dead (2:18-19). [Waltke, NICOT, 1:234]

Walkte’s rationale for distinguishing this passage from the law and the prophets is not sound. Verse 16 referred to the Jewish adulteress (note that v. 17 refers to the true God as her God) as a foreign woman (using two different terms for foreign) as a way to indicate that her adultery was contrary to the covenant expectations that marked out the Israelites. Given this context, the reference to the land should be seen as a link between Proverbs and the Law and the Prophets. This does not mean that the connection between land and life is incorrect. The land promises anticipated eternal life in the land.

Bered Schipper is more correct when he’s sees clear connections between this passage and Deuteronomy (something that characterizes these opening chapters in Proverbs):

These people are now told that they will inhabit (שׁכן) the land or “remain” (יתר niphal) in it. It was noted above … that the topic of dwelling in the land is a central part of Deuteronom(ist)ic theology (see Deut 4:1; 5:16; 25:15; and 2:22: Commentary).121 If Israel keeps the commandments, it may dwell in the land (cf. Exod 20:12). [Schipper, Herm., 120]

He also notes connections to the prophets:

the combination of the verb יתר niphal (“to remain”) and the preposition בְּ (“in”), which also occurs in Isa 4:3 and Ezek 14:22.122 Both of these texts connect the verb יתר niphal (“to remain”) with the concept of the “remnant” of Israel. The statement in Prov 2:21 is also similar to Isa 60:21, where the “righteous” (צַדִּיקִים) are promised that they will possess the land (ירשׁ אֶרֶץ) in perpetuity.123 Thus, it is quite possible that Prov 2:21 contains eschatological overtones, as has sometimes been suggested. [Schipper, Herm., 120]

Proverbs 2 consists de facto of a single sentence that can be divided into six smaller units. The text has a conditional structure that, following the invocation “my son” (בְּנִי), begins with a protasis introduced by אִם (“if”), followed by two apodoses and three concluding statements, the first two of which have an identical structure, being introduced by the preposition לְ (“to”) and an infinitive of the verb נצל hiphil (“to save”). The last concluding statement constitutes the focal point   p 103  of the text; it is introduced by לְמַעַן (“so that”) and contains a justification introduced by כִּי (“for”):

(I)	vv. 1–4	Protasis (introduced by אִם, “if”)
(II)	vv. 5–8	First apodosis (introduced by אָז, “then”)
(III)	vv. 9–11	Second, shorter apodosis (also introduced by אָז, “then”)
(IV)	vv. 12–15	First purpose (introduced by לְהַצִּילְךָ, “in order to save you”; לְ + inf.)
(V)	vv. 16–19	Second purpose (introduced by לְהַצִּילְךָ, “in order to save you”)
(VI)	vv. 20–22	Concluding statement, introduced by לְמַעַן (“so that”) and followed by a justification introduced by כִּי (“for”)

Bernd U. Schipper, Proverbs 1–15 (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2019), 102–103.

The ESV obscures the parallelism of verses 12 and 16 with its translation of verse 12. It also translates כִּ֤י as for in v. 18, which does not make good sense.

The LSB translates כִּ֤י consistently as for, which does not make good sense in vv. 3 and 18.

The NIV 2011 does the best job of translating כִּ֤י, in this chapter, recognizing when for is the best translation (vv. 6, 10, 22) and when indeed or surely make better sense (vv. 3, 18, respectively).

These opening verses of Proverbs 2 clearly link to Proverbs 1:20–33. The father calls on the son to receive his words (2:1, אֵ֫מֶר), and words (1:23, דָּבָר) are what wisdom speaks (1:21, אמר) and offers to those who turn at her reproof. It is Wisdom who cries out in 1:20-33, and it is to wisdom that the son is to make his “ear attentive” in 2:2). In 1:24 Wisdom “stretched out” [נטה] her hand, “and no one … heeded.” In 2:2 the son is instructed to incline [נטה] his heart to understanding. Wisdom cried out [קרא] to the simple (1:21, 24), and the son is told to “call out [קרא] for insight.” The simple called to Wisdom after the calamity that resulted from not heeding wisdom came upon them (1:28), but the son is to call to Wisdom ahead of time in 2:3. Wisdom raised her voice in calling to the simple (1:20), and the son is to raise his voice in calling for understanding (1:3). In 1:28 those who seek Wisdom only after rejecting her and suffering calamity will not find wisdom, but in 2:4, the son is encouraged to seek for wisdom as silver. Note the prologue’s link between the simple and the youth. The son as a youth is starting off simple, but he can become wise if he does what 2:1-4 lay out for him.

Notice also that Proverbs 2:5–11 contains numerous verbal connections with Proverbs 1:1–7.

Proverbs 2:12–16 looks back to Proverbs 1:8–19. Wisdom will deliver the son from the kind of men warned about there. Proverbs 2:17–19 looks forward to the forbidden woman who will be warned about in Proverbs 5–7.

Proverbs 2 is thus a key hinge chapter in the opening of the book.

“I will pour out my mind to you” (Geneva Bible)

“I will pour out my spirit to you” (ESV)

“I will pour out my thoughts to you” (NIV 2011)

The key debate is whether, if they respond to wisdom, there is held out a promise that I will pour out my Spirit to you, or whether it simply refers to my ‘thoughts’ (NIV) or spirit (ESV). The main clue is in the use of the words pour out, a different verb from the one in Joel 2:28. It is used eleven times in the OT, all but one in Psalms and Proverbs, and the overwhelming image is of pouring out words or what comes out of the mouth (Pss 19:2; 59:7; 78:2; 94:4; 119:171; 145:7; Prov. 15:2, 28; 18:4). [Wilson, TOTC, 69]

Wilson’s observation combined with the parallel to “I will make my words known to you” and with the fact that ל is more naturally translated to (rather than upon) argues for a translation like, “I will utter to you my mind.” (See Geneva Bible for the translation mind and Ps. 78:2 for the translation utter.”)