One and none is all one. - Glenn Conjurske

One and none is all one.

These two proverbs appear to stand in direct contradiction to each other, yet they are both true, and both wise. They are, indeed, both excellent proverbs. Anyone who had a mind to it might compile numerous such pairs of proverbs, which apparently contradict each other, and all of them true and wise. No proverb is of universal application. Each is true in that sphere to which it applies, or on that side of the question to which it speaks, and to press it beyond that is to make nonsense of it.

These things are true of human speech in general, and of divine speech also. The Bible is replete with one-sided statements, true in their own sphere, but altogether false if pressed too far. Most of the false doctrine in the church consists of pressing certain statements of the Bible beyond their legitimate meaning, while ignoring the scriptures which speak on the other side. “There are two sides to every question,” as another proverb speaks, and it is the way of the Bible to speak to both sides of every question—-not usually in the same context, however. We may find a plain statement of one side in Ephesians or Hebrews, while the other side will be found in an example tucked away in Numbers or First Chronicles. Shallow thinking and simple ignorance take one side without the other, and make a false doctrine of it.

We are all aware—-all of us, at any rate, who use a good translation of the Bible—-that the Bible contains at least one pair of these apparently contradictory proverbs, for we read in Proverbs 26:4, “Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him,” and in the next verse, “Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit.” Certain modern Bible-menders, the translators of the New American Standard Version, have altered the second verse to “Answer a fool as his folly deserves,” but this is folly indeed, and I trust I may be forgiven if I answer it as it deserves. These translators evidently supposed that they were the only ones on earth who knew how to think, and must therefore do all the interpreting for the rest of the race, but they have only demonstrated that they had little ability to think at all. The most salient feature in this pair of proverbs is the fact that they apparently contradict each other, that the one enjoins what the other forbids—-a fact preserved in every other version I have ever seen. This fact requires us to think, to determine the proper application of each proverb. The NASV destroys all this, by an officious meddling which thinks to be wiser than God, and which must explain everything instead of translating it.

Now it may be that there are other pairs of proverbs in the Bible which apparently contradict each other, but they do not stand next to each other. There are without doubt many plain statements which are apparently contradictory, as when we are told in one text to labor not for the meat that perisheth, and commanded in another text to labor for it. Such things require us to exercise our minds. Shallow thinking takes one side without the other, and makes something false of it.

As to the two proverbs before us, “One” may be vastly, immeasurably “better than none.” “He that findeth a wife findeth a good thing,” and he that finds one has found all, while he that finds none has nothing. How much better, for the woman who longs for motherhood, to have one child, than none. How much better to have one friend, than none. The man who is far ahead of his times—-or, which is far better in these days, far behind them—-may consider himself fortunate indeed if he has one who can understand him. How vastly superior is this to none. If the deep theologian has but one who can understand him, how satisfying this will be!—-but how alone will he be if he has none. If the deep thinker has but one who can think with him, how immeasurably better is this than to have none. If the true poet finds one who can appreciate his poetry, how much more satisfying is this, than to find none.

To descend to lower spheres, how much better for the man lost in the wilderness to have one match, than none. How much better for the hungry man to have one biscuit, than none. How much better for the thirsty man to have one cup of water, than none.

But then if he has a hundred head of cattle to water, “One and none is all one.” If we have a dollar, and need a hundred, “One and none is all one.” If we need four tires which will hold air, and have but one, “One and none is all one.” The meaning of this, by the way, is that one is all the same as none. One is as good as none. If we have but one nail with which to shoe a horse, “One and none is all one.” Two and none may be all the same also. There was a time when I was out of money, and out of almost everything else also. I was walking across a field, and found two quarters. But what could I do with fifty cents, when fifty dollars would not have sufficed? I carried those two quarters in my pocket for a week, without spending them, though we were in need of most everything. My bus, in which we were travelling, was broken down. The gas tank was empty. We were out of almost all kinds of food, and what could I do with two quarters? Two and none were all the same.

It is the application of proverbs which gives them life, and in the examples before us the reader may plainly perceive that it is the application which gives them truth. Misapplied, they will both be false. Truly applied, they are full of wisdom.

Glenn Conjurske