The words of the king who belongs to God, the oracle which his mother taught him.
-Prov. 31:1
Which his mother taught him. Based on subject matter, this was the teaching of a woman given to a son old enough to consider the topics of wantonness, alcoholic debauchery, law, justice, and rights advocacy. It is teaching given to save a king and kingdom from the particularly intricate temptations of politics backed by wealth. [1] These are the common temptations of rich men experiencing masculine peer influence. The king’s mother turns his eyes in an entirely different direction. She has stated what’s common to man and the social problems it causes, and she’s about to give the way of escape.
Do not give your strength to women,
Or your ways to that which destroys kings.
It is not for kings [belonging to God],
It is not for kings to drink wine,
Or for rulers to desire strong drink,
For they will drink and forget what is decreed,
And pervert the rights of all the afflicted.
“Lemuel” simply means “belonging to God,” so we can consider a generic rendering of “the king belonging to God.” [2] If a man is the king of his castle — and let’s concede that fully and freely for the purposes of this study — that makes this passage directly profitable to him. (Y’all know if I say something like that, the concession involves an unexpected whupping of somebody’s smug presuppositions right around soon.)
“Strength” in the original language here also refers to valour, resources and/or virtue, and carries a figurative connotation, not merely one of sharing generic power or physical ability. (Cf. Eccl. 10:10 for an alternate figurative use regarding wisdom, subtlety and achieving success the easy way or the hard.) We might note that “excellent wife” (Prov. 31:10) is alternately rendered “virtuous woman,” creating a parallel between her nature and the qualities the king is to protect within himself. The queen mother says, “Do not fritter away your financial resources, your virtue, or your ethical courage by digressing into exploitative relationships with the opposite sex.”
What is the king’s mother trying to teach him about the role of women? And why is it proverbial, when it could so easily stand as a more literal hortatory? How literally should we read it? Does it mean to say women should strive to work at a home-based subsistence lifestyle for the sake of frugality and family independence? What about the sewing, the weaving, the food growing, the cottage industry? The devoting all her dreams and accomplishments to her husband’s gain, all the days of her life? The late nights with the frugally-trimmed lamp, and the rising while it’s still dark in unsleeping zeal for her homemaking tasks?
Let’s back up to the verse immediately preceding all those we know so well, the verse which sets the tone for everything that follows:
Open your mouth, judge righteously, And defend the rights of the afflicted and needy. (Prov. 31:9)
Wait, what? That’s a command to the king.
Does anybody think about that?
It is not for kings to engage in a lifestyle which causes them to forget what’s decreed in Torah, and so become the agency of widespread oppression. It is for kings to speak for all those who cannot, to uphold the rights of those disproportionately disadvantaged — afflicted, needy. And those who are beset by sin, in need of righteous temporal judgement. Open your mouth, judge righteously, and defend the rights of the afflicted and needy.
How?
What follows is a treatise on the vital importance of empowered women — a recognized sociological force at the forefront of international development today. Though unfortunately adulterated by socialist policy, globalism and politically charged sexuality re-education initiatives on many fronts, the drive of international feminism to garner awareness and respect for the role of women as key players in social stability and justice is a proven factor in salvaging undeveloped societies. Where the men will digress into wantonness, drunkenness and partying with their peers, the women bring stability through their relational and nurturing focus.
It’s a factor that was acknowledged by the Bible sometime around 1000 BCE, during Israel’s development as a nascent nation. That’s what we’re looking at here.
Open your mouth, judge righteously, and defend the rights of the afflicted and needy. An excellent woman, who can find? For her worth is far above the best of your financial treasury.
I believe a proverbially-inclined king also wrote that there is nothing new under the sun. What today’s feminism struggles to actuate, the king’s mother advocates as the most efficient and effective route to establishing a nation, if the king will defend the right of women to do their own work in their own unique way. The king sets the course of action for the men of the nation — an ongoing problem in developing countries, where the advances of women are often torn down by the greed of men who do not respect their rights. Where law enforcement and the judiciary intercede on behalf of stabilizing forces, peace and security have a chance to grow.
At the same time, identitarian feminist views — that men and women are the same, and distinguished only by culturally-perpetrated gender roles — take a major knock on the head from this timeless recognition, while complementarianism stands validated by the very feminism which so despises its doctrine. It’s just not American fundamentalist complementarianism, as it turns out, any more than it’s secular feminism. This is God’s womanhood, unique and powerful, full of faith and freedom. The ultimate national treasure.
The women of a nation far outnumber one man upon the throne. And we were made for this, as we shall see.
~
The words of King Lemuel, the oracle which his mother taught him:
What, O my son?
And what, O son of my womb?
And what, O son of my vows?
Do not give your strength to women,
Or your ways to that which destroys kings.
It is not for kings, O Lemuel,
It is not for kings to drink wine,
Or for rulers to desire strong drink,
For they will drink and forget what is decreed,
And pervert the rights of all the afflicted.
Give strong drink to him who is perishing,
And wine to him whose life is bitter.
Let him drink and forget his poverty
And remember his trouble no more.
Open your mouth for the mute,
For the rights of all the unfortunate.
Open your mouth, judge righteously,
And defend the rights of the afflicted and needy.
-Prov. 31:1-9
—–
Footnotes
[1] Note the opening scenario of Esther, the court feasts described in Daniel 5, and the inroads made into the life and culture of the Israeli leadership by foreign marriage and the paradigms brought into their households by that route.
[2] Jewish rendering gives him as the king “at Massa,” which would make him an Ishmaelite (Gen. 25:13-15). [Thanks to Laurie M. for bringing that to light.] The place name is an alternate reading for the word translated “oracle,” and may be intended at the beginning of chapter 30 as well in reference to Agur.
Thank you for this. The more I learn about historical Protestant theology, I find that the Republican/Victorian/conservative Fundamentalism that is so commonly associated with “Christianity” has no biblical ground to stand on. I hope this will help me be a more loving husband and a better father.
I do disagree with your “If a man is the king of his castle” thing. This passage isn’t a parable or allegory where the king = every– Oh, I get it!
Sneaky…
It’s so typical of fundamentalism to brainwash everyone into believing the qualities of the king’s wife in the second half of the chapter are required of all women but the requirements of the king are not binding on all men. Quite a double-standard (although fundamentalists are non-drinkers and probably use the king of the castle thing to justify their man-made rules…).
Aaron, welcome here. Just had a look at your blog–interesting points about modern Calvinism versus historic Reformed.
Sneaky on the flipside: If the man wants to be Da King, maybe he should respect his wife as much as this passage suggests, and give her as much freedom and protection as it demonstrates, rather than using her like a second-class indentured labourer. There’s an increasing amount of blogging going on by women who are functionally refugees of fundamentalist abuse, from the emotional and spiritual through the spectrum of physical violence.
I have just started reading this series. Did you know that the Babylonian Talmud identifies Lemuel as one of the names of Solomon? Wouldn’t that be awesome if it turns out to be true? How different is this Bathsheba, daughter of the oath, is from the adulteress who was immodestly bathing and creating a temptation for the great King David. The very first verse seems to be in contrast to the most extreme teachings about the role of women. The oracle — the words of HaShem, Adonia, LORD, YHVH, God — taught to a king by his mother, presumably female. Women can teach God’s word.
I had never connected this first part of Proverbs 31 to the part about the role of women until just a few years ago. When I did… I decided that the Proverbs 31 woman isn’t real at all. She is Plato’s form, an abstract perfect dream-girl that a mother might wish to have her son find. I am not an abstract; I am a real person. I have gifts and talents that I am commanded to develop. And, yes, in this season of my life, I am developing my gifts and talents while staying home with my littles.