We return to these verses for further study. When we read these words from the perspective of a woman conducting business as a harlot, we see them as an evil plot to seduce and entrap an innocent young man. Only yesterday* I heard first-hand of an encounter that an eleven year-old boy had in his neighbor’s yard. A group of thirteen and fourteen year-old girls, using a hands-on approach, very actively attempted this same kind of enticement on the boy. He escaped and reported it to his parents. This kind of evil seduction is taking place right in some of our neighborhoods. However, consider this verse from a pure perspective that I only recently heard described by a marriage counselor on a radio program. What if a wife met her husband with the same kind of conduct as described in the above verses? Re-read them wives and imagine this as a possible approach to your husband when he arrives home. Rather than this being an attempt to lead someone to forbidden temptation, it becomes an attempt of a wife to ignite holy passion within her own marriage. Why be ravished (entranced) by a strange woman when you can be ravished with your own wife? We will address this next time as we consider Proverbs 5:15-20.

*Family Life Today broadcast of May 20, 2013 http://www.familylife.com/audio/topics/parenting/ages-and-stages/tweens/approaching-adolescence%C2%A0-what-your-preteen-needs-to-know/20130520-the-challenge-of-adolescence#.UZtX4Zz1Xkc.

It is very possible that at the conclusion of the Jerusalem Conference that Paul wrote his letter to the Galatian churches. Paul mentions the trip to Jerusalem in Galatians 2:1, and meeting James, Peter, and John (2:9). He mentioned that Titus, a Greek, was not required to be circumcised (2:3).

Galatia was not a single city but was rather the region that Paul covered during the latter part of the first missionary journey and now there were cities in that region that had churches. Paul heard that someone had come to their churches, more or less following in Paul’s tracks, and preached a different doctrine so he hastily wrote the letter of warning:

Galatians 1:6-7
6 I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:
7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.

Paul revealed the substance of the perverted gospel message in:

Galatians 3:1-3
1 O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you?
2 This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?
3 Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh?

Considering that our larger topic is what we should and should not look at, we are getting a look into something we should not. In others words, we are studying a young man who failed to restrain his eyes and therefore took the next step—entrapment by temptation. He took a long, lingering look that led to lust and loss. Here standing before him is a beautiful and seductively dressed woman who greeted him with a kiss (not of the holy type). After introducing herself with a kiss and describing herself as a religious woman—a glaring contradiction to a discerning person—she pours on the temptation by describing her bedroom and invites him to indulge his pleasures with her. Let us consider this from a poetic perspective and think of the woman as lust in general. Once a person (especially a man) takes a lengthy and lustful look at the skin-clad beauty, lust reaches out and touches and then grabs him. Notice how lust “came out to meet [him]” after looking for him. One does not have to pursue lust to be assaulted by it for it comes looking for us and offers a beautifully painted picture. The wise person considers lust not for just what may be offered as an instant gratification but also for what long-term harm that momentary gratification will lead to. Next time we will consider this verse from an entirely different and more wholesome perspective.

The conference agreed on the points suggested by James so a letter was prepared and was sent out to the Gentile churches by Paul, Barnabas, Barnabas, and Silas. The letter is recorded in Acts 15:23-29. It was taken back to Antioch and read there:

Acts 15:31 Which when they had read, they rejoiced for the consolation [encouragement].

In Paul’s letter to the Galatians which he wrote after the conference, he summarized the law the new churches should keep:

Galatians 5:14 For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

The way to love your neighbor as yourself means that we avoid adultery, fornication (basically sexual sins of all types), witchcraft, strife, murder, drunkenness, etc. (Gal 5:19-21) As you can see, the church did not do away with the Old Testament, and it is important that we clearly understand the message of the Jerusalem conference. Some have used this passage to indicate that it is no longer necessary for the New Testament church to observe teachings of the Old Testament that address issues of holy conduct or modesty. However, only that which pertained to the ritual worship forms and ceremonies was done away with as it was nailed to the cross. How could a holy God do away with holiness and separation from the world?

One of the main speakers at the Jerusalem conference had this to say about holiness:

1 Peter 1:15 But as he which hath called you is holy, so be ye holy in all manner of conversation;

That word “conversation” means behavior. Peter also said that the women in the church should use the women of the Old Testament as an example in dress:

1 Peter 3:5 For after this manner in the old time the holy women also, who trusted in God, adorned themselves, being in subjection unto their own husbands:

Our conduct and modesty of dress, and even our hair according to 1 Corinthians 11, reflect our proper subjection to the authority of the Lord over our lives.

The requirements of the peace offering are described in Leviticus 7:11-21. It is important to note that from Leviticus 7:16 that this offering was made voluntarily or as a result of the person offering the sacrifice to fulfill a vow made to the Lord. Also, in making this sacrifice of a vow to the Lord as this woman in Proverbs 7:14 said she had done, the person would offer only one part of the animal to the priest for the actual offering and would take the remainder of the animal home to eat that day or the next. The naïve young man saw two things before him. A beautiful and sexually enticing woman made an approach on him by grabbing and kissing him, and that image and act captured his eyes and ignited his passions. Secondly, as if in total contradiction to that, the woman mentioned that she had just completed a religious vow to God. In other words, she said she had just arrived home from church. While the hypocrisy of her actions and words may have been lost to this young man, we should not overlook it. If she was even telling the truth, she was saying that she had just left the temple, offered a voluntary sacrifice that indicated that she had taken a special religious effort that went beyond what was required of anyone, and now inside her house, she had this leftover meat that needed to be eaten that day. What should you do when someone makes advances on you who talks about their exceeding great spirituality yet demonstrates exceeding great carnality? Flee.

It was the final and authoritative voice of James speaking in the conference who settled the whole issue. This was James, the brother of Jesus who spoke up after Paul and Barnabas had had their say. James offered that the only law that the Gentiles needed to be concerned with was this:

Acts 15:19-20
19 Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God:
20 But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood.
James said that the Gentiles who were saved should not be burdened with the requirement of keeping the ordinances of the ceremonial law, but only required to keep the moral law. The moral law forbid participation in immorality and separated them from idolatry which was a very big issue in that day. James had spoken with the clarity and authority of Jesus Himself, a message that solved the crisis and satisfied everyone.

Acts 15:22 Then pleased it the apostles and elders, with the whole church, to send chosen men of their own company to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas; namely, Judas surnamed Barsabas, and Silas, chief men among the brethren:

A letter was composed that bore the message that James came up with and was to be personally delivered to the new Gentle congregations. The letter is recorded in Acts 15:24-29. Verse 28 contains a summary:

Acts 15:28 For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things;

With those necessary things set forth in writing, the circumcision controversy was settled.

The first major controversy, the racial tension that existed when some widows were neglected in food distribution, had been settled by prayer and open discussion.  This second controversy was likewise settled by prayer and open discussion.

We looked at this verse last time but will look at it again with a focus on the “attire of an harlot.” Our first impression of a person is influenced mostly by their appearance and speech.  John T. Molloy released a book in 1988 (Warner Bros.) called, “Dress for Success.” On page 2 of his introduction, Molloy revealed the results of years of research: “The way we dress has a remarkable impact on the people we meet professionally or socially, and greatly (sometimes crucially) affects how they treat us.” Depending on what kind of endeavor you are seeking to be successful in, you can dress in such a manner that will help move you toward that goal. If your goal is to get hired at your favorite business firm, you might want to wear a nice dress suit. A person wearing a nice suit will have a first impression advantage over someone who is dressed in flip flops, pajama pants, and a faded and holy t-shirt. On the other hand, a woman who dresses seductively gives a first impression of intent to seduce. We find that the woman in today’s verse definitely had that intent. Her manner of dress, speech and actions, made her intentions very plain and she was treated in a manner consistent with her dress. While this woman intended to seduce men—that was her profession—what we wear also influences how people treat us. A godly and caring person will not only think of their own personal comfort when they pick out their clothes, but will also consider how their appearance can affect others.

We are listening to the voices that spoke at the Jerusalem conference and we find the same sentiment that was expressed by Paul also taught in Hebrews which some believe was written by James, the Lord’s brother. He said the purpose of the ordinances of the old covenant were shadows of things to come:

Hebrews 9:9-12
9 Which was a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience;
10 Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation.
11 But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building;
12 Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.

The sacrifices were done away with; the dietary laws were done away with; the required washings were done away with; and carnal ordinances were done away with. None of these things “could not make [them] perfect” and were done away with by the one-time shedding of Jesus’ blood. They were a figure, or model of things to come, a shadow of the real thing. But when the perfect one came, the model was no longer needed. When the real Thing was before them, who needed the shadow?

Peter

When we look at Peter’s response, we get an idea of what was being referred to by the Law of Moses:

Acts 15:10-11
10 Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?
11 But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they.

Peter referred to a part of the law that even the disciples were not “able to bear”. He was not in favor of putting that additional “yoke” on the neck of the disciples who had been saved by Jesus Christ. Jesus had delivered them from the yoke of bondage.

More from Paul

In his letter to the Colossians, Paul gave an explanation of what Law of Moses Jesus had done away with.

Colossians 2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.

Traditions of men as well as certain ordinances were removed:

Colossians 2:14, 16
14 Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;
16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:

Jesus nailed to His cross and blotted out the Old Testament ordinances which forbid eating certain things (as Peter also learned in Acts 10), and also removed the requirement of observing certain holy days and Sabbath days. It was not the moral law of the Old Testament that was being questioned, but the ordinances that pertained to the dietary laws and holy days.

(1).           Peter

1.                 When we look at Peter’s response, we get an idea of what was being referred to by the Law of Moses:
Acts 15:10-11
10 Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?
11 But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they.

2.                 Peter referred to a part of the law that even the disciples were not “able to bear”.

3.                 He was not in favor of putting that additional “yoke” on the neck of the disciples who had been saved by Jesus Christ.

4.                 Jesus had delivered them from the yoke of bondage.

(2).           More from Paul

1.                 In his letter to the Colossians, Paul gave an explanation of what Law of Moses Jesus had done away with.
Colossians 2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.

2.                 Traditions of men as well as certain ordinances were removed:
Colossians 2:14, 16
14 Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;
16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:

3.                 Jesus nailed to His cross and blotted out the Old Testament ordinances which forbid eating certain things (as Peter also learned in Acts 10), and also removed the requirement of observing certain holy days and Sabbath days.

4.                 It was not the moral law of the Old Testament that was being questioned, but the ordinances that pertained to the dietary laws and holy days.