# The Attire of An Harlot By Stacey Shiflett



## Double Barrel BB

The Attire of An Harlot
By Stacey Shiflett

http://www.untold-millions.com/eng_article26.htm

Proverbs 7:10 And, behold, there met him a woman with the attire of an harlot, and subtil of heart.

In Proverbs 7, Solomon is warning his son about the dangers of sexual immorality.  This wise and concerned father is telling his son that sin is all around, and that he must recognize it when he sees it. 

One of the things he warned his son about was women dressed in the attire of an harlot.  Strangely enough, it doesn't say she was a harlot, though it's obvious by her actions that she was.  The interesting thing is she is described by her attire; her clothing.

One of the things that bother me as a preacher is the fact that many times I get accused of being judgmental and casting judgment on people without really knowing them or knowing all the facts.  Here we see Solomon, undoubtedly the wisest man that ever lived, is judging a woman by her clothing, by looking out of his window in the dark of night!  Furthermore, he's teaching his son to judge them by their clothing!

In my effort to convey the truth without giving anybody a reason to judge me for judging others, I'm going to do something that is perfectly fair and sensible.   Instead of trying to figure out what this harlot was wearing, I'm going to turn it around.  We are going to play a game of elimination in order to show what a good, godly woman should wear. The way we will do this is simple.  We will try to determine what the harlot in Proverbs 7 WAS NOT wearing!

I know, many will say that I have no idea what I am talking about because we don't know for sure what harlots wore in those days.  That's fine.  I agree.  That's why I'm going to make an application to the day and age in which we live and make this modern and practical.  Everybody agrees I'm sure that the Word of God applies today, and that it's teachings and warnings should be heeded.  So in saying that, let's make a couple of safe assumptions.

Assumption 1: We have harlots today. 
Assumption 2: Harlots wear clothes. 
Assumption 3: Harlots wear wrong clothes. 
Assumption 4: Christians should not.​
How are we doing so far?  In order to accurately judge what a godly, Christian woman should wear, let's examine Scripture.  As I'm sure you do, I believe the Bible is the Final Authority for ALL matters of faith and practice.  (That would even include our wardrobe.)

So, what did that harlot in Proverbs 7 have on?  One thing we know she wasn't wearing.  She wasn't wearing clothing that was modest.  We can safely assume that.  You see, harlotry has often been called the oldest profession in the world.  That may very well be true.  It certainly is not new. 

Women thousands of years ago learned one simple fact.  Men are affected by what they see.  Men respond to what they see.  The Bible has a lot to say about men's eyes.  Notice this verse. Proverbs 27:20  "he11 and destruction are never full; so the eyes of man are never satisfied."

What about this one? Matthew 5:28  "But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart."

So you see, men are affected by what they see.  Now, according to Proverbs 7:7, this young man was clearly not the sharpest kid on the block.  It says: "And beheld among the simple ones, I discerned among the youths, a young man void of understanding." But one thing about this guy was working perfectly normal.  His eyes were fine. 

Modest clothing is commanded in the word of God for godly, Christian women.  It says: 1 Timothy 2:9  In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety;..."  Needless to say, the harlot in Proverbs 7 DID NOT have on modest apparel.  She was dressed in a way that even in the dark of night (Bible says in the preceding verse: "In the twilight, in the evening, in the black and dark night: ), she could be seen and seduce this young man.

We don't know what she was wearing, but we do know what she wasn't wearing!  She wasn't wearing modest apparel. 

What is modest apparel?  Does anybody know?  Are there any clues?  Absolutely!  The Greek word for 'modest apparel' in this verse is katastole (pronounced kat-as-tol-ay’).  It means: a lowering, letting down; a garment let down, dress, attire – Bible Greek Lexicon

Now I don't profess to be a Greek scholar, or even a Bible scholar for that matter.  However, I think it's pretty clear what women are supposed to wear according to these verses; long, loose, modest dresses. 

You might say, well, how long is long?  Who's to say something is long or short?  That's an excellent point.  That's why we must refer to our Bible for that answer.  Let's see what God says.

Isaiah 47:1-3  "Come down, and sit in the dust, O virgin daughter of Babylon, ... O daughter of the Chaldeans: for thou shalt no more be called tender and delicate. ... uncover thy locks, make bare the leg, uncover the thigh, pass over the rivers. Thy nakedness shall be uncovered, yea, thy shame shall be seen: I will take vengeance, and I will not meet thee as a man."

We can see from these verses that God considers a woman uncovering her leg or her thigh to be 'nakedness'.  I think we must agree that God's description of 'modest apparel' in the Bible would have to mean that whatever it is a woman wears, it must be long and cover her legs.

Having said that, we can safely conclude that the harlot in Proverbs 7 did not have on a long skirt or a long, loose flowing dress.  As we said earlier, we cannot conceive the fact that if she did, Solomon would have described her as a woman dressed in the attire of an harlot.

One thing is very clear to me, as a man and as a preacher of the Gospel.  Too many women and girls today are wearing the attire of an harlot.  They are dressing themselves in a fashion that causes men to lust after them.  They dress in a way that draws attention to their bodies.  God is not pleased with that!

Dear sister in the Lord, do yourself a favor.  Drive through the streets of your city late at night and look at the women standing on the street corners.  Look at what they are wearing.  Look at how they dress themselves. Notice what they picked out while they were shopping for clothing.  Notice what they knew lustful, wicked men would be attracted to.  Observe what they realized would appeal to their wicked, sinful desires. Their wardrobe includes shorts, mini-skirts, low blouses, sleeveless shirts, tight clothing, blue jeans, pants and other sinful attire. Nothing godly.

Now go home, look in your closet.  What do you see?  Do you see anything that even closely resembles what those women were wearing?  Do you have clothing in your house that reveals your legs?  Do you have skirts or dresses that are not long enough to fit the description of modest apparel?  Do you by any chance have any clothing that would be too tight, too see-through, too clingy, too masculine to be worn by a godly, chaste, virtuous lady?

If so, you need to throw it out.  You need to ask God to forgive you for wearing the attire of an harlot.  You need to realize the awfulness of allowing the unbelievers and Hollywood and the harlots and lesbians of this world to influence your wardrobe.

Is your clothing modest?  Is it feminine?  Is it ladylike?  Is it loose, flowing, and long?  Is it a dress?  God forbid that any born-again lady dress herself in the attire of an harlot.


----------



## Arrowslinger

That guys a nut job!


----------



## PWalls

Arrowslinger said:


> That guys a nut job!



Really? You don't think that a woman in a miniskirt and low cut blouse is inviting the looks that she gets or the thoughts that she incites? The Bible clearly says that looking at a woman with lust is a sin. The woman who dresses in such a way to entice that lustful look is clearly culpable of that sin as well. Look at some outfits that are worn in churches nowadays. I think he has hit the nail on the head.


----------



## GeauxLSU

Though I agree with what he's trying to say in general, the 'logical conclusions' he attempts to use are anything but.  That, I'm afraid, is the kind of thing that just sends the non believer running the other direction.


----------



## SBG

GeauxLSU said:


> That, I'm afraid, is the kind of thing that just sends the non believer running the other direction.



The admonition to live holy tends to do that to some folks.


----------



## GeauxLSU

SBG said:


> The admonition to live holy tends to do that to some folks.


That actually would be a good thread.  Admonishing believers vs. non believers.....

FYI, as I'm sure you might suspect, I firmly agree with conservative dress.  But the article acts like he's trying to logically prove some specifics by making LEAPS using scripture that simply are that, leaps, at best.


----------



## PWalls

GeauxLSU said:


> That actually would be a good thread.  Admonishing believers vs. non believers.....
> 
> FYI, as I'm sure you might suspect, I firmly agree with conservative dress.  But the article acts like he's trying to logically prove some specifics by making LEAPS using scripture that simply are that, leaps, at best.



I agree with your premise. However, the fact that he is having to make some leaps as you put it instead of us being able to apply common sense is what is sad. There isn't a woman out there today (raised in a normal household I think) that shouldn't know what a man is thinking when she dresses the way she does. That is invitation pure and simple.


----------



## GeauxLSU

PWalls said:


> I agree with your premise. However, the fact that he is having to make some leaps as you put it instead of us being able to apply common sense is what is sad. There isn't a woman out there today (raised in a normal household I think) that shouldn't know what a man is thinking when she dresses the way she does. That is invitation pure and simple.


Of course it's an invitation.  It's also interesting to note how 'offended' some get when they get the stares they are after in the first place.   Of course that applies to ANY sort of outlandish dress. 
I would be interested in what the pastor thinks would be appropriate swim/beach wear for a woman.  
I guess the 1920s would be out. 





Perhaps the 1850s?  Though I think the top is a little too form fitting.  




Here's my problem, culpable or not, at some point, it's not the woman's fault, it's the MAN's!  I realize everybody's 'line' is different but presumably we all realize the Taliban forbid women from wearing "shoes that make noise for it might tempt a man".    So he has used scripture, to justify to him, I presume, something that sounds VERY similar to extremist Muslim views.


----------



## PWalls

I am in no way implying that the man is not at fault for the lust that he feels/displays towards a woman. I agree that the sin is on the man. However, our soceity has made it easier and easier for that sin to be spread. A woman should realize that she has some accountability as well.


----------



## GeauxLSU

PWalls said:


> our soceity has made it easier and easier for that sin to be spread.


True and I can't think of any sin where that doesn't apply.  
Problem is WE are "our society".  We've allowed ourselves to be steamrolled toward a Godless society.


----------



## Dixie Dawg

Well now y'all have me curious... those of you that agree with this article (which I first thought by the author's name that it was written by a woman), do your wives and daughters only wear long skirts?  No slacks, jeans, etc.?

And Phil, thank you for so eloquently pointing out the obvious... even with all of the 'guidelines' offered in the article regarding what is modest and what is not, modesty is in the eye of the beholder.


----------



## matthewsman

*That's standards preaching......*

In my opinion,you may as well bring back the law.....The Muslim comparison made by Phil is not that far fetched....

Many times in a church that holds these standards,men dress in "business casual'or formally with a suit and tie...The women, on the other hand, are dressed like pilgrims.The slits in a skirt or dress have to be "lined"(a piece of cloth sewn into the splits)To be on the "platform",many churches require the women's hair to be up,un braided,and not cut......They draw also on the principles of Biblical "harlots"braiding gold ribbons and such into their hair to justify this...... They may not wear pants,no matter how unflattering,but must wear dresses...they quote scriptures of men not wearing that that pertains to a woman,nor women that which pertains to a man...It is alright for a woman to wear her husbands flannel shirt with a long jeans skirt,but it is not alright for a husband to wear his wifes skirt with his shirt..... 

There are many more "standards"taught by churches such as these,such as no TV,no secular sounding or contemperary Christian music,of course no smoking,drinking at all,no facial hair on men and hair cut above the collar..For women they are not allowed to cut their hair either..How long is long?That question was asked earlier regarding dresses.It is often asked about womens hair too..The common answer from the pulpit is"As long as you keep the scissors out of it"...

These people are steadfast in holding to their standards and are willing to allow a new convert some slack regarding standards,but if they do not assume them,or get convicted to change on their own they are considered spiritually retarded or insensitive to the spirit.

Generally the "Jesus name"only apostolics(UPC) and some independants follow this standard,along with some other "fundemental"Full Gospel"type churches....

I think it is a form of spirtual bondage akin to the dispensation of the Law,that denies the grace obtained by Christ........

There will be those on this board that know I know what I am talking about,and accuse me of ignorance,but the teaching of "Standards"and the idea that "speaking in tongues"is the evidence of "getting the Holy Ghost"and being saved are the reasons for attendance at many of these churches falling.......

They will tell you different things,such as they are the true church and the devil is fighting them,and that's why they haven't grown in membership,or that other churches are growing because they accept anything...The common answer to why they follow these standards is"We may be taking it too far,but I would rather go too far than not do enough".......


I have heard sermons such as the one DBBB quoted,and I think it's a shame how many people miss out or are dissillsioned with a church that otherwise has good things going for them,but then beats them up with a "grocery list" of "can do's and can't do's" to be a good Christian.........


----------



## SBG

matthewsman said:


> I have heard sermons such as the one DBBB quoted,and I think it's a shame how many people miss out or are dissillsioned with a church that otherwise has good things going for them,but then beats them up with a "grocery list" of "can do's and can't do's" to be a good Christian.........



The only can do and can't do list we need is the Bible; and it is the Bible that teaches modesty.


----------



## matthewsman

*The Bible teaches modesty*



SBG said:


> The only can do and can't do list we need is the Bible; and it is the Bible that teaches modesty.



And God convicts people...Regretfully,men try to define modesty to their standards,then judge others acording to those standards.........


----------



## jneil

I love the beauty of the female body, but then again I'm a heathern.


----------



## GeauxLSU

What if she has a stunningly beautiful face?   Should she hide it (back to that Muslim thing)?  Maybe she should disfigure it?    What if her voice is seductive?  

OK, point being, ask 10 people what 'modest dress for a woman' is and you'll get 10 different answers.  
I will just say this.  YES I find what SOME women wear today deplorable.  (Of course what some guys wear is absurd too).   If you are offended or find yourself sinning in your mind/heart at the site of a beautiful woman in a bikini, I guess you just don't go to the beach.  "If your eye offends you, pluck it out."   By the way, if a bikini is not appropriate for church, why is appropriate in public (beach)?  

Like I said, at the end of the day, it's on the man.  I will admit, it's becoming more 'work' on our part, but BE THE MAN!  Hold the females of your household up to the standards YOU believe are acceptable and hold yourself to an even HIGHER standard.  Should work.


----------



## SBG

GeauxLSU said:


> If you are offended or find yourself sinning in your mind/heart at the site of a beautiful woman in a bikini, I guess you just don't go to the beach.  "If your eye offends you, pluck it out."   .



YEP!


----------



## PWalls

GeauxLSU said:


> Like I said, at the end of the day, it's on the man.  I will admit, it's becoming more 'work' on our part, but BE THE MAN!  Hold the females of your household up to the standards YOU believe are acceptable and hold yourself to an even HIGHER standard.  Should work.



Exactly.


----------



## Double Barrel BB

My wife, dresses very modestly! Yes, she is very beautiful, atleast to me. But it is a concious choice by her to not wear "inviting attire" in public.

If a woman dresses provacatively then she is wanting to draw attention to herself, she is asking for the attention. It is almost as if she is asking for men to lust after her. Now I am not admonishing men of any wrong doing. We should all be vigilant in our quest to avoid sinful thoughts. Yes, there are going to be men that lust after women no matter what they wear, but that(to me) is a sin that is on the men entirely.

The line that has to be drawn is:
How much of the world are we willing as Christians to let into our churches and our lives? We are called to be seperate.

Just my 2 cents,
DB BB


----------



## GeauxLSU

Double Barrel BB said:


> The line that has to be drawn is:
> How much of the world are we willing as Christians to let into our churches and our lives? We are called to be seperate.


Yep.  Big problem.  It's happening so slowly that we don't notice.  By (somebody's) design perhaps?....


----------



## pfharris1965

*Yeah but...*

where is the issue of responsibility of the man to turn away addressed here?

Just because a woman wears a short skirt it does not mean that a man must chase after her....

Does the Bible not say that lustful thoughts are a sin as well?  Is it not encumbent upon everyone to control themselves...INCLUDING the MALE OF THE SPECIES????

The man is just as guilty of a sin for not turning away from the temptation is he not...????

That is unless you happen to be of the mindset that a man is superior to a woman...

Just curious...


----------



## Double Barrel BB

pfharris1965 said:


> where is the issue of responsibility of the man to turn away addressed here?
> 
> Just because a woman wears a short skirt it does not mean that a man must chase after her....
> 
> Does the Bible not say that lustful thoughts are a sin as well?  Is it not encumbent upon everyone to control themselves...INCLUDING the MALE OF THE SPECIES????
> 
> The man is just as guilty of a sin for not turning away from the temptation is he not...????
> 
> That is unless you happen to be of the mindset that a man is superior to a woman...
> 
> Just curious...





Double Barrel BB said:


> Now I am not admonishing men of any wrong doing. We should all be vigilant in our quest to avoid sinful thoughts. Yes, there are going to be men that lust after women no matter what they wear, but that(to me) is a sin that is on the men entirely.



Just wanted to repost this, just incase you missed this post....


The man is not superior to the women, but he is to be the leader of the house, and the wife is to be submissive to the husband. But that is talking about husbands and wives......

DB BB


----------



## Tn_Extreme

The Bible says the saved in Christ will be a separate, peculiar people who the world will shun.


----------



## pfharris1965

*...*



Tn_Extreme said:


> The Bible says the saved in Christ will be a separate, peculiar people who the world will shun.


 
Well, I do not think it is the one's saved in Christ but there sure are a lot of self-proclaimed "righteous Christians" (I guess they would have been considered as false prophets in days of old) well on their way to fulfilling this statement...they are alienating themselves from anyone and everything with all sorts of outlandishness...for their sake I truly hope they are saved...and I hope a lot of them do not get re-elected come November...


----------



## pfharris1965

*...*



justme said:


> "The man is not superior to the women, but he is to be the leader of the house, and the wife is to be submissive to the husband. But that is talking about husbands and wives"......
> 
> submissive in what way??? I am sure this is someone that is of the midset that it's not rape if it is my wife and she says no.....and its not abuse if its my wife I happen to be beating on....
> 
> It's my right.... she is my property.....


----------



## StriperAddict

GeauxLSU said:


> Like I said, at the end of the day, it's on the man.  I will admit, it's becoming more 'work' on our part, but BE THE MAN!  Hold the females of your household up to the standards YOU believe are acceptable and hold yourself to an even HIGHER standard.  Should work.



Wanted to bring this post around again b/c it's the heart of the matter...  I do try to hold myself to a high standard... _Christs' _, and sometimes I try _desperately _ because in my weakness as a man I can fail miserably, especially if not close to God at a particular time.  (A "put on the whole armor of God" smily belongs here  )   

But godliness and modesty go hand in hand.  I hold myself accountable to God for my reaction or not to _'that' _temptation, and I trust that "sister so n' so" would do her best not to flaunt what she's got...  





now... as to what's out there _in the world?_  Dang if some of us are starting to need horses' blinders...
 





ok, some humor but yas get my point...


----------



## Tn_Extreme

pfharris1965 said:


> Well, I do not think it is the one's saved in Christ but there sure are a lot of self-proclaimed "righteous Christians" (I guess they would have been considered as false prophets in days of old) well on their way to fulfilling this statement...they are alienating themselves from anyone and everything with all sorts of outlandishness...for their sake I truly hope they are saved...and I hope a lot of them do not get re-elected come November...


I am just quoting the Bible,  Sorry what it says doesnt suit yor views.

I am not sure how politics got brought into thiss subject...maybe I need to go abck and read the thread again.

As for not wanting the Reoublicans to get re-elected. While I agree they have performed less than astellar these ast few years they still beat the baby murdering, pro gay, anti american party across the aisle.

While I will remind them with calls and emaisl that their performance needs to come abck to the right somewhat and back to their core roots, I will vote to keep them in because they do the better job of defending life, keeping sodomites from taking over this country, and have no agenda to make America a Godless society.

As a Christian it is my duty to elect leaders who best align themselves with God's word.  I cant vote for a liberal democrat and obey God's word.


----------



## pfharris1965

*...*



Tn_Extreme said:


> I am just quoting the Bible, Sorry what it says doesnt suit yor views.


 
I think if you carefully read my post you would see that I was in agreement with you...



Tn_Extreme said:


> I am not sure how politics got brought into thiss subject...maybe I need to go abck and read the thread again.


 
It was "tongue in cheek humor"...oh wait...nevermind...no point in continuing on this one...



Tn_Extreme said:


> As for not wanting the Reoublicans to get re-elected. While I agree they have performed less than astellar these ast few years they still beat the baby murdering, pro gay, anti american party across the aisle.


 
Show me again please where I made any reference to a political party... Yup...maybe you should go back and re-read as you suggested...



Tn_Extreme said:


> While I will remind them with calls and emaisl that their performance needs to come abck to the right somewhat and back to their core roots, I will vote to keep them in because they do the better job of defending life, keeping sodomites from taking over this country, and have no agenda to make America a Godless society.


 
Good for you...   Nice to see someone excercising a RIGHT afforded to EVERY citizen of this Great Nation...



Tn_Extreme said:


> As a Christian it is my duty to elect leaders who best align themselves with God's word. I cant vote for a liberal democrat and obey God's word.


 
Good to see a person follow their convictions...oh and I never made a comment on how I voted...although I can say with absolute certainty that either party leaves a LOT to be desired...we find ourselves stuck with a either a party that wants to RAM its view points down our throats or one that wants to let society run free with no boundaries...no middle ground for either side...


----------



## Double Barrel BB

justme said:


> "The man is not superior to the women, but he is to be the leader of the house, and the wife is to be submissive to the husband. But that is talking about husbands and wives"......
> 
> submissive in what way??? I am sure this is someone that is of the midset that it's not rape if it is my wife and she says no.....and its not abuse if its my wife I happen to be beating on....
> 
> It's my right.... she is my property.....


 
Are you saying that I am of the mindset above? I sure hope not.

I knew almost as soon as I typed it out, that someone would take it the wrong way.....

The husband is the leader of the family.  The Wife is his helper. When a decision is made in the family, the Husband should make it. The wife should support his decision. (this is talking about making decision in a Godly manner, I wouldn't expect my wife to support me if I was doing something un-Godly, I would expect her to say, maybe this would be a better option, and help me make the decision.) I am accountable for what goes on in my family to God, He has put me in charge of my family, so it is my responsibilty to Love my family as Jesus Loves the Church.

The husband is supposed to love his wife as himself. Love his wife as Christ loves the Church.

Saying what I said in the previous post was not meant to say what the poster thought.

Here is the scripture to back me up:

*Colossians 3:18-21*18 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as it is fit in the Lord.
19 Husbands, love your wives, and be not bitter against them. 
20 Children, obey your parents in all things: for this is well pleasing unto the Lord.
21 Fathers, provoke not your children to anger, lest they be discouraged. 


Hope this clears it up,
DB BB


----------



## GaHunter19

Here's my problem with the whole story/sermon/arguement.  This pastor distinctly chose Solomon as his example character for his Wisdom, yet how many wives did Solomon have?  Hundreds, thousands, ....including the daughter of pharoh and numerous other gentiles, and this doesn't even include the concubines.  However, I somehow doubt that this pastor would allow this think this is appropriate for todays world.

Just thinking out loud,

KP


----------



## StriperAddict

GaHunter19 said:


> Here's my problem with the whole story/sermon/arguement.  This pastor distinctly chose Solomon as his example character for his Wisdom, yet how many wives did Solomon have?  Hundreds, thousands, ....including the daughter of pharoh and numerous other gentiles, and this doesn't even include the concubines.  However, I somehow doubt that this pastor would allow this think this is appropriate for todays world.
> 
> Just thinking out loud,
> 
> KP



If mercy isn't part of who God is, then not only Solomon's Proverbs, but the rest of the bible would have to be trashed also.  

Every writer a sinner, 
every writer was humbled to the point of total surrender to the living God, 
every writer wrote with God's inspiration b/c God Himself is able to lead a heart into truth, and shine light in the midst of darkness.  It's part of what redemption is all about.  

Perhaps that's a paradox that you can't humanly justify, KP.  Don't even try... the ones that do end up on this board trashing the very God they say they believe in, but refuse to submit to His instructions and His word b/c of this very reason.   

I've left this "paradox" at the foot of the cross years ago.  I don't think for one minute that God is upset at the choices He made to pen the scriptures, since those same people, bumbling diciples and all... _God inspired _and used to turn the world upside down.


----------



## GaHunter19

Striper,

I certainly understand the paradoxical concept.  I was merely pointing out that this pastor used Solomon, and his description of a harlot, as an example to justify passing judgement on humanity.  I found this highly ironical since Solomons greastest weakness, and ultimate demise was beautiful (and probably scantilly clad) women.

Thanks for keeping me on my toes,

Kevin


----------



## Double Barrel BB

GaHunter19 said:


> Striper,
> 
> I certainly understand the paradoxical concept.  I was merely pointing out that this pastor used Solomon, and his description of a harlot, as an example to justify passing judgement on humanity.  I found this highly ironical since Solomons greastest weakness, and ultimate demise was beautiful (and probably scantilly clad) women.
> 
> Thanks for keeping me on my toes,
> 
> Kevin



Kevin,

Just out of curiousity, what would your description of a Harlot be?

DB BB


----------



## StriperAddict

GaHunter19 said:


> Striper,
> 
> I certainly understand the paradoxical concept.  I was merely pointing out that this pastor used Solomon, and his description of a harlot, as an example to justify passing judgement on humanity.  I found this highly ironical since Solomons greastest weakness, and ultimate demise was beautiful (and probably scantilly clad) women.
> 
> Thanks for keeping me on my toes,
> 
> Kevin



Solomon's instruction to his son came years before his falling into sin, as you correctly point out he did.  To quote a lyric from Margaret Becker's ol' song... "Solomon's shoes":

_Solomon was the wisest man 
But I guess not wise enough 
He forgot the Blesser 
When the blessings were too much! _


I think in the case of the faithful in the Lord, ones flops n' failures do not automatically mean that the person's time  with/near God was a wash also.  (If that is true, then we are all down the river  )  I don't think Grace works that way, both before and after the cross.

my 2c


----------



## Double Barrel BB

Resurrection of a controversial thread.....


----------



## Pale Blue Dun

We can start a new Religion with this one.

First, we have this resurected horse....

Dan


----------

