Proverbs (Part 071) - Pro 6:27-31

---

 

27. Pro 6:27 - "Can a man take fire in his bosom, and his clothes not be burned?" A. Can a man take fire in his bosom, i. When a woman is sexually intimate with a man she is given into his bosom (Gen 16:5). ii. Adultery is described as a fire (Job 31:12). iii. Therefore, when a man commits adultery with a whore he is taking fire into his bosom. iv. Thus, he who commits adultery is playing with fire. B. and his clothes not be burned? i. Solomon is asking a rhetorical question to which the answer is obviously "no." ii. If you play with fire, you will get burned. a. Fools who think that they can get away with sin without consequences will be sorely mistaken (Gal 6:7-8). b. God will recompense men's iniquities into their bosom (Jer 32:18). iii. If a man burns with lust and goes into a strange woman, he will be burned temporally if he is a child of God (Joh 15:2, 6) and eternally if he is not (Rev 21:8). 28. Pro 6:28 - "Can one go upon hot coals, and his feet not be burned?" A. Solomon asks a second similar rhetorical question for emphasis. B. The answer is of course the same: "no." C. If a man walks on hot coals, his feet are going to be burned. i. Burns are painful for a long time after the initial burn. ii. Burnt feet are especially painful every time a man has to walk anywhere. D. The Christian life is referred to as a "walk" (Col 2:6; Col 4:5). i. The man who commits adultery will greatly hinder his Christian walk as the remaining verses of the chapter show (Pro 6:29-35). ii. He will be left with scars and sores on his feet that will make him limp for the rest of his life. 29. Pro 6:29 - "So he that goeth in to his neighbour's wife; whosoever toucheth her shall not be innocent." A. So he that goeth in to his neighbour's wife; i. So - II. Placed at the beginning of a clause with continuative force, and freq. preceded by and. 8. Used to confirm or strengthen a previous statement. 9. Denoting similarity or parallelism in some respect between two facts, actions, etc. ii. The use of the word so draws a comparison between the man that takes fire in his bosom (Pro 6:27) and walks on hot coals (Pro 6:28) to the man that goes into his neighbor's wife. B. whosoever toucheth her shall not be innocent. i. Just as a man who takes fire in his bosom will have his clothes burned, and a man who walks on hot coals will burn his feet, so the man who touches his neighbor's wife will not be innocent. ii. He will get burned, just as the others. iii. He will be burned temporally if he is a child of God (Joh 15:2, 6) and eternally if he is not (Rev 21:8). a. A wound and dishonour will he get (Pro 6:33). b. One who commits adultery should expect to go to hell (Pro 7:27). iv. Whosoever does so will meet with severe judgment from God. a. Whosoever pron. - 1. whoever b. Whoever pron. - I. 1. As compound relative, or with correlative in principal clause, which usually follows but occas. precedes; in generalized or indefinite sense: Whatever person or persons; any one who, or any who. c. Whatever person, no matter who they are will not be innocent if he goes into a strange woman. d. Any one who does so will be under God's judgment whether he is young or old, rich or poor, elect or reprobate, of good reputation or ill repute, preacher or pew warmer, etc. 30. Pro 6:30 - "Men do not despise a thief, if he steal to satisfy his soul when he is hungry;" A. Men will have compassion a thief who steals in order to feed himself if the following are true: i. He has no other means to acquire food. ii. He is not stealing with a wicked intent to harm his neighbor. iii. He is not stealing to enrich himself due to covetousness. B. When a man is hungry he will sometimes do criminal things out of desperation, and in such cases men will not despise him. C. "As for the sin of stealing, if a man were brought to it by extreme necessity, if he stole meat for the satisfying of his soul when he was hungry, though that will not excuse him from guilt, yet it is such an extenuation of his crime that men do not despise him, do not expose him to ignominy, but pity him. Hunger will break through stone-walls, and blame will be laid upon those that brought him to poverty, or that did not relieve him." (Matthew Henry's Commentary, Pro 6:20-35) D. Solomon is using a thief in contrast to an adulterer (Pro 6:32). i. Whereas men do not despise a thief who steals out of desperation, they will wound, dishonour, and reproach an adulterer (Pro 6:33). ii. This shows that adultery is a greater crime than theft (especially when the theft was a result of destitution). iii. The prohibition of adultery comes before the prohibition of stealing in the ten commandments (Exo 20:14-15). iv. Today, thieves are punished with jail time while adulterers are not punished at all, nor even dishonored or reproached in most cases which shows how far our society has fallen from Biblical morality. 31. Pro 6:31 - "But if he be found, he shall restore sevenfold; he shall give all the substance of his house." A. But if he be found, he shall restore sevenfold; i. Whereas men do not despise a thief who steals to alleviate hunger (Pro 6:30), if he is caught he will nevertheless be punished. ii. Favoritism was not supposed to be shown to the poor who broke the law (Lev 19:15). iii. He shall restore sevenfold, or in other words seven times what he stole. iv. The law of Moses required thieves to make restitution. a. Five oxen were to be restored for a stolen ox and four sheep for a stolen sheep if the animal was killed or sold (Exo 22:1). b. If the animal was found in his possession alive, he was to restore double (Exo 22:4). v. A greater restitution of sevenfold might have been required rather than four or fivefold because sheep or oxen would likely be stolen out of a field; whereas food stolen to eat when hungry would likely be taken out of the victim's house which is a more serious crime. vi. There was also a precedent in the law of Moses for God punishing people seven times for their sins (Lev 26:18). B. he shall give all the substance of his house. i. Depending on the nature and circumstances of his theft, a thief might have had to give everything he owned to make restitution for his crime. ii. It could also be that the man who was hungry enough to steal would not have much substance in his house, and therefore all that he had would be required to restore sevenfold what he stole.