Shared ground
Proverbs 31:1–3 presents a short set of “words” associated with King Lemuel, explicitly framed as an “oracle” his mother taught him (v.1). The passage is not telling a story about Lemuel so much as introducing the source and tone of a mother’s instruction to a ruler.
The mother’s repeated address (“my son… son of my womb… son of my vows,” v.2) signals urgency and personal stake. The first content of her counsel is a warning: a king must not hand over his “strength” to women, nor his “ways” to what destroys kings (v.3). Explicitly, the text links certain relational/sexual entanglements with the erosion of a ruler’s vitality and life-direction.
Where interpretation differs
What “oracle” means (v.1). Some take “oracle” to mean prophecy-like speech—solemn, weighty words with special authority. Others take it more generally as a serious, memorable instruction without implying prediction.
What “to women” targets (v.3). Many read it as a warning against sexual promiscuity or indulgence. Others emphasize royal realities: relationships and marriages could be instruments of influence, access, distraction, or political pressure, so “women” can stand for entanglements that drain a king’s capacity to rule well.
What “strength” and “ways” mean (v.3). “Strength” can be heard as sexual vitality, personal resources, or moral resolve. “Ways” can refer to life-patterns and conduct more broadly, suggesting the second line either restates the first with stronger wording or widens it to any ruinous pattern.
Why the disagreement exists
The Hebrew phrasing is brief and poetic, so key terms (“oracle,” “strength,” “ways”) cover a range of meanings. Also, the setting is royal, where “private” conduct and “public” outcomes often overlap. Those two factors make it hard to tell how narrowly or broadly each phrase should be taken.
What this passage clearly contributes
These verses add a distinct voice within Proverbs: maternal instruction addressed to a king. They portray wisdom as transmitted through family teaching and vow-rooted responsibility (v.2), not only through courtly training. They also connect leadership stability to personal self-governance: a ruler’s vitality (“strength”) and direction (“ways”) can be surrendered in ways that lead toward the ruin of kings (v.3).